tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Transpl Infect Dis
. 2024 Feb 6:e14249.
doi: 10.1111/tid.14249. Online ahead of print. Clinical outcomes of baloxavir versus oseltamivir in immunocompromised patients
Matthew Ringer[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Maricar Malinis[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Dayna McManus[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Matthew Davis[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Sunish Shah[SUP] 4 5 [/SUP], Paul Trubin[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Jeffrey E Topal[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Marwan M Azar[SUP] 3 6 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Background: Neuraminidase inhibitors, including oseltamivir, are the treatment standard for influenza. Baloxavir, a novel antiviral, demonstrated comparable outcomes to oseltamivir in outpatients with influenza. Baloxavir was equally effective as oseltamivir in a retrospective study of hospitalized patients with influenza at our institution. However, the efficacy of baloxavir in immunocompromised patients is unclear.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of immunocompromised adult patients hospitalized with influenza A who received baloxavir from January 2019 to April 2019 or oseltamivir from January 2018 to April 2018. Demographic and clinical outcomes were assessed. Primary outcomes were time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia and fever. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, ICU LOS, and 30-day mortality.
Results: Of 95 total patients, 52 received baloxavir and 43 received oseltamivir. Other than younger age (57.5 vs. 65; p = .035) and longer duration between vaccination and symptom onset (114 vs. 86 days; p = .001) in the baloxavir group, baseline characteristics did not differ. H1 was the predominant subtype in the baloxavir group (65.3%) versus H3 in the oseltamivir group (85.7%). When comparing baloxavir to oseltamivir, there was no significant difference in median time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia (59.9 vs. 42.5 h) and to resolution of fever (21.6 vs. 26.6 h). There were no differences in secondary outcomes.
Conclusion: Baloxavir was not associated with longer time to resolution of hypoxia or fever in comparison to oseltamivir. Results must be taken in context of variations in seasonal influenza subtype and resistance rates.
Keywords: baloxavir; immunocompromised; influenza; solid-organ transplant
. 2024 Feb 6:e14249.
doi: 10.1111/tid.14249. Online ahead of print. Clinical outcomes of baloxavir versus oseltamivir in immunocompromised patients
Matthew Ringer[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Maricar Malinis[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Dayna McManus[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Matthew Davis[SUP] 4 [/SUP], Sunish Shah[SUP] 4 5 [/SUP], Paul Trubin[SUP] 3 [/SUP], Jeffrey E Topal[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Marwan M Azar[SUP] 3 6 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 38319665
- DOI: 10.1111/tid.14249
Background: Neuraminidase inhibitors, including oseltamivir, are the treatment standard for influenza. Baloxavir, a novel antiviral, demonstrated comparable outcomes to oseltamivir in outpatients with influenza. Baloxavir was equally effective as oseltamivir in a retrospective study of hospitalized patients with influenza at our institution. However, the efficacy of baloxavir in immunocompromised patients is unclear.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of immunocompromised adult patients hospitalized with influenza A who received baloxavir from January 2019 to April 2019 or oseltamivir from January 2018 to April 2018. Demographic and clinical outcomes were assessed. Primary outcomes were time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia and fever. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, ICU LOS, and 30-day mortality.
Results: Of 95 total patients, 52 received baloxavir and 43 received oseltamivir. Other than younger age (57.5 vs. 65; p = .035) and longer duration between vaccination and symptom onset (114 vs. 86 days; p = .001) in the baloxavir group, baseline characteristics did not differ. H1 was the predominant subtype in the baloxavir group (65.3%) versus H3 in the oseltamivir group (85.7%). When comparing baloxavir to oseltamivir, there was no significant difference in median time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia (59.9 vs. 42.5 h) and to resolution of fever (21.6 vs. 26.6 h). There were no differences in secondary outcomes.
Conclusion: Baloxavir was not associated with longer time to resolution of hypoxia or fever in comparison to oseltamivir. Results must be taken in context of variations in seasonal influenza subtype and resistance rates.
Keywords: baloxavir; immunocompromised; influenza; solid-organ transplant