Dataset Information

Five-Day vs 10-Day Postexposure Chemoprophylaxis With Oseltamivir to Prevent Hospital Transmission of Influenza: A Noninferiority Randomized Open-Label Study.

ABSTRACT: Background:The efficacy and optimal duration of postexposure influenza prophylaxis with oseltamivir are undetermined in hospital settings, where immediate separation from index cases is not feasible. Methods:In an open-label noninferiority randomized clinical trial in a single-center university hospital, the efficacy of 5-day vs 10-day postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir was compared in adult patients exposed to influenza who could not be immediately separated from index influenza cases. Influenza incidence was assessed for 10 days after discontinuing prophylaxis. Results:Among 222 exposed patients (median age, 75 years; male 119; median Charlson Comorbidity Index, 5), 110 patients were assigned to 5 days of postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir, and 112 patients were assigned to the 10-day group. The median duration of exposure to influenza (interquartile range) was 2 (1-3) days. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the incidence of influenza was 2/110 (1.8%) in the 5-day group and 0/112 (0%) in the 10-day group (difference, 1.8 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI, -1 to 4.9 percentage points; P?=?.77). Conclusions:For patients exposed to influenza in a hospital setting and who were not immediately separated from index cases, postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir resulted in low incidence of nosocomial influenza transmission. Five-day postexposure prophylaxis was noninferior to 10-day regimen. ClinicalTrialsgov Registration:NCT03899571.

SUBMITTER: Lepen L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7397832 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Five-Day vs 10-Day Postexposure Chemoprophylaxis With Oseltamivir to Prevent Hospital Transmission of Influenza: A Noninferiority Randomized Open-Label Study.

Lepen Lidija L Blagus Rok R Velušček Maša M Saletinger Rajko R Petrovec Miroslav M Bajrović Fajko F FF Stupica Daša D

Open forum infectious diseases 20200619 8

<h4>Background</h4>The efficacy and optimal duration of postexposure influenza prophylaxis with oseltamivir are undetermined in hospital settings, where immediate separation from index cases is not feasible.<h4>Methods</h4>In an open-label noninferiority randomized clinical trial in a single-center university hospital, the efficacy of 5-day vs 10-day postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir was compared in adult patients exposed to influenza who could not be immediately separated from index inf ...[more]

PMID: 32766383

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPostoperative patients with ostomies experience significant changes in their lives as a result of the device implantation. Self-care is important to improve their health outcomes. Telehealth provides an opportunity to expand access to self-care education.AimThis is a multicenter, non-inferiority randomized, open-label, controlled trial to evaluate the non-inferiority of a telehealth intervention to the standard in-person approach in improving self-care behaviors.Methods and analysisThree hundred and eighty-four patients aged ≥ 18 years, with a recently placed ostomy, no stomal/peristomal complications, and documented cognitive integrity will be randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either a telehealth intervention (four remote educational sessions) or a standard educational approach (four in-person sessions) delivered in outpatient settings. Every session (remote and in-person) will occur on Days 25, 32, 40, and 60 after discharge. Follow-ups will occur 1, 3, and 6 months after the last intervention session. Primary outcome is self-care maintenance measured using the Ostomy Self-care Index (OSCI). Secondary outcomes include self-care monitoring, self-care management, self-efficacy (OSCI), quality of life (Stoma specific quality of Life), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), adjustment (Ostomy Adjustment Inventory-23), stomal and peristomal complication rates, healthcare services utilization, mobility, and number of working days lost. Analyses will be performed per intention-to-treat and per protocol.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the main center (registration number: 119/22). Following completion of the trial, dissemination meetings will be held to share the results of the study with the participants and the health-care team. Adoption of telehealth technologies for ostomy patients can improve service organization by ensuring better integration and continuity of care. If the remote intervention produces comparable effects to the in-person intervention, it would be wise to make telehealth education an alternative treatment for addressing the educational needs of uncomplicated postoperative ostomy patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (identifier number: NCT05796544).

