Regina Dutkowski

Oral oseltamivir treatment of influenza in children

Background. Oral oseltamivir administration is effective treatment for influenza in adults. This study was conducted to determine the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oseltamivir in children with influenza. Methods. In this randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study, children 1 through 12 years with fever [≥100°F (≥38°C)] and a history of cough or coryza <48 h duration received oseltamivir 2 mg/kg/dose or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to resolution of illness including mild/absent cough and coryza mild/absent, return to normal activity and euthermia. Results. Of 695 enrolled children 452 (65%) had influenza (placebo, n = 235; oseltamivir, n = 217). Among infected children the median duration of illness was reduced by 36 h (26%) in oseltamivir compared with placebo recipients (101 h; 95% confidence interval, 89 to 118 vs. 137 h; 95% confidence interval, 125 to 150;P < 0.0001). Oseltamivir treatment also reduced cough, coryza and duration of fever. New diagnoses of otitis media were reduced by 44% (12%vs. 21%). The incidence of physician-prescribed antibiotics was significantly lower in influenza-infected oseltamivir (68 of 217, 31%) than placebo (97 of 235, 41%;P = 0.03) recipients. Oseltamivir therapy was generally well-tolerated, although associated with an excess frequency of emesis (5.8%). Discontinuation because of adverse events was low in both groups (1.8% with oseltamivir vs. 1.1% with placebo). Oseltamivir treatment did not affect the influenza-specific antibody response. Conclusions. Oral oseltamivir administration is an efficacious and well-tolerated therapy for influenza in children when given within 48 h of onset of illness.

Management of influenza in households: a prospective, randomized comparison of oseltamivir treatment with or without postexposure prophylaxis.

We determined the efficacy of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) and treatment of ill index cases with oseltamivir, in an attempt to prevent influenza transmission in households, in a study conducted in 277 households with 298 index cases (62% with laboratory-confirmed influenza) and 812 contacts aged > or =1 year. Contacts were randomized by household to receive treatment (5 days; n=402), if illness developed, or PEP for 10 days (n=410), and the number of households with at least 1 contact developing laboratory-confirmed influenza was measured. PEP provided a protective efficacy of 58.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.6%-79.6%; P=.0114) for households against proven influenza and 68.0% (95% CI, 34.9%-84.2%; P=.0017) for individual contacts, compared with treatment of index cases alone. No oseltamivir-resistant variants were detected in treated index cases or contacts. PEP of household contacts of those with influenza reduces the secondary spread of influenza in families when the initial household case is treated.

Assessment of neuropsychiatric adverse events in influenza patients treated with oseltamivir: a comprehensive review.

