Evaluation of Efficacy Endpoints for a Phase IIb Study of a Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine in Older Adults Using Patient-Reported Outcomes With Laboratory Confirmation

Efficacy, Safety, and Immunogenicity of Subunit Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is garnering increasing attention, with a growing number of subunit RSV vaccines under active clinical investigation. However, comprehensive evidence is limited.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to 12 January 2024, focusing on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies were included, encompassing assessments of efficacy (5 studies), safety (17 studies), and immunogenicity (12 studies) of RSV subunit vaccines. The pooled risk ratio (RR) for RSV-associated acute respiratory infection (RSV-ARI) with subunit vaccines was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.23-0.43), for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection (RSV-LRTI), it was 0.32 (95% CI: 0.22-0.44), and for severe RSV-LRTI (RSV-SLRTI), it was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.06-0.29). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events (SAEs) between the vaccine and placebo groups, with a pooled RR of 1.05 (95% CI: 0.98-1.14). The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) for the geometric mean titer (GMT) of neutralizing antibodies was 2.89 (95% CI: 2.43-3.35).

CONCLUSION

Subunit RSV vaccines exhibit strong efficacy, favorable safety profiles, and robust immunogenicity. Future research should focus on the cost-effectiveness of various vaccines to enhance regional and national immunization strategies.

Occurrence of Central Nervous System Complications of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

An increasing base of evidence suggests that respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections may be associated with neurological complications. In accord with the PRISMA statement, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the occurrence of encephalitis and encephalopathy associated with documented RSV infections. PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases were searched for eligible observational studies published up to 10 April 2024. Raw data included the occurrence of RSV infections among cases of encephalitis and/or encephalopathy and cases of encephalitis and/or encephalopathy among series of RSV infections. Data were pooled in a random effects model. Case reports were also collected, and their data pooled as a cumulative series. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 measure, while reporting bias was assessed by means of funnel plots and regression analysis. A total of 15 studies for a total of 7719 RSV infections and 1631 cases of encephalitis were analyzed. Moreover, 27 case reports and case series were retrieved, for a total of 84 individual cases of encephalitis/encephalopathy occurring during a documented RSV infection. A pooled prevalence of 2.20 cases of encephalitis/encephalopathy per 100 RSV cases (I2 = 99%) was calculated, while a prevalence of RSV infections among cases of encephalitis/encephalopathy was estimated to 3.53 per 100 cases for studies on respiratory specimens (I2 = 48%) and 0.37 per cases on central nervous system (CNS) specimens (I2 = 0%). Detection of RSV within the CNS was relatively rare (17.86% of pooled case reports), being associated with male gender (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5.021, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.104 to 22.831) and recovery with long-term sequelae (aOR 5.699, 95%CI 1.152; 28.183). Case fatality ratio was estimated to be 0.43 per 100 cases on observational studies and 10.71% in case reports, a difference likely due to publication bias. In summary, RSV represented a not frequent but notable cause of encephalitis/encephalopathy in adults and children. The paucity of available studies not only recommends a cautious appraisal of our results but stresses the clinical significance of future studies on incident cases of encephalitis and/or encephalopathy.

The respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein vaccine attenuates the severity of respiratory syncytial virus-associated disease in breakthrough infections in adults ≥60 years of age

Background

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a contagious pathogen causing acute respiratory infections (ARIs). Symptoms range from mild upper respiratory tract infections to potentially life-threatening lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD). In adults ≥60 years old, vaccine efficacy of a candidate vaccine for older adults (RSVPreF3 OA) was 71.7% against RSV-ARI and 82.6% against RSV-LRTD (AReSVi-006/NCT04886596). We present the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the same trial at the end of the first RSV season in the northern hemisphere (April 2022).

Methods

In this phase 3 trial, adults aged ≥60 years were randomized (1:1) to receive one dose of RSVPreF3 OA vaccine or placebo. PROs were assessed using InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO), Short Form-12 (SF-12), and EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. Peak FLU-PRO Chest/Respiratory scores during the first 7 days from ARI episode onset were compared using a Wilcoxon test. Least squares mean (LSMean) of SF-12 physical functioning (PF) and EQ-5D health utility scores were estimated using mixed effects models.

Results

In the RSVPreF3 OA group (N = 12,466), 27 first RSV-ARI episodes were observed versus 95 in the Placebo group (N = 12,494). Median peak FLU-PRO Chest/Respiratory scores were lower in RSVPreF3 OA (1.07) versus Placebo group (1.86); p = 0.0258. LSMean group differences for the PF and EQ-5D health utility score were 7.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -9.86, 23.85; p = 0.4125) and 0.0786 (95% CI: -0.0340, 0.1913; p = 0.1695).

