DOCSLIB.ORG

210854Orig1s000

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
210854Orig1s000 CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH APPLICATION NUMBER: 210854Orig1s000 CLINICAL REVIEW(S) Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) CLINICAL REVIEW Application Type New Drug Application Application Number(s) 210854 Priority or Standard Priority Submit Date(s) April 24, 2018 Received Date(s) April 24, 2018 PDUFA Goal Date October 24, 2018 Division/Office Division of Antiviral Products / Office of Antimicrobial Products Reviewer Name(s) Melisse Baylor, M.D. Review Completion Date September 30, 2018 Established/Proper Name Baloxavir marboxil (Proposed) Trade Name Xofluza™ Applicant Shionogi, Incorporated Dosage Form(s) 20 mg and 40 mg tablets Applicant Proposed Dosing Single oral dose based on body weight Regimen(s) Patient body weight of 40 kg to < 80 kg: 40 mg Patient body weight ≥ 80 kg: 80 mg Applicant Proposed Treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza in patients 12 years Indication(s)/Population(s) of age and older who have been symptomatic for no more than 48 hours Recommendation on Approval Regulatory Action Recommended Treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza in patients 12 years Indication(s)/Population(s) of age and older who have been symptomatic for no more than (if applicable) 48 hours CDER Clinical Review Template 1 Version date: September 6, 2017 for all NDAs and BLAs Reference ID: 4335994 Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) Table of Contents Glossary ..........................................................................................................................................7 1. Executive Summary.................................................................................................................9 1.1. Product Introduction........................................................................................................9 1.2. Conclusions on the Substantial Evidence of Effectiveness...............................................9 1.3. Benefit-Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................9 1.4. Patient Experience Data.................................................................................................11 2. Therapeutic Context..............................................................................................................11 2.1. Analysis of Condition......................................................................................................12 2.2. Analysis of Current Treatment Options .........................................................................12 3. Regulatory Background .........................................................................................................12 3.1. U.S. Regulatory Actions and Marketing History.............................................................12 3.2. Summary of Presubmission/Submission Regulatory Activity ........................................12 3.3. Foreign Regulatory Actions and Marketing History .......................................................12 4. Significant Issues from Other Review Disciplines Pertinent to Clinical Conclusions on Efficacy and Safety ................................................................................................................12 4.1. Office of Scientific Investigations (OSI) ..........................................................................12 4.2. Product Quality ..............................................................................................................13 4.3. Clinical Microbiology......................................................................................................13 4.4. Nonclinical Pharmacology/Toxicology ...........................................................................13 4.5. Clinical Pharmacology ....................................................................................................13 4.6. Devices and Companion Diagnostic Issues ....................................................................13 4.7. Consumer Study Reviews...............................................................................................13 5. Sources of Clinical Data and Review Strategy .......................................................................13 5.1. Table of Clinical Studies .................................................................................................13 5.2. Review Strategy .............................................................................................................15 6. Review of Relevant Individual Trials Used to Support Efficacy .............................................15 6.1. Trial 1518T0821 .............................................................................................................15 6.1.1. Study Design ...........................................................................................................15 CDER Clinical Review Template 2 Version date: September 6, 2017 for all NDAs and BLAs Reference ID: 4335994 Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) 6.1.2. Study Results ..........................................................................................................15 6.2 Trial 1601T0831 6.2.1 Study Design 6.2.2 Study Results 7. Integrated Review of Effectiveness.......................................................................................18 7.1. Assessment of Efficacy Across