Recommendations for the programme of clinical trials of medicinal products for the treatment of influenza

Scientific relevance. The development of new medicinal products to treat influenza is motivated by the limitations of existing treatment options, the emergence of drug resistance, and the health consequences of influenza epidemics associated with the highly contagious nature of the virus. Proper planning and implementation of clinical programmes providing reliable data on the efficacy and safety of medicinal products under development requires adherence to recommendations of the regulatory authorities. At the moment, the Russian Federation, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the European Union lack documented recommendations on conducting clinical trials of anti-influenza medicines. There is a need in national guidelines that will reflect the procedure for conducting clinical trials and establish the required amount of data to be submitted with marketing applications for new anti-influenza products.

Aim. The study was aimed to analyse possible regulatory approaches to planning clinical development programmes for anti-influenza medicinal products.

Discussion. The article pays particular attention to phase III studies, as the main studies confirming efficacy and safety. The authors described a clinical development strategy and the requirements for the volume and quality of efficacy and safety data. This article is based on the current Russian recommendations for the design and development of medicinal products and guidelines on their evaluation, as well as the recommendations by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Conclusions. The analysis results demonstrate the necessity for elaborating Russian recommendations for clinical studies of medicinal products for the treatment of influenza that will take into account the national legislation and clinical development practices. Such recommendations will streamline the implementation of new effective anti-influenza medicinal products.

1. Krasnova EI, Karpovich GS, Provorova VV, Shestakov AE, Kazakova YuV. Influenza in COVID-19 pandemic, epidemiological characteristics, approaches to vaccination. Lechashchy Vrach. 2021;(4):50–6 (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.51793/OS.2021.98.48.009

2. Acosta EP, Kimberlin DW. Determination of appropriate dosing of influenza drugs in pediatric patients. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;88(5):704–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2010.173

3. Darton TC, Blohmke CJ, Moorthy VS, Altmann DM, Hayden FG, Clutterbuck EA, et al. Design, recruitment, and microbiological considerations in human challenge studies. Lancet Infect Dis. 2015;15(7):840–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00068-7

4. Hayden FG, Treanor JJ, Fritz RS, Lobo M, Betts RF, Miller M, et al. Use of the oral neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir in experimental human influenza: randomized controlled trials for prevention and treatment. JAMA. 1999;282(13):1240–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.13.1240

5. Barroso L, Treanor J, Gubareva L, Hayden FG. Efficacy and tolerability of the oral neuraminidase inhibitor peramivir in experimental human influenza: randomized, controlled trials for prophylaxis and treatment. Antivir Ther. 2005;10(8):901–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/135965350501000805

6. Memoli MJ, Czajkowski L, Reed S, Athota R, Bristol T, Proudfoot K, et al. Validation of the wild-type influenza a human challenge model H1N1pdMIST: an A(H1N1)pdm09 dose-finding investigational new drug study. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;60(5):693–702. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciu924

7. Treanor J. Influenza challenge and the challenge of drug development. J Infect Dis. 2019;219(2):171–2. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiy413

8. Dunning J, Baillie JK, Cao B, Hayden FG. Antiviral combinations for severe influenza. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(12):1259–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(14)70821-7

9. Chairat K, Tarning J, White NJ, Lindegardh N. Pharmacokinetic properties of anti-influenza neuraminidase inhibitors. J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;53(2):119–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091270012440280

10. Green DA, StGeorge K. Rapid antigen tests for influenza: rationale and significance of the FDA reclassification. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56(10):e00711–18. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00711-18

11. Kim DK, Poudel B. Tools to detect influenza virus. Yonsei Med J. 2013;54(3):560–6. https://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2013.54.3.560

12. Peck AJ, Englund JA, Kuypers J, Guthrie KA, Corey L, Morrow R, et al. Respiratory virus infection among hematopoietic cell transplant recipients: evidence for asymptomatic parainfluenza virus infection. Blood. 2007;110(5):1681–8. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-12-060343

13. King JC, Beigel JH, Ison MG, Rothman RE, Uyeki TM, Walker RE, et al. Clinical development of therapeutic agents for hospitalized patients with influenza: challenges and innovations. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019;6(4):ofz137. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz137

14. Ison MG , de Jong MD, Gilligan K J, Higgs ES, Pavia AT, Pierson J, Hayden FG . End point s for testing inf luenza antiviral treatment s for patient s at high risk of severe and life-threatening disease. J Infect Dis. 2010;201(11):1654–62. https://doi.org/10.1086/652498

15. Iijima H, Kamei M. Trends in study design assessment for anti-influenza agents. Jpn J Pharm Health Care Sci. 2019;45(8):451–9. https://doi.org/10.5649/jjphcs.45.451

16. Rath B, Conrad T, Myles P, Alchikh M, Ma X, Hoppe C, et al. Influenza and other respiratory viruses: standardizing disease severity in surveillance and clinical trials. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2017;15(6):545–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/14787210.2017.1295847

17. Holmes EC, Hurt AC, Dobbie Z, Clinch B, Oxford JS, Piedra PA. Understanding the impact of resistance to influenza antivirals. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2021;34(2):e00224-20. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00224-20