Conclusions

The RSVPreF3 OA vaccine, in addition to preventing infection, attenuated the severity of RSV-associated symptoms in breakthrough infections, with trends of reduced impact on PF and health utility.

A pilot phase 2a, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to explore the antiviral activity, clinical outcomes, safety, and tolerability of rilematovir at two dose levels in non-hospitalized adults with respiratory syncytial virus infection

OBJECTIVES

To assess the antiviral effect, clinical outcomes, and safety of the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) fusion inhibitor rilematovir in non-hospitalized RSV-infected adults.

METHODS

This phase 2a, double-blind, multicentre study randomly assigned RSV-positive adult outpatients ≤5 days from symptom onset 1:1:1 to receive rilematovir 500 mg, 80 mg, or placebo once-daily for 7 days. Antiviral effect was assessed by RSV RNA viral load (VL), measured by quantitative RT-PCR, and Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimates of time to undetectable VL. Clinical course was assessed by KM estimates of median time to resolution of key RSV symptoms assessed through patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

RSV-positive patients (n = 72) were randomly assigned; 66 had confirmed RSV infection and received rilematovir 500 mg (n = 23), 80 mg (n = 21) or placebo (n = 22). Differences versus placebo in mean RSV RNA VL area under the curve (90% CI) through days 3, 5 and 8, respectively, were 0.09 (-0.837; 1.011), -0.10 (-2.171; 1.963), and -1.03 (-4.746; 2.682) log10 copies.day/mL for rilematovir 500 mg, and 1.25 (0.291; 2.204), 2.53 (0.430; 4.634), and 3.85 (0.097; 7.599) log10 copies.day/mL for rilematovir 80 mg. KM estimates of median (90% CI) time-to-first confirmed undetectable VL were 5.9 (3.85; 6.90), 8.0 (6.86; 12.80) and 7.0 (6.62; 10.88) days and 5.7 (2.93; 7.01), 8.1 (6.74; 12.80) and 7.9 (6.62; 11.74) days in patients with symptom onset ≤3 days, for rilematovir 500 mg, 80 mg, and placebo, respectively. KM estimates of median (90% CI) time to resolution of key RSV symptoms were 7.1 (5.03; 11.43), 7.6 (5.93; 8.32), and 9.6 (5.95; 14.00) days for rilematovir 500 mg, 80 mg, and placebo, respectively; and in patients with symptom onset ≤3 days, median 8.0, 7.6, and 11.8 days, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Rilematovir use, initiated early, suggests a potential clinical benefit in RSV-infected adults, with data supporting development of RSV therapeutic options.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03379675).

Evaluation of symptoms in respiratory syncytial virus infection in adults: psychometric evaluation of the Respiratory Infection Intensity and Impact Questionnaire™ symptom scores

BACKGROUND

The Respiratory Infection Intensity and Impact Questionnaire (RiiQ™) is a patient-reported outcome measure designed to assess symptoms and impacts of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. This study evaluated the construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the RiiQ™ Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms Scale scores.

METHODS

Prospective data were analyzed from a total of 1795 participants, including from non-hospitalized patients with acute respiratory infection (ARI) and no coinfections enrolled in a Phase 2b RSV vaccine study (RSV-positive: n = 60; RSV-negative: n = 1615), and two observational studies of patients hospitalized with RSV (n = 20; n = 100). Descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), construct validity correlations (between a clinician-assessed clinical questionnaire and the RiiQ™ symptoms scale), known-groups validity, and responsiveness (correlations of change scores) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean patient age ranged from 66.5 to 71.5 years and the majority of patients were female. Initial assessments in the vaccine trial (ARI Day 1) were suggestive of less severe illness than in the observational studies with hospitalized patients. CFA loadings (> 0.40) supported summary scores. ICCs exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70 supported test-retest reliability for Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms, except in the small observational study. At the scale level, correlations were moderate to strong (|r| ≥ 0.3) and positive between the Respiratory Symptoms Scale and the related clinical questionnaire scores, reflecting measurement of similar symptoms in support of convergent validity. Correlations with change in Patient Global Impression of Severity > 0.30 supported responsiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychometric tests applied to the RiiQ™ Symptoms scales provide evidence of its reliability, construct validity, discriminating ability, and responsiveness for use in clinical studies to assess the onset and severity of RSV symptoms.