After reports from Japan of neuropsychiatric adverse events (NPAEs) in children taking oseltamivir phosphate (hereafter referred to as oseltamivir [Tamiflu®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland]) during and after the 2004–5 influenza season, Roche explored possible reasons for the increase in reporting rate and presented regular updates to the US FDA and other regulatory authorities. This review summarizes the results of a comprehensive assessment of the company’s own preclinical and clinical studies, post-marketing spontaneous adverse event reporting, epidemiological investigations utilizing health claims and medical records databases and an extensive review of the literature, with the aim of answering the following questions: (i) what the types and rates of neuropsychiatric abnormalities reported in patients with influenza are, and whether these differ in patients who have received oseltamivir compared with those who have not; (ii) what levels of oseltamivir and its active metabolite, oseltamivir carboxylate are achieved in the CNS; (iii) whether oseltamivir and oseltamivircarboxylate have pharmacological activity in the CNS; and (iv) whether there are genetic differences between Japanese and Caucasian patients that result in different levels of oseltamivir and/or oseltamivir carboxylate in the CNS, differences in their metabolism or differences in their pharmacological activity in the CNS.In total, 3051 spontaneous reports of NPAEs were received by Roche, involving 2466 patients who received oseltamivir between 1999 and 15 September 2007; 2772 (90.9%) events originated from Japan, 190 (6.2%) from the US and 89 (2.9%) from other countries. During this period, oseltamivir was prescribed to around 48 million people worldwide. Crude NPAE reporting rates (per 1 000 000 prescriptions) in children (aged ≤16 years) and adults, respectively, were 99 and 28 events in Japan and 19 and 8 in the US. NPAEs were more commonly reported in children (2218 events in 1808 children aged >16 years vs 833 in 658 adults) and generally occurred within 48 hours of the onset of influenza illness and initiation of treatment. After categorizing the reported events according to International Classification of Diseases (9th edition) codes, abnormal behaviour (1160 events, 38.0%) and delusions/perceptual disturbances (661 events, 21.7%) were the largest categories of events, and delirium or delirium-like events (as defined by the American Psychiatric Association) were very common in most categories.No difference in NPAE reporting rates between oseltamivir and placebo was found in phase III treatment studies (0.5% vs 0.6%). Analyses of US healthcare claims databases showed the risk of NPAEs in oseltamivir-treated patients (n =159 386) was no higher than those not receiving antivirals (n = 159 386). Analysis of medical records in the UK General Practice Research Database showed that the adjusted relative risk of NPAEs in influenza patients was significantly higher (1.75-fold) than in the general population. Based on literature reports, NPAEs in Japanese and Taiwanese children with influenza have occurred before the initiation of oseltamivir treatment; events were also similar to those occurring after the initiation of oseltamivir therapy.No clinically relevant differences in plasma pharmacokinetics of oseltamivir and its active metabolite oseltamivir carboxylate were noted between Japanese and Caucasian adults or children. Penetration into the CNS of both oseltamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate was low in Japanese and Caucasian adults (cerebrospinal fluid/plasma maximum concentration and area under the plasma concentration-time curve ratios of approximately 0.03), and the capacity for converting oseltamivir to oseltamivir carboxylate in rat and human brains was low. In animal autoradiography and pharmacokinetic studies, brain: plasma radioactivity ratios were generally 20% or lower. Animal studies showed no specific CNS/behavioural effects after administration of doses corresponding to ≥100 times the clinical dose. Oseltamivir or oseltamivir carboxylate did not interact with human neuraminidases or with 155 known molecular targets in radioligand binding and functional assays. A review of the information published to date on functional variations of genes relevant to oseltamivir pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and simulated gene knock-out scenarios did not identify any plausible genetic explanations for the observed NPAEs.The available data do not suggest that the incidence of NPAEs in influenza patients receiving oseltamivir is higher than in those who do not, and no mechanism by which oseltamivir or oseltamivir carboxylate could cause or worsen such events could be identified.

Safety and Pharmacology of Oseltamivir in Clinical Use

Oseltamivir is a novel agent approved for the treatment and prevention of influenza infection and illnesses in adults and children. Assessment of data from the clinical trial programme, a US health insurance database study and postmarketing surveillance allowed a comprehensive review of the safety of oseltamivir in clinical use in subjects >1 year of age.Oseltamivir has been studied over the course of a 5-year development programme in >11 000 subjects from North America, Europe and the Southern Hemisphere, including otherwise healthy adults, approximately 500 elderly/high-risk subjects, and children (>1000) aged 1–12 years. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events, hospitalisations and deaths, as well as haematological and biochemical laboratory safety tests.The data reveals that oseltamivir has simple, uncomplicated pharmacology and lacks potential for drug-drug interactions. Electrocardiogram parameters, including corrected QT interval, were unaffected by oseltamivir even at high doses. Postmarketing studies confirmed that transient gastrointestinal disturbance is the major adverse effect of oseltamivir and that this can be reduced by taking oseltamivir after a light snack. On treatment serious adverse events were reported in 1.3% of oseltamivir 75mg twice daily, 0.7% of oseltamivir 150mg twice daily and 1.2% of placebo recipients, respectively, in the clinical trial programme. Postmarketing, it is estimated that, to date, over 4 million oseltamivir prescriptions have been dispensed worldwide. Approximately 2300 spontaneous reports were received by the manufacturer over the three winter seasons of use. As these events are reported infrequently and from an unknown number of users, it is not possible to definitively assess causality or frequency of reported events. Most reports were of gastrointestinal and skin reactions. However, a clear association between the skin reactions and oseltamivir has not been established. A large study of insurance records, which permitted the assessment of the relative risk of medical events treated in the month following prescription of oseltamivir in general use, showed no evidence of increased risk of cardiac, neuropsychiatric or respiratory events for those receiving oseltamivir compared with those who did not.To conclude, no important safety concerns have evolved which might limit the suitability of oseltamivir for the treatment and prevention of influenza in all patient populations.

Oral Oseltamivir improves pulmonary function and reduces exacerbation frequency for influenza-infected children with asthma

Background: Among asthmatic children, influenza is associated with increased hospitalizations. Although vaccination is safe and effective among asthmatic children, its protective efficacy varies and uptake rates can be low. In comparison, oseltamivir (Tamiflu) is effective against all influenza strains and can reduce the severity and duration of influenza among adults and children. This study determined the effects of oseltamivir among influenza-infected children with asthma. Methods: Asthmatic children (6–12 years of age) were randomized to receive oseltamivir (2 mg/kg) or placebo twice daily, as a syrup. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to freedom from illness. Secondary endpoints included the area under the symptom score-hour curve, the proportion of patients with asthma exacerbations and changes in forced expiratory volume at 1 second during the dosing period. Analysis was performed for both the intent-to-treat infected (n = 179) and per protocol (n = 162) populations. Results: The primary endpoint for this study was not met. Oseltamivir tended to reduce the time to freedom from illness in the intent-to-treat infected population (10.4 hours, 8%; P = 0.5420), the per protocol population (24.3 hours, 17%; P = 0.1607) and patients who started treatment <24 hours after symptom onset (39.8 hours, 25%; P = 0.0780). However, an improvement in pulmonary function was observed. The improvement in forced expiratory volume at 1 second was significantly greater among oseltamivir-treated patients (10.8% versus 4.7%; P = 0.0148). Oseltamivir-treated patients also experienced fewer asthma exacerbations up to day 7 (68% versus 51%; P = 0.031). Oseltamivir was safe and well-tolerated. Conclusions: Oseltamivir is safe and well-tolerated among asthmatic children, may reduce symptom duration and helps improve lung function and reduce asthma exacerbations during influenza infection.

Pharmacokinetics and Dosage Recommendations for an Oseltamivir Oral Suspension for the Treatment of Influenza in Children

AbstractObjective: Oseltamivir (Ro 64-0796) is an ester prodrug of the active metabolite Ro 64-0802 (oseltamivir carboxylate), a potent and selective inhibitor of the neuraminidase enzyme of influenza virus. In this study we report the pharmacokinetics of oseltamivir in healthy children volunteers (study 1) and in children with influenza (study 2). Study Participants and Methods: In study 1, an open-label, single dose study, serial plasma samples were obtained from a total of 18 healthy children (5 to 18 years) who were grouped by age (n = 6 per group) and received single oral doses of oseltamivir 2 mg/kg. In study 2, a randomised, placebo controlled phase III study in paediatric children (1 to 12 years) presenting with influenza symptoms, 199 pharmacokinetic sparse samples were obtained from 87 patients, and serial samples were obtained from 5 patients. Pooled data were compared with those from adult studies. Results: Children (1 to 12 years) eliminated the active metabolite faster than both adolescents (13 to 18 years) and adults, resulting in lower exposure to the active drug. In these children, oseltamivir 2 mg/kg twice daily resulted in drug exposures within the range associated with tolerability and efficacy in adults administered approximately 1 mg/kg twice daily. Unit doses of oseltamivir 30, 45 and 60mg oral suspension are recommended twice daily in children weighing ≤15kg (or ≤331b, aged 1 to 3 years), >15 to 23kg (or >33 to 511b, aged 4 to 7 years) and >23 to 40kg (or >51 to 881b, aged 8 to 12 years), respectively. A 75mg capsule may be a viable dosage formulation in children (e.g. over 8 years of age) who are able to swallow solid dosage forms. Conclusions: Young children cleared the active metabolite oseltamivir carboxylate at a faster rate than older children and adults. Convenient administration recommendations for the oseltamivir oral suspension in children are possible to maintain drug exposure within the target window.

Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness and Flu Scale (CARIFS): Development of a valid measure for childhood respiratory infections

Although acute respiratory infection (ARI) is the most frequent clinical syndrome in childhood, there is no validated measure of its severity. Therefore a parental questionnaire was developed: the Canadian Acute Respiratory Illness Flu Scale (CARIFS). A process of item generation, item reduction, and scale construction resulted in a scale composed of 18 items covering three domains; symptoms (e.g., cough); function (e.g., play), and parental impact (e.g., clinginess). The validity of the scale was evaluated in a study of 220 children with ARI. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the CARIFS score with physician, nurse, and parental assessment of the childs health. Data were available from 206 children (94%). The CARIFS correlated well with measures of the construct (Spearmans correlations between 0.36 and 0.52). Responsiveness was shown, with 90% of children having a CARIFS score less than a quarter of its initial value, by the tenth day.