Trials..............................................................................18 7.1.1. Primary Endpoints ..................................................................................................19 7.1.2. Secondary and Other Endpoints.............................................................................19 7.1.3. Subpopulations.......................................................................................................19 7.1.4. Dose and Dose-Response .......................................................................................19 7.1.5. Onset, Duration, and Durability of Efficacy Effects.................................................19 7.2. Additional Efficacy Considerations.................................................................................19 7.2.1. Considerations on Benefit in the Postmarket Setting.............................................19 7.2.2. Other Relevant Benefits..........................................................................................19 7.3. Integrated Assessment of Effectiveness ........................................................................19 8. Review of Safety....................................................................................................................19 8.1. Safety Review Approach ................................................................................................19 8.2. Review of the Safety Database ......................................................................................19 8.2.1. Overall Exposure.....................................................................................................20 8.2.2. Relevant characteristics of the safety population: .................................................20 8.2.3. Adequacy of the safety database: ..........................................................................20 8.3. Adequacy of Applicant’s Clinical Safety Assessments....................................................21 8.3.1. Issues Regarding Data Integrity and Submission Quality........................................21 8.3.2. Categorization of Adverse Events...........................................................................21 8.3.3. Routine Clinical Tests..............................................................................................21 8.4. Safety Results.................................................................................................................21 8.4.1. Deaths.....................................................................................................................21 8.4.2. Serious Adverse Events...........................................................................................21 8.4.3. Dropouts and/or Discontinuations Due to Adverse Effects....................................21 8.4.4. Significant Adverse Events......................................................................................21 8.4.5. Treatment Emergent Adverse Events and Adverse Reactions ...............................21 CDER Clinical Review Template 3 Version date: September 6, 2017 for all NDAs and BLAs Reference ID: 4335994 Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) 8.4.6. Laboratory Findings ................................................................................................21 8.4.7. Vital Signs................................................................................................................21 8.4.8. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) .....................................................................................22 8.4.9. QT ...........................................................................................................................22 8.4.10. Immunogenicity...............................................................................................22 8.5. Analysis of Submission-Specific Safety Issues ................................................................22 8.5.1. [Name Safety Issue] ................................................................................................22
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dectova, INN-Zanamivir
    28 February 2019 EMA/CHMP/851480/2018 Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) Assessment report DECTOVA International non-proprietary name: zanamivir Procedure No. EMEA/H/C/004102/0000 Note Assessment report as adopted by the CHMP with all information of a commercially confidential nature deleted. Official address Domenico Scarlattilaan 6 ● 1083 HS Amsterdam ● The Netherlands Address for visits and deliveries Refer to www.ema.europa.eu/how-to-find-us Send us a question Go to www.ema.europa.eu/contact Telephone +31 (0)88 781 6000 An agency of the European Union © European Medicines Agency, 2019. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Table of contents 1. Background information on the procedure .............................................. 7 1.1. Submission of the dossier ...................................................................................... 7 1.2. Steps taken for the assessment of the product ......................................................... 9 2. Scientific discussion .............................................................................. 12 2.1. Problem statement ............................................................................................. 12 2.1.1. Disease or condition ......................................................................................... 12 2.1.2. Epidemiology .................................................................................................. 12 2.1.3. Biologic features .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Baloxavir Marboxil on Household Transmission Of
