Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Dec 15;59(12):e172-85. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu632. Epub 2014 Aug 12.

Evaluation of intravenous peramivir for treatment of influenza in hospitalized patients.

Author information

1
Department of Medical Microbiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Division of Infectious Disease and Organ Transplantation, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
3
School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
4
Pneumology Department, SHATPPD-Ruse, Ruse, Bulgaria.
5
Emergency Medicine Observation Unit, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak.
6
Department of Emergency Medicine, Wayne State University-Detroit Medical Center, Michigan.
7
PharPoint Research, Wilmington.
8
BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Durham, North Carolina.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Seasonal influenza causes >200 000 annual hospitalizations in the United States. Current antiviral treatment options are limited to oral or inhaled agents. There is an urgent unmet need for intravenous antiviral treatments.

METHODS:

Patients hospitalized with suspected influenza were randomized to 5-day treatment with intravenous peramivir (600 mg once daily) or placebo; all received the institution's standard of care (SOC) treatment. Time to clinical resolution and change in viral shedding in nasopharyngeal specimens were the primary and key secondary end points.

RESULTS:

Influenza infection was confirmed in 338 of 405 enrolled patients. At the time of a preplanned interim analysis, the primary efficacy analysis population comprised 121 patients who did not receive a concurrent neuraminidase inhibitor as part of the SOC. The median (95% confidence interval) time to clinical resolution was 42.5 (34.0-57.9) hours for peramivir versus 49.5 (40.0-61.9) hours for placebo (P = .97). A larger treatment effect was observed in patients with history of symptoms <48 hours or admitted to an intensive care unit. Greater reductions in viral shedding, based on median tissue culture infective dose, were observed in patients who received peramivir than in placebo recipients, although this difference was not statistically significant. The incidence and severity of adverse events and laboratory abnormalities were similar between the 2 treatment groups. The study was terminated for futility after a preplanned interim analysis.

CONCLUSIONS:

A significant clinical benefit was not demonstrated for peramivir plus SOC compared with placebo plus SOC. Peramivir was generally safe and well tolerated. These findings highlight the challenges in designing studies to evaluate influenza antiviral agents in a hospitalized setting. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00958776.

KEYWORDS:

clinical trial; hospitalized; influenza; peramivir

PMID:
25115871
DOI:
10.1093/cid/ciu632
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
Loading ...
Support Center