Safety and Efficacy Study of Nitazoxanide in the Treatment of Acute Uncomplicated Influenza

NCT ID: NCT01610245

Last Updated: 2018-03-29

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE3

Total Enrollment

1941 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2013-03-31

Study Completion Date

2015-04-16

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

This study is a global multicenter randomized factorial double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate (i) efficacy and safety of nitazoxanide 600 mg administered orally twice daily for five days compared to a placebo in the treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza and (ii) efficacy and safety of combination therapy with nitazoxanide 600 mg plus Oseltamivir 75 mg co-administered orally twice daily for five days compared to nitazoxanide monotherapy (600 mg b.i.d. for 5 days) and Oseltamivir monotherapy (75 mg b.i.d. for 5 days) in the treatment of acute uncomplicated influenza.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Influenza

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

TRIPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Nitazoxanide

Two Nitazoxanide 300 mg tablets and one placebo capsule twice daily with food for 5 days

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Nitazoxanide

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo Oral Capsule

Intervention Type DRUG

Oseltamivir

Two placebo tablets and one Oseltamivir 75 mg capsule twice daily with food for 5 days

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Oseltamivir

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo Oral Tablet

Intervention Type DRUG

Nitazoxanide and Oseltamivir

Two nitazoxanide 300 mg tablets and one Oseltamivir 75 mg capsule twice daily with food for 5 days

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Nitazoxanide

Intervention Type DRUG

Oseltamivir

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo

Two placebo tablets and one placebo capsule with food twice daily for 5 days

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Placebo Oral Tablet

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo Oral Capsule

Intervention Type DRUG

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Nitazoxanide

Intervention Type DRUG

Oseltamivir

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo Oral Tablet

Intervention Type DRUG

Placebo Oral Capsule

Intervention Type DRUG

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Alinia NTZ (nitazoxanide) Tamiflu OST (oseltamivir)

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Age 13 to 65 years
2. Presence of clinical signs and/or symptoms consistent with acute illness compatible with influenza infection (each of the following is required):

1. oral temperature of ≥100.4 °F or ≥38 °C (obtained in office or self-measured within 12 hours prior to screening - if self-measured, subject must also have taken an antipyretic within 4 hours prior to screening) AND
2. at least one of the following respiratory symptoms (cough, sore throat, nasal obstruction) that is considered by the patient to be moderate or severe (greater than mild severity) AND
3. one of the following constitutional symptoms (fatigue, headache, myalgia, feverishness) that is considered by the patient to be moderate or severe (greater than mild severity).
3. Confirmation of influenza A or B infection in the local community by one of the following means:

1. the institution's local laboratory, or
2. the local public health system, or
3. the national public health system, or
4. a laboratory of a recognized national or multinational influenza surveillance scheme.
4. Onset of illness no more than 48 hours before enrollment in the trial.

Note: Time of onset of illness is defined as either the earlier of:
1. the time when the temperature was first measured as elevated, OR
2. the time when the subject experienced the presence of at least one respiratory symptom AND the presence of at least one constitutional symptom.
5. Willing and able to provide written informed consent (including assent by legal guardian if under 18 years of age) and comply with the requirements of the protocol, including completion of the patient diary.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Severity of illness requiring or anticipated to require in-hospital care or subject defined as being at high risk of complications from influenza infection according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines for seasonal influenza in adults and children (Committee of Infectious Diseases (CID) 2009:48) or current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria. Current criteria for persons 13-65 years of age who are at risk of influenza complications include (list to be reviewed and updated as required prior to initiation of the study and at least monthly during the study):

1. Persons with asthma or other chronic pulmonary diseases, such as cystic fibrosis in children or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults.
2. Persons with hemodynamically significant cardiac disease.
3. Persons who have immunosuppressive disorders or who are receiving immunosuppressive therapy.
4. HIV-infected persons.
5. Persons with sickle cell anemia or other hemoglobinopathies.
6. Persons with diseases requiring long-term aspirin therapy, such as rheumatoid arthritis or Kawasaki disease.
7. Persons with chronic renal dysfunction.
8. Persons with liver disorders.
9. Persons with cancer.
10. Persons with chronic metabolic disease, such as diabetes mellitus, inherited metabolic disorders and mitochondrial disorders.
11. Persons with neuromuscular disorders, seizure disorders or cognitive dysfunction that may compromise the handling of respiratory secretions.
12. Residents of any age of nursing homes or other long-term care institutions.
13. Persons who are morbidly obese (Body Mass Index ≥40)
14. American Indians (seemed to be at higher risk of complications last flu season)
15. Alaskan natives (seemed to be at higher risk of complications last flu season)
2. Females of childbearing potential who are either pregnant, breast-feeding or are sexually active without the use of birth control. Female patients of child-bearing potential that are sexually active must have a negative baseline pregnancy test and must agree to continue an acceptable method of birth control for the duration of the study and for 1 month post-treatment. A double barrier method, oral birth control pills administered for at least 2 monthly cycles prior to study drug administration, an intrauterine device (IUD), or medroxyprogesterone acetate administered intramuscularly for a minimum of one month prior to study drug administration are acceptable methods of birth control for inclusion into the study. Female subjects are considered of childbearing potential unless they are postmenopausal (absence of menstrual bleeding for 1 year - or 6 months if laboratory confirmation of hormonal status), or have had a hysterectomy, bilateral tubular ligation or bilateral ovariectomy.
3. Vaccination for seasonal influenza on or after i. August 1, 2012 in the case of subjects enrolled during the 2012/2013 flu season in the United States, ii. February 1, 2013 in the case of subjects enrolled during the 2013 flu season in Australia or New Zealand, or iii. August 1, 2013 in the case of subjects enrolled during the 2013/2014 flu season in the United States, Canada, Europe, or other countries in the Northern Hemisphere, or iv. February 1, 2014 in the case of subjects enrolled during the 2014 flu season in Australia or New Zealand, or v. August 1, 2014 in the case of subjects enrolled during the 2014/2015 flu season in the United States, Canada, Europe, or other countries in the Northern Hemisphere.
4. Receipt of any dose of nitazoxanide, oseltamivir, zanamivir, amantadine, or rimantadine within 30 days prior to screening.
5. Prior treatment with any investigational drug therapy within 30 days prior to screening.
6. Subjects with active respiratory allergies or subjects expected to require anti-allergy medications during the study period for respiratory allergies.
7. Known sensitivity to Nitazoxanide or any of the excipients comprising the Nitazoxanide tablets.
8. Known sensitivity to Oseltamivir or any of the excipients comprising the Oseltamivir capsules.
9. Subjects unable to take oral medications.
10. Subject has chronic kidney or liver disease (including Hepatitis A,B or C) or known impaired hepatic and/or renal function.
11. Presence of any other pre-existing chronic infection that is undergoing or requiring medical therapy.
12. Presence of any pre-existing illness that, in the opinion of the investigator, would place the subject at an unreasonably increased risk through participation in this study.
13. Subjects who, in the judgment of the investigator, will be unlikely to comply with the requirements of this protocol.
Minimum Eligible Age

13 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Romark Laboratories L.C.

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Jean-Francois Rossignol, M.D., Ph.D.

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Romark Laboratories L.C.

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Influence Study Site

Birmingham, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Dothan, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Hoover, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Mobile, Alabama, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Mesa, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Mesa, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Tucson, Arizona, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Hot Springs, Arkansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Jonesboro, Arkansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Anaheim, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Fresno, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Garden Grove, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Harbor City, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Huntington Beach, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lomita, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Long Beach, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Modesto, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Norco, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

San Ramon, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Stockton, California, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Centennial, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Littleton, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Longmont, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Thornton, Colorado, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Boynton Beach, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Coral Gables, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Edgewater, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Kissimmee, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lauderdale Lakes, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Miami, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Orlando, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Pembroke Pines, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Saint Cloud, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

West Palm Beach, Florida, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Canton, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Columbus, Georgia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Blackfoot, Idaho, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Skokie, Illinois, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Evansville, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Franklin, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Muncie, Indiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Augusta, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Kansas City, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Newton, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Wichita, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Wichita, Kansas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Hawesville, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Madisonville, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Owensboro, Kentucky, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Eunice, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lafayette, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lake Charles, Louisiana, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Fall River, Massachusetts, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Chelsea, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Essexville, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Niles, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Troy, Michigan, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Bridgeton, Missouri, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Fremont, Nebraska, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Las Vegas, Nevada, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Las Vegas, Nevada, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Teaneck, New Jersey, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Brooklyn, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Brooklyn, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Great Neck, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

New York, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Rochester, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Westfield, New York, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Charlotte, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Hickory, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Mooresville, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Columbus, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Dayton, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Groveport, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lyndhurst, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Middleburg Heights, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Milford, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Willoughby Hills, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Wooster, Ohio, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Ashland, Oregon, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Gresham, Oregon, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Altoona, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lansdale, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Reading, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Scottdale, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Uniontown, Pennsylvania, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Warwick, Rhode Island, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Charleston, South Carolina, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Rapid City, South Dakota, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Rapid City, South Dakota, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Bristol, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Columbia, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Elizabethton, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Franklin, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Jackson, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Smyrna, Tennessee, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Austin, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Beaumont, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Bryan, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Irving, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Lake Jackson, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

North Richland Hills, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Pharr, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Plano, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

San Antonio, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

San Antonio, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

San Antonio, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Sugar Land, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Waco, Texas, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Draper, Utah, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Magna, Utah, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Orem, Utah, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Salt Lake City, Utah, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Alexandria, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Ashburn, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Charlottesville, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Gainesville, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Midlothian, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Norfolk, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Port Orchard, Washington, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Spokane, Washington, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Spokane, Washington, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

La Crosse, Wisconsin, United States

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Cardiff, New South Wales, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Castle Hill, New South Wales, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Darlinghurst, New South Wales, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Chermside, Queensland, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Sherwood, Queensland, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Daw Park, South Australia, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Clayton, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Fitzroy North, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Prahran, Victoria, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study SIte

Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Antwerp, , Belgium

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Coquitlam, British Columbia, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Langley, British Columbia, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Surrey, British Columbia, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Brampton, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

London, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Sarnia, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Mirabel, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Pointe-Claire, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Birkenhead, Auckland, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Grafton, Auckland, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Remuera, Auckland, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Rotorua, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Tauranga, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Beckenham, Christchurch, New Zealand

Site Status

Influence Study Site

Christchurch Central, Christchurch, New Zealand

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States Australia Belgium Canada New Zealand

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

RM08-3002

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.