    Umemura et al. Journal of Pharmaceutical Health Care and Sciences (2020) 6:21 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40780-020-00178-4 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Efficacy of baloxavir marboxil on household transmission of influenza infection Takumi Umemura1,2* , Yoshikazu Mutoh2, Takato Kawamura1, Masayuki Saito1, Takahito Mizuno1, Aiko Ota1, Koji Kozaki1, Tetsuya Yamada1, Yoshiaki Ikeda3 and Toshihiko Ichihara2 Abstract Background: Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is a new anti-influenza virus agent that is comparable to oseltamivir phosphate (oseltamivir). Since the efficacy of baloxavir in preventing household transmission of influenza is not well established, we compared the secondary household influenza virus transmission rates between patients on baloxavir vs oseltamivir. Methods: Between October 2018 and March 2019, we enrolled index patients (diagnosed with influenza and treated with baloxavir or oseltamivir) and household members. The secondary attack rate of household members was compared between index patients treated with baloxavir vs oseltamivir. Risk factors of household transmission were determined using multivariate logistic analyses. Results: In total, 169 index patients with influenza type A were enrolled. The median age was 27.0 (interquartile range; 11–57) years. The number of index patients treated with baloxavir and oseltamivir was 49 and 120, respectively. The secondary attack rate was 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6–15.6) in the baloxavir group and 13.5% (95% CI: 9.8–17.9) in the oseltamivir group. In the multivariate analysis, independent risk factors were 0–6 years of age (odds ratio [OR] 2.78, 95% CI: 1.33–5.82, p < 0.01) and not being on baloxavir treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Neuraminidase Amino Acid Substitutions Associated with Reduced Inhibition by Neuraminidase Inhibitors
    Summary of neuraminidase amino acid substitutions associated with reduced inhibition by neuraminidase inhibitors. Susceptibility assessed by NA inhibition assays Source of Type/subtype Amino acid N2 b (IC50 fold change vs wild type [NAI susceptible virus]) viruses/ References Comments substitutiona numberinga Oseltamivir Zanamivir Peramivir Laninamivir selection withc A(H1N1)pdm09 I117R 117 NI (1) RI (10) ? ?d Sur (1) E119A 119 NI/RI (8-17) RI (58-90) NI/RI (7-12) RI (82) RG (2, 3) E119D 119 RI (25-23) HRI (583-827) HRI (104-286) HRI (702) Clin/Zan; RG (3, 4) E119G 119 NI (1-7) HRI (113-1306) RI/HRI (51-167) HRI (327) RG; Clin/Zan (3, 5, 6) E119V 119 RI (60) HRI (571) RI (25) ? RG (5) Q136K/Q 136 NI (1) RI (20) ? ? Sur (1) Q136K 136 NI (1) HRI (86-749) HRI (143) RI (42-45) Sur; RG; in vitro (2, 7, 8) Q136R was host Q136R 136 NI (1) HRI (200) HRI (234) RI (33) Sur (9) cell selected D151D/E 151 NI (3) RI (19) RI (14) NI (5) Sur (9) D151N/D 151 RI (22) RI (21) NI (3) NI (3) Sur (1) R152K 152 RI(18) NI(4) NI(4) ? RG (3, 6) D199E 198 RI (16) NI (7) ? ? Sur (10) D199G 198 RI (17) NI (6) NI (2) NI (2) Sur; in vitro; RG (2, 5) I223K 222 RI (12–39) NI (5–6) NI (1–4) NI (4) Sur; RG (10-12) Clin/No; I223R 222 RI (13–45) NI/RI (8–12) NI (5) NI (2) (10, 12-15) Clin/Ose/Zan; RG I223V 222 NI (6) NI (2) NI (2) NI (1) RG (2, 5) I223T 222 NI/RI(9-15) NI(3) NI(2) NI(2) Clin/Sur (2) S247N 246 NI (4–8) NI (2–5) NI (1) ? Sur (16) S247G 246 RI (15) NI (1) NI (1) NI (1) Clin/Sur (10) S247R 246 RI (36-37) RI (51-54) RI/HRI (94-115) RI/HRI (90-122) Clin/No (1)
    [Show full text]
  • Comprehensive Analysis of Drugs to Treat SARS‑Cov‑2 Infection: Mechanistic Insights Into Current COVID‑19 Therapies (Review)
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOleCular meDICine 46: 467-488, 2020 Comprehensive analysis of drugs to treat SARS‑CoV‑2 infection: Mechanistic insights into current COVID‑19 therapies (Review) GEORGE MIHAI NITULESCU1, HORIA PAUNESCU2, STERGHIOS A. MOSCHOS3,4, DIMITRIOS PETRAKIS5, GEORGIANA NITULESCU1, GEORGE NICOLAE DANIEL ION1, DEMETRIOS A. SPANDIDOS6, TAXIARCHIS KONSTANTINOS NIKOLOUZAKIS5, NIKOLAOS DRAKOULIS7 and ARISTIDIS TSATSAKIS5 1Faculty of Pharmacy, 2Faculty of Medicine, ‘Carol Davila’ University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 020956 Bucharest, Romania; 3Department of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University; 4PulmoBioMed Ltd., Newcastle‑Upon‑Tyne NE1 8ST, UK; 5Department of Forensic Sciences and Toxicology, Faculty of Medicine; 6Laboratory of Clinical Virology, School of Medicine, University of Crete, 71003 Heraklion; 7Research Group of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacogenomics, Faculty of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 15771 Athens, Greece Received April 20, 2020; Accepted May 18, 2020 DOI: 10.3892/ijmm.2020.4608 Abstract. The major impact produced by the severe acute tions, none have yet demonstrated unequivocal clinical utility respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV-2) focused against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‑19). This work many researchers attention to find treatments that can suppress represents an exhaustive and critical review of all available transmission or ameliorate the disease. Despite the very fast data on potential treatments
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, MD NDA 210854 Baloxavir Marboxil
    Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) CLINICAL REVIEW Application Type New Drug Application Application Number(s) 210854 Priority or Standard Priority Submit Date(s) April 24, 2018 Received Date(s) April 24, 2018 PDUFA Goal Date October 24, 2018 Division/Office Division of Antiviral Products / Office of Antimicrobial Products Reviewer Name(s) Melisse Baylor, M.D. Review Completion Date September 30, 2018 Established/Proper Name Baloxavir marboxil (Proposed) Trade Name Xofluza™ Applicant Shionogi, Incorporated Dosage Form(s) 20 mg and 40 mg tablets Applicant Proposed Dosing Single oral dose based on body weight Regimen(s) Patient body weight of 40 kg to < 80 kg: 40 mg Patient body weight ≥ 80 kg: 80 mg Applicant Proposed Treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza in patients 12 years Indication(s)/Population(s) of age and older who have been symptomatic for no more than 48 hours Recommendation on Approval Regulatory Action Recommended Treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza in patients 12 years Indication(s)/Population(s) of age and older who have been symptomatic for no more than (if applicable) 48 hours CDER Clinical Review Template 1 Version date: September 6, 2017 for all NDAs and BLAs Reference ID: 4335994 Clinical Review Melisse Baylor, M.D. NDA 210854 Baloxavir marboxil (Xofluza™) Table of Contents Glossary ..........................................................................................................................................7 1. Executive Summary.................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • A Computational Approach to Aid Clinicians in Selecting Anti-Viral
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN A computational approach to aid clinicians in selecting anti‑viral drugs for COVID‑19 trials Aanchal Mongia1, Sanjay Kr. Saha2, Emilie Chouzenoux3* & Angshul Majumdar1* The year 2020 witnessed a heavy death toll due to COVID‑19, calling for a global emergency. The continuous ongoing research and clinical trials paved the way for vaccines. But, the vaccine efcacy in the long run is still questionable due to the mutating coronavirus, which makes drug re‑positioning a reasonable alternative. COVID‑19 has hence fast‑paced drug re‑positioning for the treatment of COVID‑19 and its symptoms. This work builds computational models using matrix completion techniques to predict drug‑virus association for drug re‑positioning. The aim is to assist clinicians with a tool for selecting prospective antiviral treatments. Since the virus is known to mutate fast, the tool is likely to help clinicians in selecting the right set of antivirals for the mutated isolate. The main contribution of this work is a manually curated database publicly shared, comprising of existing associations between viruses and their corresponding antivirals. The database gathers similarity information using the chemical structure of drugs and the genomic structure of viruses. Along with this database, we make available a set of state‑of‑the‑art computational drug re‑positioning tools based on matrix completion. The tools are frst analysed on a standard set of experimental protocols for drug target interactions. The best performing ones are applied for the task of re‑positioning antivirals for COVID‑19. These tools select six drugs out of which four are currently under various stages of trial, namely Remdesivir (as a cure), Ribavarin (in combination with others for cure), Umifenovir (as a prophylactic and cure) and Sofosbuvir (as a cure).
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Efficacy of New Neuraminidase Inhibitors, Laninamivir And
    2-11-1, Kaga, Itabashi-ku, 634 Clinical efficacy of new neuraminidase inhibitors, laninamivir and Tokyo Japan +81-3-3964-1211(ext:7731) peramivir in patients with seasonal influenza; a randomized [email protected] trial Yusuke Yoshino, Kazunori Seo, Ichiro Koga, Takatoshi Kitazawa and Yasuo Ota Results Figure 1 The clinical background of the study population is summarized in Table 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo,Duration Japan of fever on the first visit was similar among the 3 groups: 24 hours in the oseltamivir group, 28.1 hours in the laninamivir group, and Average time to defervescence Introduction and respiratory failure, without other focal signs of infection. 25.9 hours in peramivir group. The other clinical characteristics and after treatment for influenza. In Japan, influenza is currently treated with Fever was defined as an axillary temperature of ≥37.0 °C. Patients There was significant difference accompanying symptoms were likewise not significantly different among between oseltamivir group and neuraminidase inhibitors, such as oseltamivir, zanamivir, who were febrile for ≥48 hours on the first hospital were excluded the 3 groups (Tables 1 and 2). Table 1 peramivir group (p = 0.004) laninamivir, and peramivir. Oseltamivir and zanamivir are in this study. Patients were randomized equally to receive either Laninamivir group tended to available worldwide. In contrast, the new neuraminidase oral oseltamivir (75 mg twice daily for 5 days), inhaled laninamivir Oseltamivir Laninamivir Peramivir have shorter duration of fever, inhibitors, laninamivir and peramivir, are used in limited (40 mg one dose), or intravenous peramivir (300 mg one dose).
