• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Giuseppe

Emeritus
Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis -- Jefferson et al. 339: b5106 (BMJ, abstract, edited)

Published 8 December 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b5106
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b5106

Research

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

Tom Jefferson, researcher1,
Mark Jones, statistician2,
Peter Doshi, doctoral student3,
Chris Del Mar, dean; coordinating editor of Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group4

1 Acute Respiratory Infections Group, Cochrane Collaboration, Rome, Italy,
2 University of Queensland, School of Population Health, Brisbane, Australia,
3 Program in History, Anthropology, Science, Technology and Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA,
4 Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond University, Gold Coast, Australia

Correspondence to: C Del Mar cdelmar@bond.edu.au


Abstract

Objectives
To update a 2005 Cochrane review that assessed the effects of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing or ameliorating the symptoms of influenza, the transmission of influenza, and complications from influenza in healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects.

Search strategy
An updated search of the Cochrane central register of controlled trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group?s specialised register, Medline (1950-Aug 2009), Embase (1980-Aug 2009), and post-marketing pharmacovigilance data and comparative safety cohorts.

Selection criteria
Randomised placebo controlled studies of neuraminidase inhibitors in otherwise healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

Main outcome measures
Duration and incidence of symptoms; incidence of lower respiratory tract infections, or their proxies; and adverse events.

Data extraction
Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data.

Data analysis
Comparisons were structured into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

Results
20 trials were included: four on prophylaxis, 12 on treatment, and four on postexposure prophylaxis. For prophylaxis, neuraminidase inhibitors had no effect against influenza-like illness or asymptomatic influenza. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic laboratory confirmed influenza was 61% (risk ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.85) at 75 mg daily and 73% (0.27, 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily was 62% efficacious (0.38, 0.17 to 0.85). Oseltamivir for postexposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% (95% confidence interval 15% to 79%) and 84% (49% to 95%) in two trials of households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza-like illness symptoms were in favour of treatment: 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Eight unpublished studies on complications were ineligible and therefore excluded. The remaining evidence suggests oseltamivir did not reduce influenza related lower respiratory tract complications (risk ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 1.35). From trial evidence, oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 2.93). Evidence of rarer adverse events from pharmacovigilance was of poor quality or possibly under-reported.

Conclusion
Neuraminidase inhibitors have modest effectiveness against the symptoms of influenza in otherwise healthy adults. The drugs are effective postexposure against laboratory confirmed influenza, but this is a small component of influenza-like illness, so for this outcome neuraminidase inhibitors are not effective. Neuraminidase inhibitors might be regarded as optional for reducing the symptoms of seasonal influenza. Paucity of good data has undermined previous findings for oseltamivir?s prevention of complications from influenza. Independent randomised trials to resolve these uncertainties are needed.
-
<cite cite="http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/dec07_2/b5106">Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis -- Jefferson et al. 339: b5106 -- BMJ</cite>
 

Attachments

Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

my summary:
prophylaxis : no effect
symptomatic laboratory confirmed influenza :
- Tamiflu: 61% efficacy at 75mg daily and 73% at 150mg
- Relenza: 62% efficacy at 10 mg daily
postexposure prophylaxis: ~70% efficacy
odds ratio for nausea = 1.79
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

> The drugs are effective postexposure against laboratory
> confirmed influenza, but this is a small component of
> influenza-like illness, so for this outcome neuraminidase
> inhibitors are not effective

I don't understand this.

are effective ... but ... are not effective
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

my summary : no evidence that Tamiflu is effective at all ???
only non-confirmed Roche studies

but I somehow remember lots of independent studies, claiming
~1 day reduction of symptoms (~15%)
symptoms are also maybe less severe in the remaining days,
I don't know

many governments stockpiled it in 2006, urged by WHO
didn't they check it ??

--------------------------------
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22513907
In children
sick time: 20% effective (laninamivir 40%)
otitis media: 14% effective
prophylaxis: 8% effective
....................................................
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

--------accidently edited by gsgs-----------
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

oops, sorry. maybe I accidently edited your post instead of
replying ?!

----------------------------------------------------------
"significantly" often just means that they have confidence > 95% _that_ it does.
Not _how much_ it does.

Unfortunately it's quite common to use less informative formulations like that


remembering all our threads about "tamiflu-blankets" and such in 2006,2007 ...
---------------------------------------------------------------

that was my post, not Laidback Al 's
replying to him saying something similar to tamiflu significantly
reducing symptoms and death in H5N1 treatment
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23199978
Time to initiation of oseltamivir from symptom onset was 2-6 days for
survivors and 7-9 days for non-survivors
8 patients with H5N1 infection (aged 2-30 years; 3 fatal)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22927451
215 patients with confirmed H5N1
early initiation of oseltamivir was found to be particularly effective in individuals
without respiratory failure (odds ratio, 0.17; P = .04).
[6 times less likely to die ?]
[early treatment with tamiflu probably also meant early treatment for > respiratory failure,
and adjunctive treatment with corticosteroids or antibiotics.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/197/9/1315.full.pdf
[effective for prophylaxis in ferrets, 5?ferrets,high dose]
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

There is also a critical difference to be aware of here: studies look at seasonal flu and the degree of improvement in relatively mild flu cases. I am also not sure that the cochrane data has examined improvements in morbidity/ mortality in specific high risk groups or just the general population.

As far as pandemic management is concerned, Tamiflu usage is intended for severe flu with (usually) a high fatality rate.

The non-study based clinical evidence suggests that Tamiflu has value in saving lives in H5N1 outbreaks i.e the degree of improvement in a severe flu situation may produce different data vs a seasonal flu outbreak.

However, an H5N1 outbreak is not a situation that permits double blind, placebo controlled studies and so we do not have sufficient data to measure its real usefulness in these circumstances.

Also worth noting that until something else comes along, it is the best we have.
 
Re: BMJ. Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

laninamivir was ~ double as effective as oseltamivir in one
of the studies above

---------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22513907
In children
sick time: 20% effective (laninamivir 40%)

well, that was maybe in resistent cases only
-------------------------
well again, but that was double as good as
oseltamivir on all cases, not just resistent.
-----------------------------------
also this: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23085742
------------------------------------------
http://www.omicsonline.org/0975-0851/JBB-03-001.php
Satoshi Yoshiba*, Hiromi Okabe and Hitoshi Ishizuka are employees of Daiichi Sankyo
---------------------------------------
 
Back
Top Bottom