Hospices Civils de Lyon, Centre National de Référence virus influenzae France Sud, Laboratoire de Virologie Est, F-69677 Bron, France.
Antiviral Res. 2012 Nov;96(2):130-7. doi: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2012.08.002. Epub 2012 Aug 14.
The emergence of oseltamivir resistance in 2007 highlighted the need for alternative strategies against influenza. To limit the putative emergence of resistant viruses this clinical trial aimed to evaluate the antiviral efficacy and tolerability of oseltamivir-zanamivir (O+Z) bitherapy compared to oseltamivir monotherapy (O). This clinical trial was designed in 2008-2009 and was conducted during the A(H1N1) influenza virus pandemic in 2009-2010. The A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses were reported to be sensitive to oseltamivir and zanamivir but resistant to amantadine.
During the pandemic phase in France, adults with influenza-like illness for less than 42h and who tested positive to influenza A were randomised into treatment groups: (O+Z) or (O). Patients had a nasal wash at day 0, before the beginning of treatment and daily at days 1 to 4. They also had a nasal swab at days 5 and 7 to check for the negativation of viral excretion. Virological response was assessed using the GAPDH adjusted M gene quantification.
Analysis was possible for 24 patients, 12 in the (O+Z) arm and 12 in the (O) arm. The mean viral load decreased at around 1 log(10)cgeq/μl per day regardless of allocated treatment group. We could not detect any significant difference between treatment groups in the duration needed to alleviate symptoms. All treatments were well tolerated. No oseltamivir-resistant H275Y NA mutated virus has been detected in patients of both treatment groups.
The sample size of our study is too limited to be fully informative and we could not detect whether combination therapy (O+Z) improves or reduces the effectiveness of oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection in community patients. Additional studies are needed to improve the antiviral treatment of patients infected with influenza virus.
2007 年奥司他韦耐药性的出现凸显了需要针对流感的替代策略。为了限制可能出现的耐药病毒,本临床试验旨在评估奥司他韦-扎那米韦(O+Z)联合治疗与奥司他韦单药治疗(O)相比的抗病毒疗效和耐受性。本临床试验于 2008-2009 年设计,并在 2009-2010 年甲型 H1N1 流感大流行期间进行。报道称,A(H1N1)pdm09 病毒对奥司他韦和扎那米韦敏感,但对金刚烷胺耐药。
在法国大流行期间,症状出现不到 42 小时且流感 A 检测阳性的成年人被随机分为治疗组:(O+Z)或(O)。患者在治疗开始前的第 0 天、第 1 天至第 4 天每天进行一次鼻腔冲洗。他们还在第 5 天和第 7 天进行鼻腔拭子检查,以检查病毒排出是否转阴。使用 GAPDH 调整后的 M 基因定量法评估病毒学反应。
共对 24 例患者进行了分析,其中(O+Z)组 12 例,(O)组 12 例。无论分配的治疗组如何,病毒载量平均每天降低约 1 个对数(10)cgeq/μl。我们无法检测到治疗组之间在缓解症状所需的时间上有任何显著差异。所有治疗均耐受良好。在两组患者中均未检测到奥司他韦耐药 H275Y NA 突变病毒。
本研究的样本量太小,无法提供充分的信息,我们无法检测出联合治疗(O+Z)是否能提高或降低奥司他韦治疗社区患者甲型 H1N1pdm09 病毒感染的疗效。需要进一步研究以改善流感病毒感染患者的抗病毒治疗。