    [Show full text]
  • Combined Therapy of Influenza with Antiviral Drugs with a Different Mechanism of Action in Comparison with Monotherapy
    Aleksandr Fyodorovich Popov et al /J. Pharm. Sci. & Res. Vol. 10(2), 2018, 357-360 Combined therapy of influenza with antiviral drugs with a different mechanism of action in comparison with monotherapy Aleksandr Fyodorovich Popov, Pacific State Medical University, 690600 Russia, Vladivostok, prosp. Ostryakova, 2 Mihail Yur'evich Shchelkanov, Far Eastern Federal University, 690600 Russia, Vladivostok, Sukhanova St., 8 Kseniya Aleksandrovna Dmitrenko, Pacific State Medical University, 690600 Russia, Vladivostok, prosp. Ostryakova, 2 Anna Ivanovna Simakova, Pacific State Medical University, 690600 Russia, Vladivostok, prosp. Ostryakova, 2 Abstract Increasing of drug-resistance in influenza virus is a new serious challenge for global healthcare. Existing antiviral therapy is incompletely effective and there is a need for improving the efficacy of current treatment strategies. One of the possible ways to overcome the resistance of influenza virus is to combine the use of antiviral drugs with various mechanisms of action. To assess the efficacy of influenza А (Н1N1) pdm09 monotherapy with antiviral drugs (oseltamivir or umifenovir) versus combination of two antiviral drugs with different mechanism of action (oseltamivir+kagocel and umifenovir+kagocel), an open comparative study was conducted. All 200 patients with confirmed by RT-PCR analysis diagnosis influenza А (Н1N1) pdm09 were randomly sorted to four group of 50 persons. Group 1 received monotherapy with an influenza virus fusion inhibitor umifenovir (Arbidol); Group 2 - monotherapy with a competitive inhibitor of influenza´s neuraminidase enzyme oseltamivir (Tamiflu); Group 3 - an influenza virus fusion inhibitor umifenovir (Arbidol) in combination with an interferons inductor Kagocel; Group 4 - a competitive inhibitor of influenza´s neuraminidase enzyme oseltamivir (Tamiflu) in combination with an interferons inductor Kagocel.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Implications of Antiviral Resistance in Influenza
    Review Clinical Implications of Antiviral Resistance in Influenza Timothy C. M. Li 1, Martin C. W. Chan 2 and Nelson Lee 1,* Received: 26 May 2015 ; Accepted: 28 July 2015 ; Published: 14 September 2015 Academic Editor: Curt Hagedorn 1 Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 9/F, Clinical Sciences Building, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong, China; [email protected] 2 Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1/F, Clinical Sciences Building, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +852-2632-1464, Fax: +852-2637-3852 Abstract: Influenza is a major cause of severe respiratory infections leading to excessive hospitalizations and deaths globally; annual epidemics, pandemics, and sporadic/endemic avian virus infections occur as a result of rapid, continuous evolution of influenza viruses. Emergence of antiviral resistance is of great clinical and public health concern. Currently available antiviral treatments include four neuraminidase inhibitors (oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir, laninamivir), M2-inibitors (amantadine, rimantadine), and a polymerase inhibitor (favipiravir). In this review, we focus on resistance issues related to the use of neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs). Data on primary resistance, as well as secondary resistance related to NAI exposure will be presented. Their clinical implications, detection, and
    [Show full text]
  • Incomplete Inhalation of Laninamivir Octanoate in Children with Influenza
    & The ics ra tr pe a u i t i d c e s P Katsumi, et al., Pediat Therapeut 2015, 5:1 Pediatrics & Therapeutics DOI: 10.4172/2161-0665.1000225 ISSN: 2161-0665 Research Article Open Access Incomplete Inhalation of Laninamivir Octanoate in Children with Influenza Yoshiki Katsumi*, Osamu Otabe, Satoshi Sakaue, Yusuke Tsuma, Mihoko Yamaguchi, Fumihiro Matsui, Masaya Suematsu, Satoshi Miyagaki and Hisato Ito Departments of Pediatrics, Nantan General Hospital, Japan Abstract Background: Laninamivir octanoate (LO), an inhaled neuraminidase inhibitor, has been used against influenza in Japan. However, children who cannot inhale well might not receive the full