Frederick G. Hayden

The Efficacy of Live Attenuated, Cold-Adapted, Trivalent, Intranasal Influenzavirus Vaccine in Children

BACKGROUND Influenzavirus vaccine is used infrequently in healthy children, even though the rates of influenza in this group are high. We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a live attenuated, cold-adapted, trivalent influenzavirus vaccine in children 15 to 71 months old. METHODS Two hundred eighty-eight children were assigned to receive one dose of vaccine or placebo given by intranasal spray, and 1314 were assigned to receive two doses approximately 60 days apart. The strains included in the vaccine were antigenically equivalent to those in the inactivated influenzavirus vaccine in use at the time. The subjects were monitored with viral cultures for influenza during the subsequent influenza season. A case of influenza was defined as an illness associated with the isolation of wild-type influenzavirus from respiratory secretions. RESULTS The intranasal vaccine was accepted and well tolerated. Among children who were initially seronegative, antibody titers increased by a factor of four in 61 to 96 percent, depending on the influenza strain. Culture-positive influenza was significantly less common in the vaccine group (14 cases among 1070 subjects) than the placebo group (95 cases among 532 subjects). The vaccine efficacy was 93 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 88 to 96 percent) against culture-confirmed influenza. Both the one-dose regimen (89 percent efficacy) and the two-dose regimen (94 percent efficacy) were efficacious, and the vaccine was efficacious against both strains of influenza circulating in 1996-1997, A(H3N2) and B. The vaccinated children had significantly fewer febrile illnesses, including 30 percent fewer episodes of febrile otitis media (95 percent confidence interval, 18 to 45 percent; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS A live attenuated, cold-adapted influenzavirus vaccine was safe, immunogenic, and effective against influenza A(H3N2) and B in healthy children.

Clinical aspects of pandemic 2009 influenza a (H1N1) virus infection

Copyright

Update on avian influenza A (H5N1) virus infection in humans.

The members of the writing committee (Abdel-Nasser Abdel-Ghafar, M.D., Tawee Chotpitayasunondh, M.D., Zhancheng Gao, M.D., Ph.D., Frederick G. Hayden, M.D., Nguyen Duc Hien, M.D., Ph.D., Menno D. de Jong, M.D., Ph.D., Azim Naghdaliyev, M.D., J.S. Malik Peiris, M.D., Nahoko Shindo, M.D., Santoso Soeroso, M.D., and Timothy M. Uyeki, M.D.) assume responsibility for the overall content and integrity of the article. Address reprint requests to Dr. Hayden at the Global Influenza Program, Department of Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response, World Health Organization, 20 Ave. Appia, Ch-1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland, or at haydenf@who.int.

Resistant influenza A viruses in children treated with oseltamivir: descriptive study

BACKGROUND Oseltamivir is an effective inhibitor of influenza virus neuraminidase. Although viruses resistant to oseltamivir emerge less frequently than those resistant to amantadine or rimantadine, information on oseltamivir-resistant viruses arising during clinical use of the drug in children is limited. Our aim was to investigate oseltamivir resistance in a group of children treated for influenza. METHODS We analysed influenza A viruses (H3N2) collected from 50 children before and during treatment with oseltamivir. We sequenced the genes for neuraminidase and haemagglutinin and studied the mutant neuraminidases for their sensitivity to oseltamivir carboxylate. FINDINGS We found neuraminidase mutations in viruses from nine patients (18%), six of whom had mutations at position 292 (Arg292Lys) and two at position 119 (Glu119Val), which are known to confer resistance to neuraminidase inhibitors. We also identified another mutation (Asn294Ser) in one patient. Sensitivity testing to oseltamivir carboxylate revealed that the neuraminidases of viruses that have an Arg292Lys, Glu119Val, or Asn294Ser mutation were about 10(4)-10(5)-fold, 500-fold, or 300-fold more resistant than their pretreatment neuraminidases, respectively. Oseltamivir-resistant viruses were first detected at day 4 of treatment and on each successive day of the study. More than 10(3) infectious units per mL of virus were detected in some of the patients who did not shed drug-resistant viruses, even after 5 days of treatment. INTERPRETATION Oseltamivir-resistant mutants in children being treated for influenza with oseltamivir arise more frequently than previously reported. Furthermore, children can be a source of viral transmission, even after 5 days of treatment with oseltamivir.

