Abstract
Anti-Spike monoclonal antibodies have been considered a promising approach to COVID-19 therapy. Unfortunately, the advent of resistant lineages jeopardized their effectiveness and prompted limitations in their clinical use. Change in the dominant variant can be fast to such an extent that, in the absence of timely medical education, prescribers can keep using these drugs for relatively long periods even in patients with resistant variants. Therefore, many patients could have been exposed to drugs with unlikely benefits and probable risks. We show here that about 20% of bamlanivimab+etesevimab, 30% of casirivimab+imdevimab, and 30% of sotrovimab courses were administered in Italy during periods in which a fully resistant variant was dominant. Additionally, for monoclonal antibody cocktails, the vast majority of usage occurred against variants for which one of the mAbs within the cocktail was ineffective. Given the high costs of these drugs and their potential side effects, it would be important to consider a frequent review of the appropriateness of these drugs and timely communication when the benefit/risk balance is no longer favorable.