Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
April 1, 1992Antimicrobial Agents and ChemotherapyOpen Access

Safety and efficacy of intranasal pirodavir (R77975) in experimental rhinovirus infection

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

Does intranasal pirodavir prevent infection and clinical colds in healthy adults experimentally challenged with rhinovirus?

Population

132 previously healthy adults aged 18 to 50 years with screening serum neutralizing antibody titers of ≤1:2…

Comparison

Intranasal pirodavir given by metered pump… vs Matching placebo given by metered pump spray.

Design

RCT, double-blind

Follow-up

5 to 8 days post-challenge

Authors

FHFrederick G. HaydenResearch Council of FinlandKAKoen AndriesRutgers, The State University of New JerseyPJPaul A. J. JanssenRutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Implication

Supports 6-times-daily intranasal pirodavir for experimental rhinovirus prophylaxis; confirms capsid-binding antiviral efficacy in human RCT.

Structured PICO

Does intranasal pirodavir prevent infection and clinical colds in healthy adults experimentally challenged with rhinovirus?

P
Population
132 previously healthy adults aged 18 to 50 years (mean age 20-22) with screening serum neutralizing antibody titers of ≤1:2 to challenge rhinovirus serotypes (type 39 or Hank's).
I
Intervention
Intranasal pirodavir (2 mg per dose) given by metered pump spray, administered either 6 times per day or 3 times per day for prophylaxis or treatment.
C
Comparator
Matching placebo (hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin vehicle) given by metered pump spray.
O
Outcome
Development of infection (detected by virus shedding or seroconversion) and clinical colds.surrogate

Frequent intranasal sprays of pirodavir (6 times daily) were effective in preventing experimentally induced rhinovirus illness, but less frequent dosing was ineffective.

Limitations

  • Small sample size in individual trials
  • Frequent intranasal applications (6 times daily) are not practical for prophylaxis
  • Uncertain link between active virus replication and symptom production in rhinovirus infections

Cite This Study

Hayden et al. (1992) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a18cf84e0375f9dbfcfc9achttps://doi.org/10.1128/aac.36.4.727
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1In vitro activity of WIN 51711, a new broad-spectrum antipicornavirus drug1985 · 117 citations
  2. 2In vitro activity of pirodavir (R 77975), a substituted phenoxy-pyridazinamine with broad-spectrum antipicornaviral activity1992 · 126 citations
  3. 3Two groups of rhinoviruses revealed by a panel of antiviral compounds present sequence divergence and differential pathogenicity1990 · 160 citations
  4. 4Conformational change in the floor of the human rhinovirus canyon blocks adsorption to HeLa cell receptors1989 · 188 citations
  5. 5An Appraisal of the Efficacy of the Antiviral R 61837 in Rhinovirus Infections in Human Volunteers1990 · 28 citations