Systematic literature review of the signs and symptoms of respiratory syncytial virus

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is responsible for over 30 million lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) and 3 million hospitalizations worldwide each year. Despite the risk RSV poses to young children, older adults, and individuals with comorbidities or suppressed immunity, there is limited understanding of RSV symptom presentation across these at-risk groups, and there is no vaccine for RSV. We conducted two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) of studies that document signs and symptoms (S&S) of RSV in (1) children aged ≤5 years and (2) immunocompromised adolescents and adults, and adults at high risk for severe RSV due to age or comorbidities. Symptom duration and hospital length of stay (LOS) were explored. Electronic database searches were performed following PRISMA guidelines. Studies captured RSV S&S across community and hospital settings. Clinicians and caregivers reported (n = 25 studies) nasal discharge/congestion, cough, shortness of breath, feeding abnormalities, and fever in ≥40% of children across studies and settings. Median hospital stays for children ranged from 2 days in the United States to 7.5 days in China. High-risk adults with RSV (n = 6 studies) commonly (≥40% of adults) reported cough, sputum, dyspnea, and fever/feverishness. Median length of hospital stay in adults ranged from 6 to 15 days across studies. Caregivers and clinicians reported similar RSV S&S in young children, including upper and lower respiratory and systemic symptoms. In high-risk and immunocompromised adults, the most frequent (in multiple publications) and commonly reported RSV S&S were primarily LRTI symptoms. RSV symptoms could last for weeks and are variable based on geography.

Content validity and psychometric properties of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus©) instrument in patients with COVID-19

PURPOSE

A well-defined and reliable patient-reported outcome instrument for COVID-19 is important for assessing symptom severity and supporting research studies. The InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) instrument has been expanded to include loss of taste and smell in the FLU-PRO Plus, to comprehensively cover COVID-19 symptoms. Our studies were designed to evaluate and validate the FLU-PRO Plus among patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

Two studies were conducted: (1) a qualitative, non-interventional, cross-sectional study of patients with COVID-19 involving hybrid concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews; (2) a psychometric evaluation of the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus, using data from COMET-ICE (COVID-19 Monoclonal antibody Efficacy Trial-Intent to Care Early).

RESULTS

In the qualitative interviews (n = 30), all 34 items of the FLU-PRO Plus were considered relevant to COVID-19, and participants determined the questionnaire was easily understood, well written, and comprehensive. In the psychometric evaluation (n = 845), the internal consistency reliability of FLU-PRO Plus total score was 0.94, ranging from 0.71 to 0.90 for domain scores. Reproducibility (Day 20-21) was 0.83 for total score, with domain scores of 0.67-0.89. Confirmatory factor analysis with the novel smell/taste domain demonstrated an acceptable fit to the data.

CONCLUSION

The content, reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the FLU-PRO Plus in the COVID-19 population were supported. Our results suggest that FLU-PRO Plus is a content- and psychometrically-valid, fit-for-purpose measure which is easily understood by patients. FLU-PRO Plus is a suitable PRO measure for evaluating symptoms of COVID-19 and treatment benefit directly from the patient perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov: NCT04545060, September 10, 2020; retrospectively registered.

