Dataset Information

Factors associated with non-persistence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies for seasonal influenza: a secondary analysis of a double-blind, multicentre, randomised clinical trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:We aimed to evaluate and compare non-adherence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies prescribed of a randomised clinical trial in outpatients with influenza A infection. DESIGN:A parallel, three-arm, double-blinded trial randomly allocated antiviral therapies twice daily for 5?days: (1) oral oseltamivir plus inhaled zanamivir (arm OZ); (2) oseltamivir plus inhaled placebo (arm Opz); or (3) oral placebo plus inhaled zanamivir (arm poZ). Analysis of non-adherence was a secondary objective of the trial. SETTINGS:Outpatients were enrolled by 145 general practitioners throughout France during the 2008-2009 seasonal influenza epidemics. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 541 adults presenting with influenza-like illness for less than 36?hours. PRIMARY OUTCOMES:Non-persistence, the time between inclusion and the last dose treated as a failure time, was used as the primary endpoint. RESULTS:The proportions of patients who persisted on treatment until the end of prescription were estimated at 85.73% (±3.28%) for the oral route and 82.73% (±3.44%) for the inhaled route. Based on multivariable models, non-persistence was associated with a PCR confirmation of influenza for both the oral (HR=0.54, p=0.010) and inhaled (HR=0.59, p=0.018) drugs and antibiotic coprescriptions (HR=2.07, p=0.007; and HR=1.88, p=0.017, respectively) and active combination treatment (HR=1.71, p=0.035; and HR=1.58, p=0.035, respectively). The hazard of non-persistence of the inhaled therapy was increased compared with that of the oral therapy (HR=1.23, p=0.043). CONCLUSION:In addition to the clinical and virological profiles of influenza infection, non-persistence may have been influenced by an active combination and the route of administration. RCT REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT00799760. This is a post-result analysis.

SUBMITTER: Flicoteaux R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5734282 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Factors associated with non-persistence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies for seasonal influenza: a secondary analysis of a double-blind, multicentre, randomised clinical trial.

Flicoteaux Remi R Protopopescu Camelia C Tibi Annick A Blanchon Thierry T Werf Sylvie Van Der SV Duval Xavier X Mosnier Anne A Charlois-Ou Cécile C Lina Bruno B Leport Catherine C Chevret Sylvie S

BMJ open 20170710 7

<h4>Objectives</h4>We aimed to evaluate and compare non-adherence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies prescribed of a randomised clinical trial in outpatients with influenza A infection.<h4>Design</h4>A parallel, three-arm, double-blinded trial randomly allocated antiviral therapies twice daily for 5 days: (1) oral oseltamivir plus inhaled zanamivir (arm OZ); (2) oseltamivir plus inhaled placebo (arm Opz); or (3) oral placebo plus inhaled zanamivir (arm poZ). Analysis of non-adherence was a ...[more]

