Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of EZC Pak, a 5-Day Combination Echinacea-Zinc-Vitamin C Dose Pack with or without Vitamin D, in the Management of Outpatient Upper Respiratory Infections

Figures & data

Figure 1 CONSORT flow diagram.

Figure 2 Visual representation of the dosing scheme over the five-day treatment period.

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Participants

Variable	Placebo Group (n = 165)	EZC Group (n = 123)	EZC+D Group (n = 72)
Gender n (%)
Male	44 (26.7)	28 (22.8)	19 (26.4)
Female	121 (73.3)	95 (77.2)	53 (73.6)
Age (years)
Mean ± SD	56.9 ± 13.32	54.5 ± 14.83	53.8 ± 14.58
Median	59	58	56
Min, Max	22, 86	22, 88	23, 78
Ethnicity n (%)
White or Caucasian	117 (70.9)	100 (81.3)	60 (83.3)
Black or African American	12 (7.3)	6 (4.9)	4 (5.6)
Hispanic or Latino	14 (8.5)	7 (5.7)	4 (5.6)
East Asian	6 (3.6)	1 (0.8)	1 (1.4)
South Asian/Indian subcontinent	6 (3.6)	1 (0.8)	1 (1.4)
Native American or Alaska Native	2 (1.2)	1 (0.8)	1 (1.4)
Middle Eastern or North African	0	1 (0.8)	0
Multiracial or Multiethnic	7 (4.2)	4 (3.3)	1 (1.4)
Other	1 (0.6)	2 (1.6)	0
Household income n (%)
$30,000 or less	53 (32.1)	22 (17.9)	12 (16.7)
$30,000 to $60,000	40 (24.2)	35 (28.5)	23 (31.9)
$60,000 to $100,000	31 (18.8)	36 (29.3)	20 (27.8)
$100,000 to $150,000	25 (15.2)	19 (15.4)	10 (13.9)
$150,000 or more	16 (9.7)	11 (8.9)	7 (9.7)
Education level n (%)
No degree	4 (2.4)	0	1 (1.4)
High school or equivalent	29 (17.6)	27 (22.0)	15 (20.8)
Bachelor’s degree	67 (40.6)	49 (39.8)	28 (38.9)
Master’s degree	43 (26.1)	28 (22.8)	13 (18.1)
PhD	1 (0.6)	3 (2.4)	3 (4.2)
Other	21 (12.7)	16 (13.0)	12 (16.7)

Figure 3 Choropleth map of geographic distribution of study participants.

Table 2 Mean DTR Score and Improvement over Placebo with Log-Rank test

Group	Mean DTR Score	Improvement Over Placebo	90% CI	p-value (Log Rank Test; versus Placebo)
EZC Pak	5.82 days	1.44 days	1.01 to 1.86	0.022
EZC Pak+D	5.97 days	1.29 days	0.71 to 1.87	0.124
EZC Pak Combined	5.87 days	1.39 days	1.05 to 1.73	0.017
Placebo	7.26 days	N/A	N/A	N/A

Figure 4 Kernel density estimate plot and Kaplan–Meier plot for Days To Recovery (DTR) Score.

Table 3 Mean SSDR Score and Improvement Over Placebo with T-test

Group	Size	Post Filter	Mean SSDR Score	Improvement Over Placebo	90% CI	p-value (T-test test; versus Placebo)
EZC Pak	58	40	0.35	16.38%	16.0 to 16.8	0.054
EZC Pak+D	32	18	0.34	19.76%	19.2 to 20.3	0.077
EZC Combined	90	58	0.35	17.43%	17.1 to 17.8	0.029
Placebo	72	42	0.42	N/A	N/A	N/A

Figure 5 Kernel density estimate plot for Symptom Severity During Recovery (SSDR) Score.

Table 4 Mean Satisfaction Score with T-test

Group	Mean Satisfaction Score	p-value (T-test test; versus Placebo)
EZC Pak	0.76	0.012
EZC Pak+D	0.30	0.893
EZC Pak Combined	0.63	0.051
Placebo	0.26	N/A

Table 5 Participant Side Effects

Side Effect n (%)	Placebo Group (n = 90)	EZC Group (n = 60)	EZC+D Group (n = 32)	EZC Combined (n=92)
GI Discomfort/Nausea	2 (2.2)	5 (8.3)	1 (3.1)	6 (6.5)
Vomiting	0	1 (1.7)	0	1 (1.1)
Loose Stool/Diarrhea	3 (3.3)	1 (1.7)	0	1 (1.1)
Dizziness	0	1 (1.7)	0	1 (1.1)
Headache	1 (1.1)	0	0	0
Drowsiness	1 (1.1)	1 (1.7)	0	1 (1.1)
Insomnia	1 (1.1)	0	0	0
Mouth Dryness	1 (1.1)	0	0	0
Nasal Dryness	0	1 (1.7)	0	1 (1.1)
Facial Flushing	0	0	1 (3.1)	1 (1.1)
Itching	1 (1.1)	0	0	0
Muscle Ache	2 (2.2)	0	0	0