RESUMEN
Background: Echinacea purpurea has clinical antiviral activity against respiratory viruses and modulates immune functions. In this study, we compared higher doses of new Echinacea formulations with conventional formulations at lower, preventive doses for therapy of respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Methods: In this randomized, blinded, controlled trial, healthy adults (n = 409) were randomized between November 2018 and January 2019 to one of four Echinacea formulations, which were taken in case of an RTI for up to 10 days. New formulations A (lozenges) and B (spray) delivered an increased dose of 16,800 mg/d Echinacea extract during days 1-3 and 2,240-3,360 mg/d afterward; as controls, conventional formulations C (tablets) and D (drops) delivered a lower daily dose of 2,400 mg, usually taken for prevention. The primary endpoint was time to clinical remission of first RTI episodes based on the Kaplan-Meier analysis of patient-reported, investigator-confirmed, respiratory symptoms assessed for up to 10 days. In a sensitivity analysis, the mean time to remission beyond day 10 was calculated by extrapolating the treatment effects observed on days 7 to 10. Results: A total of 246 participants (median age 32 years, 78% female participants) were treated for at least one RTI. Recovery by day 10 (complete absence of symptoms) was achieved in 56 and 44% of patients with the new and conventional formulations, respectively, showing a median time to recovery of 10 and 11 days, respectively (p = 0.10 in intention-to-treat analysis, p = 0.07 in per-protocol analysis). In the extrapolated sensitivity analysis, new formulations resulted in a significantly shorter mean time to remission (9.6 vs. 11.0 days, p < 0.001). Among those with an identified respiratory virus, viral clearance until day 10 based on real-time PCR from nasopharyngeal swabs was more frequent with new formulations (70 vs. 53%, p = 0.046). Tolerability and safety (adverse events: 12 vs. 6%, p = 0.19) were good and similar between formulations. There was one severe adverse event with a potential hypersensitivity reaction in a recipient of the novel spray formulation. Conclusion: In adults with acute RTI, new Echinacea formulations with higher doses resulted in faster viral clearance than conventional formulations in prophylactic dosages. The trend for faster clinical recovery was not significant by day 10 but became so upon extrapolation. A dose increase during acute respiratory symptoms might improve the clinical benefits of orally administered Echinacea formulations. Trial registration: The study was registered in the Swiss National Clinical Trials Portal (SNCTP000003069) and on ClinicalTrials.gov (NTC03812900; URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03812900?cond=echinacea&draw=3&rank=14).
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) containing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and didanosine (ddI) has been associated with poor immune recovery despite virologic success. This effect might be related to ddI toxicity since ddI exposure is substantially increased by TDF. OBJECTIVE: To analyze whether immune recovery during ART with TDF and ddI is ddI-dose dependent. DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal analysis of immune recovery measured by the CD4 T-cell slope in 614 patients treated with ART containing TDF with or without ddI. Patients were stratified according to the tertiles of their weight-adjusted ddI dose: low dose (< 3.3 mg/kg), intermediate dose (3.3-4.1 mg/kg) and high dose (> 4.1 mg/kg). Cofactors modifying the degree of immune recovery after starting TDF-containing ART were identified by univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses. RESULTS: CD4 T-cell slopes were comparable between patients treated with TDF and a weight-adjusted ddI-dose of < 4.1 mg/kg per day (n = 143) versus TDF-without-ddI (n = 393). In the multivariable model the slopes differed by -13 CD4 T cells/mul per year [95% confidence interval (CI), -42 to 17; P = 0.40]. In contrast, patients treated with TDF and a higher ddI dose (> 4.1 mg/kg per day, n = 78) experienced a significantly impaired immune recovery (-47 CD4 T cells/microl per year; 95% CI, -82 to -12; P = 0.009). The virologic response was comparable between the different treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Immune recovery is impaired, when high doses of ddI (> 4.1 mg/kg) are given in combination with TDF. If the dose of ddI is adjusted to less than 4.1 mg/kg per day, immune recovery is similar to other TDF-containing ART regimen.