PMID: 28698321

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInfluenza continues to have a substantial socioeconomic and health impact despite a long established vaccination programme and approved antivirals. Preclinical data suggest that combining antivirals might be more effective than administering oseltamivir alone in the treatment of influenza.MethodsWe did a randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 2 trial of a combination of oseltamivir, amantadine, and ribavirin versus oseltamivir monotherapy with matching placebo for the treatment of influenza in 50 sites, consisting of academic medical centre clinics, emergency rooms, and private physician offices in the USA, Thailand, Mexico, Argentina, and Australia. Participants who were aged at least 18 years with influenza and were at increased risk of complications were randomly assigned (1:1) by an online computer-generated randomisation system to receive either oseltamivir (75 mg), amantadine (100 mg), and ribavirin (600 mg) combination therapy or oseltamivir monotherapy twice daily for 5 days, given orally, and participants were followed up for 28 days. Blinded treatment kits were used to achieve masking of patients and staff. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants with virus detectable by PCR in nasopharyngeal swab at day 3, and was assessed in participants who were randomised, had influenza infection confirmed by the central laboratory on a baseline nasopharyngeal sample, and had received at least one dose of study drug. Safety assessment was done in all patients in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01227967.FindingsBetween March 1, 2011, and April 29, 2016, 633 participants were randomly assigned to receive combination antiviral therapy (n=316) or monotherapy (n=317). Seven participants were excluded from analysis: three were not properly randomised, three withdrew from the study, and one was lost to follow-up. The primary analysis included 394 participants, excluding 47 in the pilot phase, 172 without confirmed influenza, and 13 without an endpoint sample. 80 (40·0%) of 200 participants in the combination group had detectable virus at day 3 compared with 97 (50·0%) of 194 (mean difference 10·0, 95% CI 0·2-19·8, p=0·046) in the monotherapy group. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal-related disorders, primarily nausea (65 [12%] of 556 reported adverse events in the combination group vs 63 [11%] of 585 reported adverse events in the monotherapy group), diarrhoea (56 [10%] of 556 vs 64 [11%] of 585), and vomiting (39 [7%] of 556 vs 23 [4%] of 585). There was no benefit in multiple clinical secondary endpoints, such as median duration of symptoms (4·5 days in the combination group vs 4·0 days in the monotherapy group; p=0·21). One death occurred in the study in an elderly participant in the monotherapy group who died of cardiovascular failure 13 days after randomisation, judged by the site investigator as not related to study intervention.InterpretationAlthough combination treatment showed a significant decrease in viral shedding at day 3 relative to monotherapy, this difference was not associated with improved clinical benefit. More work is needed to understand why there was no clinical benefit when a difference in virological outcome was identified.FundingNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, USA.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Psoriasis vulgaris is a common skin disease that is characterised by persistent localised erythematous scaly plaques. Yinxieling is a Chinese herbal formula for psoriasis that has been used for more than 20 years in China. To facilitate application, PSORI-CM01 was developed based on the optimisation and simplification of Yinxieling tablets performed in a previous study and in clinical practice. However, the scientific evidence regarding whether PSORI-CM01 is more effective for psoriasis than the original Yinxieling remains insufficient. Therefore, we designed a randomised clinical trial to investigate the effect, safety and cost-effectiveness of PSORI-CM01 granules compared with those of Yinxieling tablets for the treatment of patients with psoriasis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This ongoing study is a two-arm parallel, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy clinical trial. Five hundred and fifty-six participants with psoriasis will be recruited and then randomly allocated into two groups in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in PSORI-CM01 group will receive a 5.5?g granule of PSORI-CM01 two times daily and five placebo tablets three times daily for 12 weeks. The participants in the Yinxieling group will receive five Yinxieling tablets three times daily and a placebo granule two times daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome is the reduction of the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index. The secondary outcomes include relapse rate, Visual Analogue Scale scores, body surface area and the Dermatology Life Quality Index. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from a health and community care provider perspective. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This research protocol had been reviewed and approved by the institutional review boards of three trial centres (Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine (B2014-026-01), Affiliated Hospital of Tianjin Chinese Medicine Academy (2014-KY-001) and Third Hospital of Hangzhou (B2014-026-01)). The findings will be disseminated to the public through conference presentations and open-access journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-TRC-14005185); Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is spreading globally and treatment options remain limited. A formulation of niclosamide, a potent anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent and a broad-spectrum antiviral treatment candidate, optimized for inhalation and intranasal administration (UNI91104) was developed.MethodsWe conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, single-centre, dose-ascending Phase 1 trial to assess the safety of UNI91104 in Denmark (NCT04576312). Healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to a ascending single dose in cohort 1-4 and five doses over 2.5 days in cohort 5. Inclusion criteria included a minimum 80% of predicted lung function. Exclusion criteria included severe, clinically significant allergies and current acute or chronic condition especially airway diseases. Safety was evaluated through adverse events (AEs) and pulmonary function tests including forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) tests. The primary endpoints were defined as the frequency of reported AEs and the change of safety variables relative to pre-dose. Data from all enroled healthy volunteers receiving any amount of IMP was included in the primary analyses. The pharmacokinetics of UNI91104 was determined.FindingsThe trial was conducted between 29 June 2020 and 08 August 2020. Thirty-four healthy volunteers received UNI91104 and ten placebo. No serious AEs or discontinuation were reported. Mild irritation in the upper respiratory tract following inhalation of UNI91104 was reported as most frequent AE (45 events in 26 healthy volunteers, 59% of all healthy volunteers). Nasal application was well-tolerated. There was no evidence of difference in the change of mean levels of pulmonary function tests between active and placebo group across all cohorts. Five healthy volunteers (11.4%) (1 on placebo) had signs of increased transient FeNO and 4 on active (9.1%) experienced asymptomatic drops in FEV1, which resolved spontaneously or were reversible with a β2-agonist. Niclosamide exhibited dose-proportional pharmacokinetics following inhalation and intranasal administration.InterpretationUNI91104, a promising candidate for inhalation and intranasal therapy against COVID-19 and other viral respiratory tract infections is well-tolerated in healthy volunteers and warrants further testing in patient trials.FundingThe study was funded by Innovationsfonden Denmark and UNION therapeutics.

Dataset Information

Factors associated with non-persistence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies for seasonal influenza: a secondary analysis of a double-blind, multicentre, randomised clinical trial.

Publications

Factors associated with non-persistence to oral and inhaled antiviral therapies for seasonal influenza: a secondary analysis of a double-blind, multicentre, randomised clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets