A noninferiority randomized open-label pilot study of 3- versus 7-day influenza postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir in hospitalized children

3Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Short influenza postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) showed high efficacy in adults, but studies in children are lacking. This randomized open-label pilot trial aimed to verify noninferiority of a 3- versus 7-day prophylaxis with oral oseltamivir in hospitalized children. Influenza contacts were randomized to the 3- or 7-day group and efficacy, relative risk of adverse events (AEs), and the cumulative costs of drugs and AEs management were compared. The intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis included 59 children (n = 28 and n = 31 in the 3- and 7-day group, respectively). The efficacy was 100% (95% CI 87.7–100%) versus 93.6% (95% CI 78.6–99.2%) in the 3- and 7-day group; the differences were statistically insignificant. A per-protocol (PP) analysis including 56 patients (n = 27 and n = 29, respectively) showed 100% (95% CI 87.2–100%) and 93.1% (95% CI 77.2–99.2%) efficacy, respectively, without statistical significance. Differences were within the predefined noninferiority margin with an efficacy difference Δ = 6.45 percentage points (p.p.) with 1-sided 95% CI (− 2.8, − 1.31, p = 0.86; ITT) and Δ = 6.9 p.p. (1-sided 95% CI − 2.83, − 1.27, p = 0.85; PP). Adverse events did not differ significantly, while the cumulative costs of the prophylaxis and AEs management were higher in the 7-day group (median 10.5 euro vs. 4.5 euro, p < 0.01). This pilot study showed the noninferiority of the 3-day versus 7-day PEP, which was associated with lower costs. Trial registration number: NCT04297462, 5th March 2020, restrospectively registered.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wrotek, A., & Jackowska, T. (2024). A noninferiority randomized open-label pilot study of 3- versus 7-day influenza postexposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir in hospitalized children. Scientific Reports, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-65244-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free