Project description:BackgroundBismuth quadruple therapy is currently consensus recommendation for first-line Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) treatment; however, the optimal duration is unknown. We compared the efficacy of 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy with that of 14-day bismuth quadruple therapy for first-line eradication.MethodsFor our multicentre, parallel randomised, open-label, and non-inferiority study, we recruited H. pylori treatment-naïve patients from one medical centre and one teaching hospital in Taiwan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 10-day (PBMT-10) or 14-day (PBMT-14) bismuth quadruple therapy. The primary outcome was the eradication rate as determined by intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analyses. The eradication rates between the two groups were compared using a one-sided α value of 0.025 and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. The secondary outcomes were the rate of adverse effects. The trial is registered with ClincialTrials.gov (NCT04527055).FindingsFrom August 3, 2020 to April 28, 2023, 313 H. pylori treatment-naïve patients (PBMT-10 = 157; PBMT-14 = 156) were enrolled. 35 patients were excluded from PP analyses. The eradication rates (95% CI) for PBMT-10 and PBMT-14 were respectively 92.4% (88.2%-96.5%) and 92.9% (88.9%-97.0%) by ITT analyses, and 97.9% (95.5%-100.0%) and 99.3% (97.8%-100.0%) by PP analyses. The eradication rates for PBMT-10 were non-inferior to those for PBMT-14 (absolute difference [lower boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI] -0.6% [-6.7%], PNI = 0.020 in ITT analyses, -1.4% [-5.8%], PNI = 0.007 in PP analyses). The rates of overall adverse effects (54.1% versus 57.1%, P = 0.604) were similar between the two groups; nevertheless, the rates of dizziness (18.5% versus 34.0%, P = 0.003) and vomiting (4.5% versus 12.8%, P = 0.008) were lower in PBMT-10 than in PBMT-14.InterpretationThe 10-day bismuth quadruple therapy was non-inferior to the 14-day therapy as a first-line treatment for eradicating H. pylori infection and had no different rates of overall adverse effects, but less serious adverse events in terms of dizziness and vomiting.FundingThe National Science and Technology Council and Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan.

Project description:BackgroundEffective prevention against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is currently limited to nonpharmaceutical strategies. Laboratory and observational data suggested that hydroxychloroquine had biological activity against SARS-CoV-2, potentially permitting its use for prevention.ObjectiveTo test hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis for SARS-CoV-2 infection.DesignHousehold-randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of hydroxychloroquine postexposure prophylaxis. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04328961).SettingNational U.S. multicenter study.ParticipantsClose contacts recently exposed (<96 hours) to persons with diagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection.InterventionHydroxychloroquine (400 mg/d for 3 days followed by 200 mg/d for 11 days) or ascorbic acid (500 mg/d followed by 250 mg/d) as a placebo-equivalent control.MeasurementsParticipants self-collected mid-turbinate swabs daily (days 1 to 14) for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing. The primary outcome was PCR-confirmed incident SARS-CoV-2 infection among persons who were SARS-CoV-2 negative at enrollment.ResultsBetween March and August 2020, 671 households were randomly assigned: 337 (407 participants) to the hydroxychloroquine group and 334 (422 participants) to the control group. Retention at day 14 was 91%, and 10 724 of 11 606 (92%) expected swabs were tested. Among the 689 (89%) participants who were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline, there was no difference between the hydroxychloroquine and control groups in SARS-CoV-2 acquisition by day 14 (53 versus 45 events; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.73 to 1.66]; P > 0.20). The frequency of participants experiencing adverse events was higher in the hydroxychloroquine group than the control group (66 [16.2%] versus 46 [10.9%], respectively; P = 0.026).LimitationThe delay between exposure, and then baseline testing and the first dose of hydroxychloroquine or ascorbic acid, was a median of 2 days.ConclusionThis rigorous randomized controlled trial among persons with recent exposure excluded a clinically meaningful effect of hydroxychloroquine as postexposure prophylaxis to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection.Primary funding sourceBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Dataset Information

Five-Day vs 10-Day Postexposure Chemoprophylaxis With Oseltamivir to Prevent Hospital Transmission of Influenza: A Noninferiority Randomized Open-Label Study.

Publications

Five-Day vs 10-Day Postexposure Chemoprophylaxis With Oseltamivir to Prevent Hospital Transmission of Influenza: A Noninferiority Randomized Open-Label Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets