OUTCOMES IN INFLUENZA PHASE III/IV CLINICAL TRIALS: A SCOPING REVIEW

Author(s)

Emma Gregory, BA, Hei To Ho, -, Archawin Udomrat, -, Ousmane Tapsirou Ly, MD, MPH, Anastasiia Demidova, MD, Daniel Munblit, MD, PhD, MSc.
King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVES: Given the global burden of influenza and need for robust meta-analyses to shape evidence-based medicine,(1,2) a relevant core outcome set (COS) may improve alignment between trials, aid comparative assessments and ensure relevant outcomes are captured. Reviewing existing literature comprises the first stage in COS development. We aimed to review the current landscape of outcome selection in influenza clinical trials.
METHODS: The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE and Medline were searched on 4 October 2024 for clinical trials of influenza management in adult and mixed populations since 2000. Phase 3 and/or 4 interventional studies involving ≥1 efficacy outcome in patients with influenza were included. Study characteristics were extracted, including title, included countries, year of publication/registration, phase, intervention/control, influenza severity, sample size and outcomes. Outcomes were mapped to domains per a modified version of the taxonomy by Dodd et al (2018; 3)
RESULTS: In total, 18,040 studies and 1,687 protocols were identified; 12,807 and 1,506 underwent screening and 106 and 148 underwent extraction, respectively. Across the included studies, 1,052 unique outcomes were identified: 165 primary, 764 secondary and 123 ‘other’ or ‘safety’. The three most frequently reported domains were symptom alleviation (n=192; 18.3%), viral kinetics/load (148; 14.1%), and complications (74; 7.0%). Overall, 59 outcomes (5.6%) were classified under a health‑related quality of life (HRQoL) domain.
CONCLUSIONS: There is frequent utilisation of symptom-focused and viral load efficacy outcomes, with comparatively limited assessment of complications. Future studies should prioritise clinically meaningful endpoints that distinguish symptomatic relief from altered disease course. Additionally, there was limited reporting of HRQoL endpoints, suggesting underrepresentation of patient-centred perspectives. A COS could improve harmonisation and ensure consistent capture of outcomes relevant to patients, clinicians, payers and policymakers. REFERENCES: [1] World Health Organization. 2025; [2] Juliano et al. Lancet. 2018; [3] Dodd et al. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S

Code

CO223

Topic

Clinical Outcomes

Topic Subcategory

Clinical Outcomes Assessment

Disease

Infectious Disease (non-vaccine), Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory)

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×