Oseltamivir in seasonal influenza: cumulative experience in low- and high-risk patients

Seasonal influenza viruses cause annual disease epidemics that affect individuals at low and high risk for secondary illnesses. Influenza vaccines are widely used in high-risk patients to prevent infection, but the protection afforded varies by population; uptake is also limited in some groups. Antiviral drugs for influenza are now readily available. Oseltamivir is the most widely used antiviral for the treatment and prophylaxis of seasonal influenza, and its efficacy and safety are now well established in a variety of populations. In addition to decreasing the severity and duration of the symptoms of influenza, clinical and epidemiological studies demonstrate that oseltamivir significantly reduces the frequency of secondary illnesses and exacerbation of underlying conditions; survival is also significantly improved in seriously ill patients who are hospitalized with severe influenza. Resistant viruses are isolated with a low frequency during oseltamivir treatment (0.33% in adults and 4.0% in children among almost 2000 oseltamivir-treated patients enrolled onto Roche-sponsored clinical trials of oseltamivir treatment during the oseltamivir development programme). However, an oseltamivir-resistant influenza A (H1N1) virus emerged in Europe during the 2007–08 season and circulated in the southern and northern hemispheres in 2008–09. No link with oseltamivir usage could be detected, and the clinical impact of these viruses was limited. Oseltamivir-susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 viruses now predominate in many countries. Oseltamivir is generally well tolerated, with a similar adverse event profile to placebo.

Oseltamivir in seasonal, pandemic, and avian influenza: a comprehensive review of 10-years clinical experience

Oseltamivir (Tamiflu®; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland) is an orally administered antiviral for the treatment and prevention of influenza A and B infections that is registered in more than 100 countries worldwide. More than 83 million patients have been exposed to the product since its introduction. Oseltamivir is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for use in the clinical management of pandemic and seasonal influenza of varying severity, and as the primary antiviral agent for treatment of avian H5N1 influenza infection in humans. This article is a nonsystematic review of the experience gained from the first 10 years of using oseltamivir for influenza infections since its launch in early 2000, emphasizing recent advances in our understanding of the product and its clinical utility in five main areas. The article reviews the pharmacokinetics of oseltamivir and its active metabolite, oseltamivir carboxylate, including information on special populations such as children and elderly adults, and the co-administration of oseltamivir with other agents. This is followed by a summary of data on the effectiveness of oseltamivir treatment and prophylaxis in patients with all types of influenza, including pandemic (H1N1) 2009 and avian H5N1 influenza. The implications of changes in susceptibility of circulating influenza viruses to oseltamivir and other antiviral agents are also described, as is the emergence of antiviral resistance during and after the 2009 pandemic. The fourth main section deals with the safety profile of oseltamivir in standard and special patient populations, and reviews spontaneously reported adverse event data from the pandemic and pre-pandemic periods and the topical issue of neuropsychiatric adverse events. Finally, the article considers the pharmacoeconomics of oseltamivir in comparison with vaccination and usual care regimens, and as a component of pandemic influenza mitigation strategies.

Efficacy and safety of oral oseltamivir for influenza prophylaxis in transplant recipients

BACKGROUND Haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at high risk for severe influenza and its complications, and may not be adequately protected by vaccination. METHODS Liver, kidney, or liver-kidney transplant or allogeneic HSCT recipients aged ≥1 year were randomized to oseltamivir (75 mg once daily for those ≥13 years or weight-based dosing for children 1-12 years) or placebo for 12 weeks during periods of local influenza circulation. Patients were assessed for influenza infection via daily diary, every-other-week culture and PCR, and baseline and end-of-treatment serology. RESULTS A total of 477 subjects were enrolled (239 oseltamivir and 238 placebo); most were adults (96%) and SOT recipients (81%). In the intent-to-treat population, the frequency of laboratory-confirmed clinical influenza (culture positive and/or >4-fold increase in haemagglutinin antibody inhibition [primary end point]) was similar in the oseltamivir and placebo groups (2.1% [5/237] and 2.9% [7/238]). Incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza was significantly reduced in the oseltamivir group versus placebo when determined by reverse transcriptase-PCR (1.7% [4/237] versus 8.4% [20/238]; 95% CI 2.8, 11.1) or viral culture (<1% [1/237] versus 3.8% [9/238]; 95% CI 0.7, 6.6), giving protective efficacies of 79.9 and 88.8%, respectively. Serious adverse events (oseltamivir 8% and placebo 10%) and adverse events (oseltamivir 55% and placebo 58%) were reported in both arms with a similar frequency. One illness due to oseltamivir-resistant A/H1N1 virus was detected in each group. CONCLUSIONS Oseltamivir prophylaxis is generally well-tolerated and may reduce culture- or PCR-confirmed influenza incidence in transplant recipients.