Virological Response to Standard- and Double-Dose Oseltamivir Treatment in Patients With Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza

Durigon, Edison L.; Thomazelli, Luciano Matsumiya; Oliveira, Danielle Bruna Leal; Macedo, Priscila V.; Lotufo, João Paulo Becker; Cunha, Clóvis Arns da; Neto, João Toniolo

doi:10.1097/ipc.0b013e31828bbb66

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sample size ranged from 36 to 19 893 (a total of 20 947). Among the included studies, four were RCTs 6‐9 and the other six were cohort studies (four retrospective studies 10‐13 and two prospective studies 14,15 ). Among the ten studies, five were conducted in North America 7,10‐13 and two in Asia 8,15 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the ten studies, five were conducted in North America 7,10‐13 and two in Asia 8,15 . Eight studies were multicentre studies 6‐10,13‐15 . All studies were published in English.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four of the included studies 6,8,9,14,15 provided data for 5‐day clearance after treatment by PCR (Table 7). The double‐dose regimen did not show a statistically significant benefit over the standard‐dose regimen ( P > .05) on the virologic clearance rate at a level of low degree of heterogeneity (=0%), and the results were consistent with both RCT studies and observational studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six of the included studies 6‐9,14,15 provided data for AEs (Table 8). The double‐dose regimen did not show a statistically significant benefit over the standard‐dose regimen ( P > .05), and the results were also consistent with both RCT studies and observational studies with a moderate degree of heterogeneity (=59%).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparison of double‐dose vs standard‐dose oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Liu

Qin

2020

J Clin Pharm Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is known and objective The effect of double‐dose oseltamivir on mortality in patients with influenza remains controversial. We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate whether double‐dose oseltamivir influences mortality in patients with influenza. Methods PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies regarding the effect of double‐dose oseltamivir on mortality in patients with influenza. The primary outcome was all‐cause mortality. The Mantel‐Haenszel method with random effects model was used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results and discussion Ten studies (four RCTs and six observational studies), involving 20 947 patients, were included. Pooled analysis suggested that double‐dose oseltamivir was not associated with decreased mortality in patients with influenza, both in RCTs (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.52‐3.15; P = .58) and observational studies (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.79‐3.19; P = .20; I2 = 51%). Double‐dose oseltamivir did not show statistical benefit on the virologic clearance rate (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.85‐1.88; P = .25; I2 = 0%) or the incidence of adverse events (AEs) (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.85‐2.72; P = .15; I2 = 59%). What is new and conclusion Current evidence indicates that double‐dose oseltamivir does not decrease mortality or have advantages on the outcome of virologic clearance rate and incidence of AEs. However, the finding largely relied on the data from observational studies, which may potentially have led to selection bias. Therefore, high‐quality and adequately powered RCTs are warranted.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the ten studies, five were conducted in North America 7,10‐13 and two in Asia 8,15 . Eight studies were multicentre studies 6‐10,13‐15 . All studies were published in English.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of double‐dose vs standard‐dose oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Liu

Qin

2020

J Clin Pharm Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Safety and effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors in situations of pandemic and/or novel/variant influenza: a systematic review of the literature, 2009–15

Boikos

Caya

Doll

et al. 2017

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most included studies were observational, statistically underpowered and at high risk of reporting biased and/or confounded effect estimates. NI treatment appeared likely effective in reducing mortality (cause unspecified) and pneumonia in general populations, with increasing benefit when administered with 48 h of symptom onset. NI pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis is likely effective in reducing secondary transmission of influenza in a general population. Our evidence suggests NIs are likely safe to use in the general population; however, data for children and pregnant women are limited. Knowledge gaps persist in specific populations such as Aboriginals, high-risk individuals and the elderly.

show abstract

Virological Response to Standard- and Double-Dose Oseltamivir Treatment in Patients With Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza

Cited by 2 publications

References 16 publications

Comparison of double‐dose vs standard‐dose oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Comparison of double‐dose vs standard‐dose oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Safety and effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors in situations of pandemic and/or novel/variant influenza: a systematic review of the literature, 2009–15

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About