Polasek Thomas M, Friedland Peter L
Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Jun 5;12:1565069. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1565069. eCollection 2025.
To determine the safety and efficacy of a 0.5% povidone-iodine nasal spray (Nasodine) as a treatment for the common cold (ACTRN12619000764134).
A multi-center, randomized, controlled, double-blind Phase III study was conducted to assess the impact of Nasodine on the common cold. Two hundred and sixty (260) euthyroid adults with qualifying cold symptoms and meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria were randomized 2:1 to Nasodine or matching saline nasal spray (SNS), each applied 4 times daily for 5 days. Cold severity was reported using the WURSS-21 survey. The primary endpoint was impact on nasal symptoms (4-item scale), with the validated 19-item Global Severity Score (GSS) as the key secondary endpoint.
All cold severity outcomes pointed in favor of Nasodine over SNS. In the ITT ( = 260), the Nasodine benefit over SNS on nasal symptoms was 8.4% ( = 0.217). For GSS, the benefit was 12.6% ( = 0.054) in the ITT population. subset analyses showed markedly improved benefits of Nasodine: In subjects with stronger symptoms at enrollment (ES), the GSS benefit was 17.1% ( = 0.023); for those with confirmed viral infection (VES), GSS benefit was 23.0% ( = 0.048); and for those enrolled within 24 h of symptom onset (24S), GSS benefit was 39.7% ( = 0.024). In terms of functional impairment, the Nasodine benefit was greater in all subsets, with 16.1% ( = 0.041) benefit in ITT, 22.2% in ES ( = 0.012), 32.1% in VES ( = 0.023) and 37.1% in 24S ( = 0.093). Nasodine was well tolerated, with mild transient nasopharyngeal discomfort being a common adverse effect.
Nasodine treatment had a consistently positive and clinically meaningful benefit on overall cold severity when compared with saline nasal spray. Early treatment after symptom onset is an important efficacy factor.
https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377353&isReview=true, identifier ACTRN12619000764134.
确定0.5%聚维酮碘鼻腔喷雾剂(Nasodine)治疗普通感冒的安全性和有效性(澳大利亚新西兰临床试验注册中心编号:ACTRN12619000764134)。
开展一项多中心、随机、对照、双盲III期研究,以评估Nasodine对普通感冒的影响。260名甲状腺功能正常、有符合条件的感冒症状且符合纳入/排除标准的成年人按2:1随机分组,分别使用Nasodine或匹配的生理盐水鼻腔喷雾剂(SNS),均每日使用4次,持续5天。使用WURSS - 21调查问卷报告感冒严重程度。主要终点是对鼻部症状的影响(4项量表),经过验证的19项总体严重程度评分(GSS)作为关键次要终点。
所有感冒严重程度结果均表明Nasodine优于SNS。在意向性分析人群(n = 260)中,Nasodine在鼻部症状方面比SNS的优势为8.4%(P = 0.217)。对于GSS,在意向性分析人群中的优势为12.6%(P = 0.054)。亚组分析显示Nasodine的益处明显更大:在入组时症状较重的受试者(ES)中,GSS优势为17.1%(P = 0.023);对于确诊病毒感染的受试者(VES),GSS优势为23.0%(P = 0.048);对于症状发作24小时内入组的受试者(24S),GSS优势为39.7%(P = 0.024)。在功能损害方面,Nasodine在所有亚组中的益处都更大,在意向性分析人群中的优势为16.1%(P = 0.041),在ES中为22.2%(P = 0.012),在VES中为32.1%(P = 0.023),在24S中为37.1%(P = 0.093)。Nasodine耐受性良好,轻度短暂性鼻咽不适是常见的不良反应。
与生理盐水鼻腔喷雾剂相比,Nasodine治疗对感冒总体严重程度始终具有积极且具有临床意义的益处。症状发作后早期治疗是一个重要的疗效因素。