Search

Background Peramivir offers a single‐dose intravenous (IV) treatment option for influenza (vs 5‐day oral dosing for oseltamivir). We sought to compare outcomes of emergency department (ED) patients at high risk for influenza complications treated with IV peramivir vs oral oseltamivir. Methods During the 2015‐16 and 2016‐17 influenza seasons, adult patients in two US EDs were randomized to either oral oseltamivir or IV peramivir treatment group. Eligibility included positive molecular influenza test; met CDC criteria for antiviral treatment; able to provide informed consent and agree to follow‐up assessment. Outcomes were measured by clinical end‐point indicators, including FLU‐PRO Score, Ordinal Scale, Patient Global Impression on Severity Score, and Karnofsky Performance Scale for 14 days. Non‐inferior t test was performed to assess comparative outcomes between the two groups. Results Five hundred and seventy‐five (68%) of 847 influenza‐positive patients were approached. Two hundred and eighty‐four met enrollment criteria and 179 were enrolled; of these 95 (53%) were randomized to peramivir, and 84 to oseltamivir. Average FLU‐PRO score at baseline was similar (peramivir: 2.67 vs oseltamivir: 2.52); the score decreased over time for both groups (day 5: peramivir: 1.71 vs oseltamivir: 1.62; day 10: peramivir: 1.48 vs oseltamivir: 1.37; day 14: peramivir: 1.40 vs oseltamivir: 1.33; all P .05; pneumonia: peramivir: 11% vs oseltamivir: 14%, P > .05). Conclusions Clinical outcomes of influenza‐infected patients treated with single‐dose IV peramivir were comparable to those treated with oral oseltamivir, suggesting potential utility of peramivir for influenza‐infected patients in the ED.

BACKGROUND Influenza B accounts for approximately one fourth of the seasonal influenza burden. However, research on the importance of influenza B has received less attention compared to influenza A. We sought to describe the association of both coinfections and comorbidities with disease severity among adults presenting to emergency departments (ED) with influenza B. METHODS Nasopharyngeal samples from patients found to be influenza B positive in four US and three Taiwanese ED over four consecutive influenza seasons (2014-2018) were tested for coinfections with the ePlex RP RUO panel. Multivariable logistic regressions were fitted to model adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for two severity outcomes separately: hospitalization and pneumonia diagnosis. Adjusting for demographic factors, underlying health conditions, and the National Early Warning Score (NEWS), we estimated the association of upper respiratory coinfections and comorbidity with disease severity (including hospitalization or pneumonia). RESULTS Amongst all influenza B positive individuals (n = 446), presence of another upper respiratory pathogen was associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalization (aOR = 2.99 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.14-7.85, p = 0.026]) and pneumonia (aOR = 2.27 [95% CI: 1.25-4.09, p = 0.007]). Chronic lung diseases (CLD) were the strongest predictor for hospitalization (aOR = 3.43 [95% CI: 2.98-3.95, p