Oral oseltamivir treatment of influenza in children

Background. Oral oseltamivir administration is effective treatment for influenza in adults. This study was conducted to determine the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oseltamivir in children with influenza. Methods. In this randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study, children 1 through 12 years with fever [≥100°F (≥38°C)] and a history of cough or coryza <48 h duration received oseltamivir 2 mg/kg/dose or placebo twice daily for 5 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time to resolution of illness including mild/absent cough and coryza mild/absent, return to normal activity and euthermia. Results. Of 695 enrolled children 452 (65%) had influenza (placebo, n = 235; oseltamivir, n = 217). Among infected children the median duration of illness was reduced by 36 h (26%) in oseltamivir compared with placebo recipients (101 h; 95% confidence interval, 89 to 118 vs. 137 h; 95% confidence interval, 125 to 150;P < 0.0001). Oseltamivir treatment also reduced cough, coryza and duration of fever. New diagnoses of otitis media were reduced by 44% (12%vs. 21%). The incidence of physician-prescribed antibiotics was significantly lower in influenza-infected oseltamivir (68 of 217, 31%) than placebo (97 of 235, 41%;P = 0.03) recipients. Oseltamivir therapy was generally well-tolerated, although associated with an excess frequency of emesis (5.8%). Discontinuation because of adverse events was low in both groups (1.8% with oseltamivir vs. 1.1% with placebo). Oseltamivir treatment did not affect the influenza-specific antibody response. Conclusions. Oral oseltamivir administration is an efficacious and well-tolerated therapy for influenza in children when given within 48 h of onset of illness.

Influenza virus neuraminidase inhibitors

Neuraminidase promotes influenza virus release from infected cells and facilitates virus spread within the respiratory tract. Several potent and specific inhibitors of this enzyme have been developed, and two (zanamivir and oseltamivir) have been approved for human use. Unlike amantadine and rimantadine that target the M2 protein of influenza A viruses, these drugs inhibit replication of both influenza A and B viruses. Zanamivir is delivered by inhalation because of its low oral bioavailability whereas oseltamivir is administered by mouth. Early treatment with either drug reduces the severity and duration of influenza symptoms and associated complications. Both agents are effective for chemoprophylaxis. Because of a broader antiviral spectrum, better tolerance, and less potential for emergence of resistance than is seen with the M2 inhibitors, the neuraminidase inhibitors represent an important advance in the treatment of influenza.

Seasonal Influenza in Adults and Children—Diagnosis, Treatment, Chemoprophylaxis, and Institutional Outbreak Management: Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America

Guidelines for the treatment of persons with influenza virus infection were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. The evidence-based guidelines encompass diagnostic issues, treatment and chemoprophylaxis with antiviral medications, and issues related to institutional outbreak management for seasonal (interpandemic) influenza. They are intended for use by physicians in all medical specialties with direct patient care, because influenza virus infection is common in communities during influenza season and may be encountered by practitioners caring for a wide variety of patients.

Use of the selective oral neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir to prevent influenza