dose. We examined the relation between the residual amounts of LO in the device after its use and the time to fever resolution in children with influenza. Methods: The subjects of the study were 161 children (4-15 years) who had been diagnosed as having influenza from 2011-2014 and who had demonstrated an ability to properly use an inhalation training device. After its use, the LO device was returned to the authors and the residual amount of LO was measured. After flu symptoms had resolved, the patients’ parents reported the time to fever resolution in a questionnaire. Results: The percentage of the residual LO was not significantly correlated with the time to fever resolution or with patient age. The percentage of residual LO tended to be higher and the time to fever resolution tended to be longer in 4-6 year-olds than in older children. In the 4-6 year group, seven patients were inhaling steroids. These patients tended to inhale more of the LO dose and tended to have a shorter time to fever resolution than the other patients.
    [Show full text]
  • In Vitro Combinations of Baloxavir Acid and Other Inhibitors Against Seasonal Influenza a Viruses
    viruses Article In Vitro Combinations of Baloxavir Acid and Other Inhibitors against Seasonal Influenza A Viruses 1, 2,3, 2 2 Liva Checkmahomed y, Blandine Padey y , Andrés Pizzorno , Olivier Terrier , Manuel Rosa-Calatrava 2,4, Yacine Abed 1, Mariana Baz 1,* and Guy Boivin 1,* 1 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec—Centre Hospitalier de l’Université Laval (CHUQ-CHUL) and Laval University, Québec City, QC G1V 4G2, Canada; [email protected] (L.C.); [email protected] (Y.A.) 2 CIRI—Centre International de Recherche en Infectiologie, (Team VirPath), University Lyon, Inserm U1111, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS—Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR5308, ENS de Lyon, F-69007 Lyon, France; [email protected] (B.P.); [email protected] (A.P.); [email protected] (O.T.); [email protected] (M.R.-C.) 3 Signia Therapeutics SAS, 69100 Villeurbane, France 4 VirNext, Faculté de Médecine RTH Laennec, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Université de Lyon, 69008 Lyon, France * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.B.); [email protected] (G.B.) These authors contributed equally to this work. y Received: 21 September 2020; Accepted: 1 October 2020; Published: 8 October 2020 Abstract: Two antiviral classes, the neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) and polymerase inhibitors (baloxavir marboxil and favipiravir) can be used to prevent and treat influenza infections during seasonal epidemics and pandemics. However, prolonged treatment may lead to the emergence of drug resistance. Therapeutic combinations constitute an alternative to prevent resistance and reduce antiviral doses.
    [Show full text]
  • Approved Antiviral Drugs Over the Past 50 Years
    crossmark Approved Antiviral Drugs over the Past 50 Years Erik De Clercq,a Guangdi Lia,b KU Leuven-University of Leuven, Rega Institute for Medical Research, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Leuven, Belgiuma; Department of Metabolism and Endocrinology, Metabolic Syndrome Research Center, Key Laboratory of Diabetes Immunology, Ministry of Education, National Clinical Research Center for Metabolic Diseases, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, Chinab SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................696 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................696 OVERVIEW OF NINE HUMAN VIRUSES .....................................................................................................................698 Human Immunodeficiency Virus .........................................................................................................................698 Hepatitis C Virus ..........................................................................................................................................699 Influenza Virus ............................................................................................................................................699 Respiratory Syncytial Virus................................................................................................................................699
    [Show full text]