4.7 Article

Clinical Experience in Adults and Children Treated with Intravenous Peramivir for 2009 Influenza A (H1N1) Under an Emergency IND Program in the United States

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 52, Issue 6, Pages 695-706

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/cir001

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. BioCryst Pharmaceuticals
  2. BioCryst
  3. Roche
  4. Cellex
  5. Chimerix

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Peramivir, an investigational intravenous neuraminidase inhibitor in Phase 3 trials for hospitalized patients, was made available during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic under the Emergency Investigational New Drug (eIND) regulations. We describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of all patients for whom peramivir was requested under the eIND. Methods. After obtaining eIND approval from the Food and Drug Administration and local institutional review board approval, clinicians caring for hospitalized patients with influenza administered intravenous peramivir and collected information on demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. Results. From April through October 2009, peramivir was requested for 42 patients and administered to 20 adults and 11 children. At hospitalization, all patients had rapidly progressing, radiographically confirmed viral pneumonia with respiratory failure, and all but 1 patient required mechanical ventilation. In most patients, including 1 person with documented oseltamivir-resistant infection, the illness had progressed despite oseltamivir treatment. Peramivir was administered for 1-14 days (median duration, 10 days). The 14-day, 28-day, and 56-day survival rates were 76.7%, 66.7%, and 59.0%, respectively. Peramivir was generally well tolerated. Conclusions. Intravenous peramivir was well tolerated and was associated with recovery in most patients hospitalized with severe 2009 H1N1 influenza viral pneumonia and treated under an eIND.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available