You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 160 No. 10, May 22, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Investigation
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (27)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Aging/ Geriatrics
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Comparison of Central Nervous System Adverse Effects of Amantadine and Rimantadine Used as Sequential Prophylaxis of Influenza A in Elderly Nursing Home Patients

Linda A. Keyser, PharmD; Margaret Karl, RPh; Anne N. Nafziger, MD, MHS; Joseph S. Bertino, Jr, PharmD

Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:1485-1488.

Background  Amantadine hydrochloride and rimantadine hydrochloride are recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for prophylaxis of influenza A. While data suggest that rimantadine is better tolerated, there are no data examining the rate of adverse reactions in elderly patients who receive amantadine vs rimantadine. Our objective was to assess the adverse reaction rate in elderly nursing home patients receiving sequential amantadine and rimantadine for influenza A prophylaxis.

Methods  Data were collected in 156 nursing home patients (70% women; mean±SD age, 83.7±10.1 years) in a single care setting who received sequential therapy with amantadine and rimantadine during the 1997-1998 influenza season. Patients were assessed for central nervous system adverse effects and therapy discontinuation occurring with each agent.

Results  Twenty-nine (18.6%) of the 156 patients experienced an adverse effect when receiving amantadine compared with 3 patients (1.9%) when rimantadine was given (P<.01). Drug use was discontinued due to adverse events in 17.3% (n=27) of the amantadine courses and 1.9% (n=3) of the rimantadine courses (P<.001). Confusion was the most frequently observed adverse event (amantadine, 10.6%; rimantadine, 0.6%; P<.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that significant risk factors for central nervous system adverse events included male sex (odds ratio, 3.65), reduced calculated creatinine clearance (odds ratio, 1.78), and use of amantadine (odds ratio, 12.73).

Conclusions  Amantadine use was associated with a significantly higher incidence of central nervous system adverse events than rimantadine use in this elderly population receiving influenza prophylaxis. In addition, the discontinuation rate of amantadine was significantly higher than that with rimantadine.


From the University of Colorado School of Pharmacy, Denver (Dr Keyser), and the Department of Pharmacy Services (Ms Karl and Dr Bertino), the Department of Medicine (Drs Nafziger and Bertino), The Research Institute (Drs Nafziger and Bertino), and the Clinical Pharmacology Research Center (Drs Nafziger and Bertino), Bassett Healthcare, Cooperstown, NY.



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Management of Influenza in Adults Older than 65 Years of Age: Cost-Effectiveness of Rapid Testing and Antiviral Therapy
Rothberg et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2003;139:321-329.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

New treatments for viral respiratory tract infections--opportunities and problems
Snell
J Antimicrob Chemother 2001;47:251-259.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.