BACKGROUND Safe and effective antiviral agents are needed to prevent infection with influenza A and B virus. Oseltamivir (GS4104), which can be administered orally, is the prodrug of GS4071, a potent and selective inhibitor of influenzavirus neuraminidases. We studied the use of oseltamivir for long-term prophylaxis against influenza in two placebo-controlled, double-blind trials at different U.S. sites during the winter of 1997-1998. METHODS We randomly assigned 1559 healthy, nonimmunized adults 18 to 65 years old to receive either oral oseltamivir (75 mg given once or twice daily, for a total daily dose of 75 or 150 mg) or placebo for six weeks during a peak period of local influenzavirus activity. The primary end point with respect to efficacy was laboratory-confirmed influenza-like illness (defined as a temperature of at least 37.2 degrees C accompanied by at least one respiratory and at least one systemic symptom). RESULTS In the two studies combined, the risk of influenza among subjects assigned to either once-daily or twice-daily oseltamivir (1.2 percent and 1.3 percent, respectively) was lower than that among subjects assigned to placebo (4.8 percent; P<0.001 and P=0.001 for the comparison with once-daily and twice-daily oseltamivir, respectively). The protective efficacy of oseltamivir in the two active-treatment groups combined was 74 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 53 to 88 percent) at all the sites combined and 82 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 60 to 93 percent) at sites in Virginia, where the rate of influenza infection was higher than the overall rate. For culture-proved influenza, the rate of protective efficacy in the two oseltamivir groups combined was 87 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 65 to 96 percent). The rate of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection was lower with oseltamivir than with placebo (5.3 percent vs. 10.6 percent, P<0.001). Oseltamivir was well tolerated but was associated with a greater frequency of nausea (12.1 percent and 14.6 percent in the once-daily and twice-daily groups, respectively) and vomiting (2.5 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively) than was placebo (nausea, 7.1 percent; vomiting, 0.8 percent). However, the frequency of premature discontinuation of drug or placebo was similar among the three groups (3.1 to 4.0 percent). CONCLUSIONS Oseltamivir administered daily for six weeks by the oral route is safe and effective for the prevention of influenza.

Efficacy of vaccination with live attenuated, cold-adapted, trivalent, intranasal influenza virus vaccine against a variant (A/Sydney) not contained in the vaccine

OBJECTIVE To determine the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of revaccination of children with live attenuated influenza vaccine. STUDY DESIGN A 2-year multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, efficacy field trial of live attenuated, cold-adapted trivalent influenza vaccine administered by nasal spray to children. This report summarizes year 2 results, a year in which the epidemic strain of influenza A/Sydney was not well matched to the vaccine strains. Each year, vaccine strains were antigenically equivalent to the contemporary inactivated influenza vaccine. In year 2, a single intranasal revaccination was administered. Active surveillance for influenza was conducted during the influenza season by means of viral cultures. Influenza cases were defined as illnesses with wild-type influenza virus isolated from respiratory secretions. RESULTS In year 2, 1358 (85%) children, 26 to 85 months of age, returned for revaccination. The intranasal vaccine was easily accepted, well tolerated, and immunogenic. Revaccination resulted in 82% to 100% of the vaccinated children in a subset studied for immunogenicity being seropositive as compared with 26% to 65% of placebo recipients, depending on the influenza strain tested. No serious adverse events were associated with the vaccine. In addition to the strains in the vaccine, antibody was induced to the variant strain A/Sydney/H3N2. In year 2, influenza A/Sydney/H3N2, a variant not contained in the vaccine, caused 66 of 70 cases of influenza A; nonetheless, intranasal vaccine was 86% efficacious in preventing A/Sydney influenza. Eight cases of lower respiratory tract disease were associated with A/Sydney influenza; all cases were in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS This live attenuated, cold-adapted influenza vaccine was safe, immunogenic, and efficacious against influenza A/H3N2 (including a variant, A/Sydney, not contained in the vaccine) and influenza B. The characteristics of this vaccine make it suitable for routine use in children to prevent influenza.

Correlates of Immune Protection Induced by Live, Attenuated, Cold-Adapted, Trivalent, Intranasal Influenza Virus Vaccine

The authors conducted a 2-year, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy field trial of live, attenuated, cold-adapted, trivalent influenza vaccine administered by nasal spray to children 15-71 months old. Overall, vaccine was 92% efficacious at preventing culture-confirmed infection by influenza A/H3N2 and influenza B. Because influenza A/H1N1 did not cause disease during the years in which this study was conducted, the authors sought to determine vaccine efficacy and correlates of immune protection against experimental challenge with 107 TCID50 of attenuated H1N1 (vaccine strain) by intranasal spray. Prechallenge assessments included serum hemaglutination-inhibiting (HAI) antibody and nasal wash IgA antibody to H1N1. Vaccine was 83% efficacious (95% confidence interval, 60%-93%) at preventing shedding of H1N1 virus after challenge. Any serum HAI antibody or any nasal wash IgA antibody was correlated with significant protection from H1N1 infection as indicated by vaccine-virus shedding, and high efficacy against H1N1 challenge was demonstrated.