Vaccines for the common cold

BACKGROUND

The common cold is a spontaneously remitting infection of the upper respiratory tract, characterised by a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing, cough, malaise, sore throat, and fever (usually < 37.8 ºC). Whilst the common cold is generally not harmful, it is a cause of economic burden due to school and work absenteeism. In the United States, economic loss due to the common cold is estimated at more than USD 40 billion per year, including an estimate of 70 million workdays missed by employees, 189 million school days missed by children, and 126 million workdays missed by parents caring for children with a cold. Additionally, data from Europe show that the total cost per episode may be up to EUR 1102. There is also a large expenditure due to inappropriate antimicrobial prescription. Vaccine development for the common cold has been difficult due to antigenic variability of the common cold viruses; even bacteria can act as infective agents. Uncertainty remains regarding the efficacy and safety of interventions for preventing the common cold in healthy people, thus we performed an update of this Cochrane Review, which was first published in 2011 and updated in 2013 and 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of vaccines for preventing the common cold in healthy people.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (April 2022), MEDLINE (1948 to April 2022), Embase (1974 to April 2022), CINAHL (1981 to April 2022), and LILACS (1982 to April 2022). We also searched three trials registers for ongoing studies, and four websites for additional trials (April 2022). We did not impose any language or date restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any virus vaccine compared with placebo to prevent the common cold in healthy people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used Cochrane's Screen4Me workflow to assess the initial search results. Four review authors independently performed title and abstract screening to identify potentially relevant studies. We retrieved the full-text articles for those studies deemed potentially relevant, and the review authors independently screened the full-text reports for inclusion in the review, recording reasons for exclusion of the excluded studies. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consulting a third review author when needed. Two review authors independently collected data on a data extraction form, resolving any disagreements by consensus or by involving a third review author. We double-checked data transferred into Review Manager 5 software. Three review authors independently assessed risk of bias using RoB 1 tool as outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We carried out statistical analysis using Review Manager 5. We did not conduct a meta-analysis, and we did not assess publication bias. We used GRADEpro GDT software to assess the certainty of the evidence and to create a summary of findings table.  MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any new RCTs for inclusion in this update. This review includes one RCT conducted in 1965 with an overall high risk of bias. The RCT included 2307 healthy young men in a military facility, all of whom were included in the analyses, and compared the effect of three adenovirus vaccines (live, inactivated type 4, and inactivated type 4 and 7) against a placebo (injection of physiological saline or gelatin capsule). There were 13 (1.14%) events in 1139 participants in the vaccine group, and 14 (1.19%) events in 1168 participants in the placebo group. Overall, we do not know if there is a difference between the adenovirus vaccine and placebo in reducing the incidence of the common cold (risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 2.02; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, no difference in adverse events when comparing live vaccine preparation with placebo was reported. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence to very low due to unclear risk of bias, indirectness because the population of this study was only young men, and imprecision because confidence intervals were wide and the number of events was low. The included study did not assess vaccine-related or all-cause mortality.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane Review was based on one study with very low-certainty evidence, which showed that there may be no difference between the adenovirus vaccine and placebo in reducing the incidence of the common cold. We identified a need for well-designed, adequately powered RCTs to investigate vaccines for the common cold in healthy people. Future trials on interventions for preventing the common cold should assess a variety of virus vaccines for this condition, and should measure such outcomes as common cold incidence, vaccine safety, and mortality (all-cause and related to the vaccine).

COVID-19 patient reported symptoms using FLU-PRO Plus in a cohort study: associations with infecting genotype, vaccine history, and return-to-health

Background

Patient reported outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection are an important measure of the full burden of COVID. Here, we examine how 1) infecting genotype and COVID-19 vaccination correlate with FLU-PRO Plus score, including by symptom domains, and 2) FLU-PRO Plus scores predict return to usual activities and health.

Methods

The EPICC study was implemented to describe the short- and long-term consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a longitudinal, observational cohort. Multivariable linear regression models were run with FLU-PRO Plus scores as the outcome variable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models evaluated effects of FLU-PRO Plus scores on return to usual health or activities.

Results

Among the 764 participants included in this analysis, 63% were 18-44 years old, 40% were female, and 51% were white. Being fully vaccinated was associated with lower total scores (β=-0.39 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.57, -0.21)). The Delta variant was associated with higher total scores (β=0.25 (95% CI 0.05, 0.45)). Participants with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores were less likely to report returning to usual health and activities (Health: hazard ratio (HR) 0.46 (95% CI 0.37, 0.57); Activities: HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.47, 0.67)). Fully vaccinated participants were more likely to report returning to usual activities (HR 1.24 (95% CI 1.04, 1.48)).

Conclusions

Full SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with decreased severity of patient-reported symptoms across multiple domains, which in turn is likely to be associated with earlier return to usual activities. In addition, infection with the Delta variant was associated with higher FLU-PRO Plus scores than previous variants, even after controlling for vaccination status.

Impact of respiratory syncytial virus disease on quality of life in adults aged ≥50 years: A qualitative patient experience cross-sectional study

Background

Information about the impact of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) on quality of life in older adults is limited. This study characterized the patient experience of RSV illness in USA older adults and assessed the content validity of the InFLUenza Patient Reported Outcome (FLU‐PRO) in this population.

Methods

This qualitative, non‐interventional, cross‐sectional study included hybrid concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews with 30 individuals (age ≥50 years) with polymerase chain reaction‐confirmed RSV diagnosed within 6 months of screening. Targeted literature review was first conducted to inform the development of interview materials. Webcam or telephone interviews were conducted by qualitative researchers using a semistructured interview guide. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using Excel and NVivo software.

Results

All participants reported impacts on daily activities, social activities, and relationships during RSV disease. Physical functioning was impaired in 25 (83%) participants, and 18 (60%) reported not engaging in leisure activities/hobbies. All nine participants who were working reported major impacts on work. Most (n = 28; 93%) described emotional impacts. A majority (n = 19; 63%) reported symptoms lasting beyond the acute disease stage from a week to >1 month. Symptom concepts reported generally matched FLU‐PRO items and domains. Cognitive debriefing indicated that FLU‐PRO was easy to understand and captured participants' experiences of RSV illness.

Conclusions

This study indicates that RSV disease in adults aged ≥50 years in the USA has substantial impacts on daily life and that the concepts included in FLU‐PRO are appropriate and fit for purpose as a measure of RSV symptoms in this population.

Performance of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) Instrument in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

Background

The inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome Plus (FLU-PRO Plus) is a patient-reported outcome data collection instrument assessing symptoms of viral respiratory tract infections across 8 body systems. This study evaluated the measurement properties of FLU-PRO Plus in a study enrolling individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

Data from a prospective cohort study (EPICC) in US Military Health System beneficiaries evaluated for COVID-19 was utilized. Adults with symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with FLU-PRO Plus survey information within 1 week of symptom onset were included. Reliability of FLU-PRO Plus was estimated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; 2 days' reproducibility). Known-groups validity was assessed using patient global assessment (PGA) of disease severity. Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (day 1-6/7).

Results

Two hundred twenty-six SARS-CoV-2-positive participants were included in the analysis. Reliability among those who reported no change in their symptoms from one day to the next was high for most domains (ICC range, 0.68-0.94 for day 1 to day 2). Construct validity was demonstrated by moderate to high correlation between the PGA rating of disease severity and domain and total scores (eg, total scores correlation: 0.69 [influenza-like illness severity], 0.69 [interference in daily activities], and -0.58 [physical health]). In addition, FLU-PRO Plus demonstrated good known-groups validity, with increasing domain and total scores observed with increasing severity ratings.

Conclusions

FLU-PRO Plus performs well in measuring signs and symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection with excellent construct validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness to change. Standardized data collection instruments facilitate meta-analyses, vaccine effectiveness studies, and other COVID-19 research activities.

Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives.

DESIGN

A list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance.

RESULTS

The outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.

Comparative assessment of reported symptoms of influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and human metapneumovirus infection during hospitalization and post-discharge assessed by Respiratory Intensity and Impact Questionnaire

Background

The hospitalized acute respiratory tract infection (HARTI) study used the Respiratory Intensity and Impact Questionnaire (RiiQ™) Symptom Scale, derived from FluiiQ™, to assess and compare the burden of respiratory infection symptoms for patients with influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and human metapneumovirus (hMPV) infection, with or without core risk factors (CRF) (age ≥65; chronic heart, renal, obstructive pulmonary disease; asthma).

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study in adult patients hospitalized with acute respiratory tract infection (40 centers, 12 countries) during two consecutive influenza/RSV/hMPV seasons (2017–2019). The RiiQ™ Symptom Scale and EuroQol 5‐Dimensions 5‐Levels (EQ‐5D‐5L) were assessed by interview at two timepoints during hospitalization and at 1, 2, and 3 months post‐discharge.

Results

Mean lower respiratory tract (LRT) symptom scores were higher for RSV and hMPV participants compared to influenza at 48 h after enrollment/early discharge (p = 0.001) and 3 months post‐discharge (p = 0.007). This was driven by LRT symptoms, including shortness of breath (SOB) (p < 0.01) and wheezing (p < 0.01) during hospitalization, and SOB (p < 0.05) and cough (p < 0.05) post‐discharge. Participants with CRF reported more moderate‐to‐severe SOB (p < 0.05) and wheezing (p < 0.05) compared to CRF(−) participants post‐discharge. EQ‐5D‐5L scores were moderately associated with RiiQ™ LRT and systemic symptoms domains.

Conclusions

Results from the HARTI study suggest that in the study population, LRT symptoms were more severe for RSV and hMPV groups and for patients with CRF. RiiQ™ Symptom Scale scores shows a moderate association with EQ‐5D‐5L indicating that the RiiQ™ may provide useful insights and offer advantages over other measures for use in interventional RSV adult clinical studies.

Feasibility and Performance of Self-Collected Nasal Swabs for Detection of Influenza Virus, Respiratory Syncytial Virus, and Human Metapneumovirus

BACKGROUND

We assessed performance of participant-collected midturbinate nasal swabs compared to study staff-collected midturbinate nasal swabs for the detection of respiratory viruses among pregnant women in Bangkok, Thailand.

