Effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors in treatment and prevention of influenza A and B: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 5 June 2003
- Vol. 326 (7401) , 1235
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7401.1235
Abstract
Objective To review the clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir and zanamivir for the treatment and prevention of influenza A and B. Design Systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Published studies were retrieved from electronic bibliographic databases; supplementary data were obtained from the manufacturers. Selection of studies Randomised controlled, double blind trials that were published in English, had data available before 31 December 2001, evaluated treatment or prevention of naturally occurring influenza with zanamivir or oseltamivir (if given using the formulation and dosage licensed for clinical use), and reported at least one end point of relevance. Review methods The main outcome measures were the median time to the alleviation of symptoms (for treatment trials) and number of flu episodes avoided (for prevention trials). Three population groups were defined: children aged 12 years and under; otherwise healthy individuals aged 12 to 65 years; and “high risk” individuals (those with certain chronic medical conditions or aged 65 years and older). Results Seventeen treatment trials and seven prevention trials identified met the inclusion criteria. All trials included compared one of the drugs against placebo or standard care. Treatment of children, otherwise healthy individuals, and high risk populations with zanamivir reduced the median duration of symptoms in days respectively by 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.5 to 1.5), 0.8 (0.3 to 1.3), and 0.9 (−0.1 to 1.9) for the intention to treat population. The corresponding results, in days, for oseltamivir were 0.9 (0.3 to 1.5), 0.9 (0.3 to 1.4), and 0.4 (−0.7 to 1.4). The effect of giving zanamivir and oseltamivir prophylactically resulted in a relative reduction of 70-90% in the odds of developing flu, depending on the strategy adopted and the population studied. Conclusions Evidence from randomised controlled trials consistently supports the view that both oseltamivir and zanamivir are clinically effective for treating and preventing flu. However, evidence is limited for the treatment of certain populations and for all prevention strategies.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Systematic review and economic decision modelling for the prevention and treatment of influenza A and BHealth Technology Assessment, 2003
- Zanamivir for the treatment of influenza in adults: a systematic review and economic evaluationHealth Technology Assessment, 2002
- Zanamivir for the Treatment of Influenza A and B Infection in High-Risk PatientsArchives of internal medicine (1960), 2001
- Efficacy and safety of oseltamivir in treatment of acute influenza: a randomised controlled trialThe Lancet, 2000
- Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statementThe Lancet, 1999
- Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adultsPublished by Wiley ,1999
- Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?Controlled Clinical Trials, 1996
- Differences in side effects of amantadine hydrochloride and rimantadine hydrochloride relate to differences in pharmacokineticsAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 1983
- Double-blind controlled study of central nervous system side effects of amantadine, rimantadine, and chlorpheniramineAntimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, 1982
- STUDIES ON THE ANTIVIRAL ACTIVITY OF AMANTADINE HYDROCHLORIDE*Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1965