A Phase II Randomized, Double-blind Study to Evaluate the Safety, Neutralizing Activity and Efficacy of AZD3152 for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis of COVID-19 in Participants Having an Increased Risk for Inadequate Response to Active Immunization (NOVELLA)

AstraZeneca, NCT06057064, NOVELLA, NCT06057064, May 2024
Mortality -267% improvement lower risk ← → higher risk Symp. case 33% Sipavibart for COVID-19  NOVELLA  PROPHYLAXIS RCT Is prophylaxis with sipavibart beneficial for COVID-19? Double-blind RCT 116 patients in Russia Trial underpowered to detect differences c19early.org AstraZeneca, NCT06057064, May 2024 0 0.5 1 1.5 2+ RR
RCT 116 patients in Russia, showing improved nAb titers with sipavibart prophylaxis, but no significant difference for mortality or symptomatic cases.
risk of death, 266.7% higher, RR 3.67, p = 1.00, treatment 2 of 87 (2.3%), control 0 of 29 (0.0%), continuity correction due to zero event (with reciprocal of the contrasting arm).
risk of symptomatic case, 33.3% lower, RR 0.67, p = 0.64, treatment 4 of 87 (4.6%), control 2 of 29 (6.9%), NNT 44.
Effect extraction follows pre-specified rules prioritizing more serious outcomes. Submit updates
AstraZeneca et al., 17 May 2024, Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial, placebo-controlled, Russia, preprint, 1 author, trial NCT06057064 (history) (NOVELLA). Contact: information.center@astrazeneca.com.
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19 treatment protocols c19early.org November 2025 Russia United Kingdom USA Pakistan Argentina Vietnam Peru Philippines Spain Brazil Italy France Japan China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Ghana Mexico South Korea Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Taiwan Zambia Fiji Bosnia-Herzegovina Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore Iceland New Zealand Czechia Mongolia Israel Trinidad and Tobago Hong Kong North Macedonia Belarus Qatar Panama Serbia CAR Russia favored low-cost treatments.The average efficacy of treatments was very low.Low-cost treatments improve early treatment, andprovide complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
$0 $500 $1,000+ Efficacy vs. cost for COVID-19treatment protocols worldwide c19early.org November 2025 Russia United Kingdom USA Pakistan Argentina Vietnam Peru Philippines Spain Brazil Italy France Japan China Uzbekistan Nepal Ethiopia Iran Ghana Mexico South Korea Germany Bangladesh Saudi Arabia Algeria Morocco Yemen Poland India DR Congo Madagascar Thailand Uganda Venezuela Nigeria Egypt Bolivia Taiwan Zambia Fiji Ukraine Côte d'Ivoire Eritrea Bulgaria Greece Slovakia Singapore New Zealand Malawi Czechia Mongolia Israel Trinidad and Tobago North Macedonia Belarus Qatar Panama Serbia Syria Russia favored low-cost treatments.The average efficacy was very low.Low-cost protocols improve early treatment,and add complementary/synergistic benefits. More effective More expensive 75% 50% 25% ≤0%
Please send us corrections, updates, or comments. c19early involves the extraction of 200,000+ datapoints from thousands of papers. Community updates help ensure high accuracy. Treatments and other interventions are complementary. All practical, effective, and safe means should be used based on risk/benefit analysis. No treatment or intervention is 100% available and effective for all current and future variants. We do not provide medical advice. Before taking any medication, consult a qualified physician who can provide personalized advice and details of risks and benefits based on your medical history and situation. IMA and WCH provide treatment protocols.
  or use drag and drop   
Submit