Safety analysis of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil after market approval: a pharmacovigilance study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Amidst limited influenza treatment options, evaluating the safety of Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil is crucial, particularly given their comparable efficacy. This study investigates post-market safety profiles, exploring adverse events (AEs) and their drug associations to provide essential clinical references. METHODS: A meticulous analysis of FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data spanning the first quarter of 2004 to the fourth quarter of 2022 was conducted. Using data mining techniques like reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio, Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network, and Multiple Gamma Poisson Shrinkage, AEs related to Oseltamivir and Baloxavir Marboxil were examined. Venn analysis compared and selected specific AEs associated with each drug. RESULTS: Incorporating 15,104 Oseltamivir cases and 1,594 Baloxavir Marboxil cases, Wain analysis unveiled 21 common AEs across neurological, psychiatric, gastrointestinal, dermatological, respiratory, and infectious domains. Oseltamivir exhibited 221 significantly specific AEs, including appendicolith [ROR (95% CI), 459.53 (340.88 ∼ 619.47)], acne infantile [ROR (95% CI, 368.65 (118.89 ∼ 1143.09)], acute macular neuroretinopathy [ROR (95% CI), 294.92 (97.88 ∼ 888.64)], proctitis [ROR (95% CI), 245.74 (101.47 ∼ 595.31)], and Purpura senile [ROR (95% CI), 154.02 (81.96 ∼ 289.43)]. designated adverse events (DMEs) associated with Oseltamivir included fulminant hepatitis [ROR (95% CI), 12.12 (8.30-17.72), n=27], ventricular fibrillation [ROR (95% CI), 7.68 (6.01-9.83), n=64], toxic epidermal necrolysis [ROR (95% CI), 7.21 (5.74-9.05), n=75]. Baloxavir Marboxil exhibited 34 specific AEs, including Melaena [ROR (95% CI), 21.34 (14.15-32.18), n = 23], cystitis haemorrhagic [ROR (95% CI), 20.22 (7.57-54.00), n = 4], ileus paralytic [ROR (95% CI), 18.57 (5.98-57.71), n = 3], and haemorrhagic diathesis [ROR (95% CI), 16.86 (5.43-52.40)), n = 3]. DMEs associated with Baloxavir Marboxil included rhabdomyolysis [ROR (95% CI), 15.50 (10.53 ∼ 22.80), n = 26]. CONCLUSION: Monitoring fulminant hepatitis during Oseltamivir treatment, especially in patients with liver-related diseases, is crucial. Oseltamivir's potential to induce abnormal behavior, especially in adolescents, necessitates special attention. Baloxavir Marboxil, with lower hepatic toxicity, emerges as a potential alternative for patients with liver diseases. During Baloxavir Marboxil treatment, focused attention on the occurrence of rhabdomyolysis is advised, necessitating timely monitoring of relevant indicators for those with clinical manifestations. The comprehensive data aims to provide valuable insights for clinicians and healthcare practitioners, facilitating an understanding of the safety profiles of these influenza treatments in real-world scenarios.

Clinical outcomes of baloxavir versus oseltamivir in immunocompromised patients.

BACKGROUND: Neuraminidase inhibitors, including oseltamivir, are the treatment standard for influenza. Baloxavir, a novel antiviral, demonstrated comparable outcomes to oseltamivir in outpatients with influenza. Baloxavir was equally effective as oseltamivir in a retrospective study of hospitalized patients with influenza at our institution. However, the efficacy of baloxavir in immunocompromised patients is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of immunocompromised adult patients hospitalized with influenza A who received baloxavir from January 2019 to April 2019 or oseltamivir from January 2018 to April 2018. Demographic and clinical outcomes were assessed. Primary outcomes were time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia and fever. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) care, ICU LOS, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Of 95 total patients, 52 received baloxavir and 43 received oseltamivir. Other than younger age (57.5 vs. 65; p = .035) and longer duration between vaccination and symptom onset (114 vs. 86 days; p = .001) in the baloxavir group, baseline characteristics did not differ. H1 was the predominant subtype in the baloxavir group (65.3%) versus H3 in the oseltamivir group (85.7%). When comparing baloxavir to oseltamivir, there was no significant difference in median time from antiviral initiation to resolution of hypoxia (59.9 vs. 42.5 h) and to resolution of fever (21.6 vs. 26.6 h). There were no differences in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Baloxavir was not associated with longer time to resolution of hypoxia or fever in comparison to oseltamivir. Results must be taken in context of variations in seasonal influenza subtype and resistance rates.

Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety of baloxavir marboxil versus oseltamivir as the treatment for influenza virus infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Baloxavir marboxil (BXM), a newly developed cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor, is widely used to treat influenza virus infections in inpatients and outpatients. A previous meta-analysis included only outpatients and patients suspected of having an influenza virus infection based on clinical symptoms. However, whether BXM or oseltamivir is safer and more effective for inpatients remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis validating the effectiveness and safety of BXM versus oseltamivir in inpatients with influenza virus. METHODS: The Scopus, EMBASE, PubMed, Ichushi, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for articles published until January 2023. The outcomes were mortality, hospitalization period, incidence of BXM- or oseltamivir-related adverse events, illness duration, and changes of virus titers and viral RNA load in patients with influenza virus infections. RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials with 1624 outpatients and two retrospective studies with 874 inpatients were enrolled. No deaths occurred in outpatients treated with BXM or oseltamivir. Among inpatients, BXM reduced mortality (p = 0.06) and significantly shortened hospitalization period (p = 0.01) compared to oseltamivir. In outpatients, BXM had a significantly lower incidence of adverse events (p = 0.03), reductions in influenza virus titers (p < 0.001) and viral RNA loads (p < 0.001), and a tendency to be a shorter illness duration compared with that of oseltamivir (p = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that BXM was safer and more effective in patients than oseltamivir; thus, supporting the use of BXM for the initial treatment of patients with proven influenza virus infection.

Baloxavir safety and clinical and virologic outcomes in influenza virus-infected pediatric patients by age group: age-based pooled analysis of two pediatric studies conducted in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Anti-influenza treatment is important for children and is recommended in many countries. This study assessed safety, clinical, and virologic outcomes of baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) treatment in children based on age and influenza virus type/subtype. METHODS: This was a post hoc pooled analysis of two open-label non-controlled studies of a single weight-based oral dose of baloxavir (day 1) in influenza virus-infected Japanese patients aged < 6 years (n = 56) and ≥ 6 to < 12 years (n = 81). Safety, time to illness alleviation (TTIA), time to resolution of fever (TTRF), recurrence of influenza illness symptoms and fever (after day 4), virus titer, and outcomes by polymerase acidic protein variants at position I38 (PA/I38X) were evaluated. RESULTS: Adverse events were reported in 39.0 and 39.5% of patients < 6 years and ≥ 6 to < 12 years, respectively. Median (95% confidence interval) TTIA was 43.2 (36.3-68.4) and 45.4 (38.9-61.0) hours, and TTRF was 32.2 (26.8-37.8) and 20.7 (19.2-23.8) hours, for patients < 6 years and ≥ 6 to < 12 years, respectively. Symptom and fever recurrence was more common in patients < 6 years with influenza B (54.5 and 50.0%, respectively) compared with older patients (0 and 25.0%, respectively). Virus titers declined (day 2) for both age groups. Transient virus titer increase and PA/I38X-variants were more common for patients < 6 years. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and effectiveness of single-dose baloxavir were observed in children across all age groups and influenza virus types. Higher rates of fever recurrence and transient virus titer increase were observed in children < 6 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center Clinical Trials Information JapicCTI-163,417 (registered 02 November 2016) and JapicCTI-173,811 (registered 15 December 2017).

Baloxavir Marboxil for Prophylaxis against Influenza in Household Contacts.

BACKGROUND: Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is a polymerase acidic protein (PA) endonuclease inhibitor with clinical efficacy in the treatment of uncomplicated influenza, including in outpatients at increased risk for complications. The postexposure prophylactic efficacy of baloxavir in the household setting is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the postexposure prophylactic efficacy of baloxavir in household contacts of index patients with confirmed influenza during the 2018-2019 season in Japan. The participants were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a single dose of baloxavir or placebo. The primary end point was clinical influenza, as confirmed by reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction testing, over a period of 10 days. The occurrence of baloxavir-selected PA substitutions associated with reduced susceptibility was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 752 household contacts of 545 index patients were randomly assigned to receive baloxavir or placebo. Among the index patients, 95.6% had influenza A virus infection, 73.6% were younger than 12 years of age, and 52.7% received baloxavir. Among the participants who could be evaluated (374 in the baloxavir group and 375 in the placebo group), the percentage in whom clinical influenza developed was significantly lower in the baloxavir group than in the placebo group (1.9% vs. 13.6%) (adjusted risk ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 0.30; P<0.001). Baloxavir was effective in high-risk, pediatric, and unvaccinated subgroups of participants. The risk of influenza infection, regardless of symptoms, was lower with baloxavir than with placebo (adjusted risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.58). The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups (22.2% in the baloxavir group and 20.5% in the placebo group). In the baloxavir group, the viral PA substitutions I38T/M or E23K were detected in 10 (2.7%) and 5 (1.3%) participants, respectively. No transmission of these variants from baloxavir-treated index patients to participants in the placebo group was detected; however, several instances of transmission to participants in the baloxavir group could not be ruled out. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose baloxavir showed significant postexposure prophylactic efficacy in preventing influenza in household contacts of patients with influenza. (Funded by Shionogi; Japan Primary Registries Network number, JapicCTI-184180.).

Acute ischemic colitis with hematochezia related to baloxavir marboxil treatment for influenza A.

Oseltamivir, an established oral anti-influenza medication, increases the risk of ischemic colitis. Baloxavir marboxil is a novel oral anti-influenza medication, and few studies have evaluated its potential side effects, including ischemic colitis. Moreover, as influenza A can also induce ischemic colitis, drug-induced colitis associated with anti-influenza medication is not clearly understood. In this report, we describe the case of a 62-year-old Japanese woman who developed acute ischemic colitis after taking baloxavir for influenza A. The day after taking baloxavir (day 2), the patient experienced abdominal pain, diarrhea, and nausea. On day 3, she had developed hematochezia and decided to visit our hospital. Upon presentation, inflammation of the descending and sigmoid colon was detected by abdominal echography and computed tomography. Fluid replacement therapy and dietary restrictions were initiated. On day 4, the inflammation of the descending colon and marked intestinal edema were confirmed by colonoscopy. She was clinically diagnosed with ischemic colitis, from which she recovered completely by day 9. This case suggests that patients taking baloxavir may be at risk of developing ischemic colitis with hematochezia and underscores the need to further study the induction of this condition by commonly used oral anti-influenza agents.

A network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of baloxavir marboxil versus neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment of influenza in otherwise healthy patients.

Objective: Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is the first cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor being studied for the treatment of influenza in single oral dosing regimen. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the efficacy and safety of baloxavir compared to other antivirals for influenza in otherwise healthy patients. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on 14 November 2016 in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and ICHUSHI to identify randomized controlled trials assessing antivirals for influenza. A NMA including 22 trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of baloxavir with other antivirals. Results: The time to alleviation of all symptoms was significantly shorter for baloxavir compared to zanamivir (difference in median time 19.96 h; 95% CrI [3.23, 39.07]). The time to cessation of viral shedding was significantly shorter for baloxavir than zanamivir and oseltamivir (47.00 h; 95% CrI [28.18, 73.86] and 56.03 h [33.74, 87.86], respectively). The mean decline in virus titer from baseline to 24 h was significantly greater for baloxavir than for the other drugs. Other differences in efficacy outcomes were not significant. No significant differences were found between baloxavir and the other antivirals for safety, except total drug-related adverse events where baloxavir demonstrated a decrease compared to oseltamivir and laninamivir. Conclusions: The NMA suggests that baloxavir demonstrated better or similar efficacy results compared to other antivirals with a comparable safety profile. Baloxavir led to a significant decrease in viral titer versus zanamivir, oseltamivir and peramivir and decreased viral shedding versus zanamivir and oseltamivir.

Baloxavir Marboxil: The First Cap-Dependent Endonuclease Inhibitor for the Treatment of Influenza.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical trials, and clinical implications of baloxavir marboxil. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search was conducted using the terms baloxavir, baloxavir marboxil, cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor, and polymerase acidic endonuclease inhibitor. Additional data were obtained from the prescribing information and relevant guidelines. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All clinical trials were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Baloxavir marboxil exploits a new mechanism of action of inhibiting cap-dependent endonuclease. Baloxavir was shown to be superior compared with placebo and noninferior compared with oseltamivir with regard to the primary end point. Baloxavir was well tolerated in the trials. A second phase III study investigating high-risk patients was completed with positive results. However, the full article is not yet published. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: The small amount of literature limits baloxavir's use in certain patient populations. Baloxavir offers advantages such as single-dose regimen, eliminating adherence concerns and lack of cross-resistance, making it an alternative for resistant viruses. Several uncertainties remain. Baloxavir has not been studied in hospitalized patients, patients with symptoms for >48 hours, or in combination with other antiviral agents. Furthermore, resistance to baloxavir can develop after 1 dose. Clinical studies are ongoing to evaluate baloxavir in young pediatric patients, hospitalized patients, and in combination therapy with neuraminidase inhibitors to further elucidate baloxavir's place in therapy. CONCLUSION: Baloxavir is a new antiviral medication for the treatment of influenza. Given the new mechanism of action, baloxavir may be useful in treating patients with resistant viruses.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of the Novel Anti-influenza Agent Baloxavir Marboxil in Healthy Adults: Phase I Study Findings.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Baloxavir marboxil, a prodrug that is metabolized to baloxavir acid, suppresses viral replication by inhibiting cap-dependent endonuclease. This first-in-human phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of baloxavir marboxil/baloxavir acid in healthy Japanese volunteers (Study 1), while food effects were evaluated in a separate phase I, crossover study in healthy Japanese volunteers (Study 2). METHODS: Study 1 participants were randomized to single-dose oral baloxavir marboxil (6, 20, 40, 60, or 80 mg; n = 6 per dose) or placebo (n = 10), while Study 2 participants (n = 15) received single-dose oral baloxavir marboxil 20 mg in fasted, fed, and before-meal states. RESULTS: Baloxavir marboxil was well tolerated; there were few treatment-emergent adverse events and no serious adverse events/deaths. The mean plasma baloxavir acid concentration 24 h after single-dose (C24) oral baloxavir marboxil 6 mg was 6.92 ng/mL, exceeding the target C24 (6.85 ng/mL) estimated in nonclinical studies. In Study 1, baloxavir acid exposure demonstrated dose-proportional increases in the fasted state, with maximum plasma concentration generally attained within 3.5 h. Terminal elimination half-life ranged from 49 to 91 h. In Study 2, exposure was decreased and apparent clearance increased in the fed and before-meal states versus the fasted state; however, exposure exceeded the target C24 in all states. CONCLUSION: Single-dose oral baloxavir marboxil was well tolerated, had a favorable safety profile, and had favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics, including a long half-life, supporting single oral dosing. The baloxavir acid area under the plasma concentration-time curve decreased with food intake by approximately 40%.

Baloxavir Marboxil for Uncomplicated Influenza in Adults and Adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Baloxavir marboxil is a selective inhibitor of influenza cap-dependent endonuclease. It has shown therapeutic activity in preclinical models of influenza A and B virus infections, including strains resistant to current antiviral agents. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, double-blind, controlled trials involving otherwise healthy outpatients with acute uncomplicated influenza. After a dose-ranging (10 to 40 mg) placebo-controlled trial, we undertook a placebo- and oseltamivir-controlled trial of single, weight-based doses of baloxavir (40 or 80 mg) in patients 12 to 64 years of age during the 2016-2017 season. The dose of oseltamivir was 75 mg twice daily for 5 days. The primary efficacy end point was the time to alleviation of influenza symptoms in the intention-to-treat infected population. RESULTS: In the phase 2 trial, the median time to alleviation of influenza symptoms was 23.4 to 28.2 hours shorter in the baloxavir groups than in the placebo group (P<0.05). In the phase 3 trial, the intention-to-treat infected population included 1064 patients; 84.8 to 88.1% of patients in each group had influenza A(H3N2) infection. The median time to alleviation of symptoms was 53.7 hours (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.5 to 58.5) with baloxavir, as compared with 80.2 hours (95% CI, 72.6 to 87.1) with placebo (P<0.001). The time to alleviation of symptoms was similar with baloxavir and oseltamivir. Baloxavir was associated with greater reductions in viral load 1 day after initiation of the regimen than placebo or oseltamivir. Adverse events were reported in 20.7% of baloxavir recipients, 24.6% of placebo recipients, and 24.8% of oseltamivir recipients. The emergence of polymerase acidic protein variants with I38T/M/F substitutions conferring reduced susceptibility to baloxavir occurred in 2.2% and 9.7% of baloxavir recipients in the phase 2 trial and phase 3 trial, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose baloxavir was without evident safety concerns, was superior to placebo in alleviating influenza symptoms, and was superior to both oseltamivir and placebo in reducing the viral load 1 day after initiation of the trial regimen in patients with uncomplicated influenza. Evidence for the development of decreased susceptibility to baloxavir after treatment was also observed. (Funded by Shionogi; JapicCTI number, 153090, and CAPSTONE-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02954354 .).