METHODS

We enrolled pregnant women aged ≥18 years and followed them throughout the 2018 influenza season. Women with acute respiratory illness self-collected midturbinate nasal swabs at home for influenza viruses, respiratory syncytial viruses (RSV), and human metapneumoviruses (hMPV) real-time RT-PCR testing and the study nurse collected a second midturbinate nasal swab during home visits. Paired specimens were processed and tested on the same day.

RESULTS

The majority (109, 60%) of 182 participants were 20-30 years old. All 200 paired swabs had optimal specimen quality. The median time from symptom onsets to participant-collected swabs was 2 days and to staff-collected swabs was also 2 days. The median time interval between the 2 swabs was 2 hours. Compared to staff-collected swabs, the participant-collected swabs were 93% sensitive and 99% specific for influenza virus detection, 94% sensitive and 99% specific for RSV detection, and 100% sensitive and 100% specific for hMPV detection.

CONCLUSIONS

Participant-collected midturbinate nasal swabs were a valid alternative approach for laboratory confirmation of influenza-, RSV-, and hMPV-associated illnesses among pregnant women in a community setting.

Patient-reported outcomes in vaccines research: relevance for decision-making

The development and demand for effective vaccines have witnessed an exponential growth over the last century. In the meantime, the vaccine market involves more knowledgeable stakeholders, with a shift in emphasis by regulatory agencies on understanding the patient perception and experience. The Food and Drug Administration's publication of the patient-reported outcomes (PRO) guidance has elevated the discipline of PROs and has resulted in a transition from clinician reports of patient outcomes to PROs. This review reports various research methods, which utilize PROs, including qualitative and quantitative research, clinical trials, and patient preference studies. With the advancement of electronic PRO data capture, additional advantages of PROs are being observed and utilized (e.g. as a trigger for clinical endpoints). We discuss uses and advantages of including PROs into the clinical trial program to improve efficiencies, clinical relevance and overall validity of the program in the vaccine field. (See Plain Language Summary).

Evolution of Specimen Self-Collection in the COVID-19 Era: Implications for Population Health Management of Infectious Disease

Laboratory testing is an important component in the diagnosis of respiratory tract infections such as with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, specimen collection not only risks exposure of health care workers and other patients to infection, but also necessitates use of personal protective equipment that may be in short supply during periods of heightened disease activity. Self-collection of nasal or oropharyngeal swabs offers an alternative to address these drawbacks. Although studies in the past decade have demonstrated the utility of this approach for respiratory infections, it has not been widely adopted in routine clinical practice. The rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, has focused attention on the need for safe, convenient, timely, and scalable methods for collecting upper respiratory specimens for testing. The goals of this article are to highlight the literature regarding self-collected nasal or oropharyngeal specimens for respiratory pathogen testing; discuss the role of self-collection in helping prevent the spread of the COVID-19 disease from infected patients and facilitating a shift toward “virtual” medicine or telemedicine; and describe the current and future state of self-collection for infectious agents, and the impacts these approaches can have on population health management and disease diagnosis and prevention.

The Clinical Course of COVID-19 in the Outpatient Setting: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been insufficiently characterized. To determine the progression of disease and determinants of hospitalization, we conducted a prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Outpatient adults with positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were recruited by phone between April 21 and July 23, 2020, after receiving outpatient or emergency department testing within a large health network in Maryland, United States. Symptoms were collected by participants on days 0, 3, 7, 14, 21, and 28, and portable pulse oximeter oxygen saturation (SaO2), heart rate, and temperature were collected for 15 consecutive days. Baseline demographics, comorbid conditions, and vital signs were evaluated for risk of subsequent hospitalization using negative binomial and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 118 SARS-CoV-2-infected outpatients, the median age (interquartile range [IQR]) was 56.0 (50.0-63.0) years, and 50 (42.4%) were male. Among individuals in the first week of illness (n = 61), the most common symptoms included weakness/fatigue (65.7%), cough (58.8%), headache (45.6%), chills (38.2%), and anosmia (27.9%). Participants returned to their usual health a median (IQR) of 20 (13-38) days from symptom onset, and 66.0% of respondents were at their usual health during the fourth week of illness. Over 28 days, 10.9% presented to the emergency department and 7.6% required hospitalization. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for the initial home SaO2 for predicting subsequent hospitalization was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms often persisted but uncommonly progressed to hospitalization among outpatients with COVID-19. Home SaO2 may be a helpful tool to stratify risk of hospitalization.