68-2

32/110

Early (n = 150)64.8 ± 15.7M, 63 (42.0)F, 87 (58.0)AMNV, 87 (58.0)FCV, 63 (42.0)AMNV, 67 (54.0)FCV, 57 (46.0)18 (12.0)22 (14.7)29 (19.3)7 (4.7)V, 47 (31.3)C, 23 (15.3)TU, 33 (22.0)TL, 21 (14.0)L, 13 (8.7)S, 13 (8.7)36 (24.0)2 (1, 3)2 (1, 3)1 (0, 3)0 (0, 2)17 (11.3)After PSMLate (n = 108)Early (n = 108)65.4 ± 15.6M, 52 (48.1)F, 56 (51.9)65.8 ± 16.3M, 52 (48.1)F, 56 (51.9)AMNV, 60 (55.6) FCV, 48 (44.4)AMNV, 53 (49.1)FCV, 55 (50.9)7 (6.5)10 (9.3)13 (12.0)6 (5.6)9 (8.3)14 (13.0)18 (16.7)8 (7.4)V, 27 (25.0)C, 20 (18.5)TU, 25 (23.1)TL, 15 (13.9)L, 12 (11.1)S, 9 (8.3)V, 27 (25.0)C, 18 (16.7)TU, 26 (24.1)TL, 21 (19.4)L, 10 (9.3)S, 6 (5.6)25 (23.1)2 (1, 3)2 (1, 4)1 (0, 3)0 (0, 2)30 (27.8)2 (1, 3)3 (1, 5)2 (0, 4)0 (0, 1)15 (13.9)12 (11.1)124Figure 3　Comparison between numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores in 111 propensity score-matched pairs of patients treated with amenamevir (AMNV) and patients treated with famciclovir (FCV)Data are expressed as box and whisker plots. A solid line in the box depicts the median. Ends of the box represent the 75th and 25th percentiles. Whiskers represent the 90th and 10th percentiles. * Significant difference between patientsTable 3　Comparisons of clinical characteristics and primary/secondary clinical outcomes between early visitors and late visitors before and after propensity score matching (PSM)Before PSMVariablesHospital visitLate (n = 124)Clinical characteristicsAge (years)Sex; Males and FemalesAntiherpetic agents, AMNV and FCVAntibiotic therapySteroid userImmunocompromised stateAntidepressant userRash locationsPrimary clinical outcomesRequirements of NSAIDsNRS pain score at Day 0NRS pain score at Day 3-4NRS pain score at Day 7NRS pain score at Week 2-3Secondary clinical outcomesPHNData are shown as Mean ± SD, Median (Interquartile Range), or Number (%), and compared between patients with unpaired t test, Mann-Whitney U test, or Pearson’s chi-square test.PSM, propensity score matching; AMNV, amenamevir; FCV, famciclovir; M, males; F, females; V, trigeminal; C, cervical; TU, upper thoracic (T1-8); TL, lower thoracic (T9-12); L, lumbar; S, sacral; NSAIDs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; NRS, numerical rating scale; PHN, postherpetic neuralgia early visitors and 124 late visitors. AMNV was more frequently used in early visitors than in late visitors (p = 0.0342) (Table 3). Requirements of NSAIDs or NRS pain scores did not differ signifi-cantly between early and late visitors during the acute HZ period, although pain scores tended to be higher at Day 3-4 and Day 7 in late than early visi-tors (p = 0.0979 and p = 0.0671, respectively) (Table 3). In 108 PSM pairs with comparable clin-ical characteristics, the pain score at Day 3-4 tended to be higher and that at Day 7 was signifi-cantly higher in late than early visitors (p = 0.0938 and p = 0.0315, respectively) (Table 3, Figure 4).Comparison between AMNV and FCV in early visitorsThird, based on above-mentioned results, we performed the first subgroup analysis by comparing primary/secondary clinical outcomes between 87 AMNV-treated patients and 63 FCV-treated patients p values0.5286 66.0 ± 16.3M, 57 (46.0)F, 67 (54.0)0.5100 0.0342 9 (7.3)16 (12.9)20 (16.1)8 (6.5)0.1899 0.6742 0.4909 0.5180 V, 28 (22.6)C, 29 (23.4)TU, 26 (21.0)TL, 22 (17.7)L, 12 (9.7)S, 7 (5.6)0.3278 34 (27.4)2 (1, 3)2.5 (1, 5)2 (0, 4)0 (0, 1)0.5183 0.48910.09790.06710.697912 (9.7)0.6574 p values0.8244 1.0000 0.34030.6033 0.3865 0.3319 0.5804 0.8619 0.4349 0.34440.09380.03150.55430.5371