Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14638501›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2003

Phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of ruprintrivir nasal spray 2-percent suspension for prevention and treatment of experimentally induced rhinovirus colds in healthy volunteers.

Frederick G Hayden, Ronald B Turner, Jack M Gwaltney, Kathy Chi-Burris, Merril Gersten, Poe Hsyu, Amy K Patick, George J Smith, Leora S Zalman

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical TrialClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 115 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
115citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

115 citing papers in PubMed, 233 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The rhinovirus puzzle: Linking virus and host factors to childhood asthma.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Frederick G HaydenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville, Virginia 22908, USA. fgh@virginia.edu
Ronald B Turner
Jack M Gwaltney
Kathy Chi-Burris
Merril Gersten
Poe Hsyu
Amy K Patick
George J Smith
Leora S Zalman
Agouron Institute · USPfizer (United States) · USUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human rhinovirus (HRV) infections are usually self-limited but may be associated with serious consequences, particularly in those with asthma and chronic respiratory disease. Effective antiviral agents are needed for preventing and treating HRV illnesses. Ruprintrivir (Agouron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., San Diego, Calif.) selectively inhibits HRV 3C protease and shows potent, broad-spectrum anti-HRV activity in vitro. We conducted three double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials in 202 healthy volunteers to assess the activity of ruprintrivir in experimental HRV infection. Subjects were randomized to receive intranasal ruprintrivir (8 mg) or placebo sprays as prophylaxis (two or five times daily [2x/day or 5x/day] for 5 days) starting 6 h before infection or as treatment (5x/day for 4 days) starting 24 h after infection. Ruprintrivir prophylaxis reduced the proportion of subjects with positive viral cultures (for 5x/day dosing groups, 44% for ruprintrivir treatment group versus 70% for placebo treatment group [P=0.03]; for 2x/day dosing groups, 60% for ruprintrivir group versus 92% for placebo group [P=0.004]) and viral titers but did not decrease the frequency of colds. Ruprintrivir treatment reduced the mean total daily symptom score (2.2 for ruprintrivir treatment group and 3.3 for the placebo treatment group [P=0.014]) by 33%. Secondary endpoints, including viral titers, individual symptom scores, and nasal discharge weights, were also reduced by ruprintrivir treatment. Overall, ruprintrivir was well tolerated; blood-tinged mucus and nasal passage irritation were the most common adverse effects reported. Pharmacokinetic analysis of plasma and nasal ruprintrivir concentrations revealed intranasal drug residence with minimal systemic absorption. Results from these studies in experimental rhinoviral infection support continued investigation of intranasal ruprintrivir in the setting of natural HRV infection.

Indexed as

RhinovirusAdministration, InhalationAdolescentAdultAntiviral AgentsBiological AvailabilityCommon ColdDouble-Blind MethodEndpoint DeterminationFemaleHumansIsoxazolesMaleMiddle AgedMucusOxazolesAntiviral AgentsIsoxazolesOxazolesPhenylalaninePyrrolidinesPyrrolidinonesrupintrivirSuspensionsValine

Identifiers

PMID14638501
PMCPMC296196
OpenAlexW2114626540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.