BACKGROUND: An obstacle in influenza therapeutics development is the lack of clinical endpoints, especially in hospitalized patients. A single time-point binary outcome measure is limited by patients' diverse clinical trajectories and low event rates. METHODS: A 6-point ordinal scale with ascending clinical status severity (scoring: discharged; subacute care; acute care without/with respiratory failure; intensive care unit [ICU]; death) was proposed to study outcomes of adults hospitalized with influenza. Individual patient data from 2 active surveillance cohorts' datasets (2015/2016-2017/2018; Edmonton, Hong Kong) was used for evaluation. The impact of neuraminidase inhibitor (NAI) treatment on longitudinal ordinal outcome changes over 30 days was analyzed using mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression and group-based trajectory models. RESULTS: Patient (n = 1226) baseline characteristics included age (mean 68.0 years), virus-type (A 78.1%, B 21.9%), respiratory failure (57.2%), ICU admittance (14.4%), and NAI treatment within 5 days of illness (69.2%). Outcomes at 30 days included discharged (75.2%), subacute care (13.7%), acute care (4.5%), and death (6.6%). Two main clinical trajectories were identified, predictive by baseline scoring (mean ± SD, 4.3 ± 0.6 vs 3.5 ± 0.6, P < .001). Improved outcomes with NAI treatment within 5 days were indicated by significantly lower clinical status scores over time (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], .41-.69; P < .001; adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, .50-.77; P < .001, for baseline score, age, and within-patient correlations). In subanalysis, influenza vaccination was also associated with lower scores (adjusted OR, 0.67; 95% CI, .50-.90; P = .007). Analyses of binary endpoints showed insignificant results. CONCLUSIONS: The ordinal outcome scale is a potentially useful clinical endpoint for influenza therapeutic trials, which could account for the diverse clinical trajectories of hospitalized patients, warranting further development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: