Zanamivir: a significant reduction in viral load during treatment in military conscripts with influenza

Efficacy of Pharmacotherapy for Seasonal Influenza in Young and Middle-aged Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Objective Seasonal influenza affects healthcare demand. However, the efficacy of anti-influenza drugs, particularly among young patients at a low risk of complications, has rarely been evaluated. Therefore, we evaluated the efficacy of anti-influenza drugs against seasonal influenza in healthy young and middle-aged adults. Methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online were searched for original articles reporting double-blind, randomized controlled trials published up to the end of July 2023. Clinical trials that tested the efficacy of anti-influenza drugs in young and middle-aged patients with seasonal influenza were also included. The primary outcome was time to fever alleviation. The efficacy and adverse effects of these treatments were estimated using a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects model and a Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. Results In total, 24 articles with 34 treatments and 8,949 individuals were included. Oseltamivir (300 mg/day for 5 days) showed the largest reduction in time to fever alleviation by -19.1 [95% confidence interval (CI): -29.4, -10.7] h compared with a placebo. Baloxavir marboxil (40 mg/day) reduced the time to symptom alleviation by -28.2 (95% CI: -42.7, -13.7) h, and peramivir (300 mg/day) administered by intravenous infusion for 1 day reduced the time to resumption of usual activities by -43.5 (95% CI: -72.8, -14.2) h. Conclusion Several pharmaceutical treatments were able to reduce the recovery time for fever and symptom alleviation and resumption of usual activities in young and middle-aged adults with seasonal influenza without increasing the risk of complications.

Comparative effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors in patients with influenza: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to use a network meta-analysis (NWA) to evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of various neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) in reducing the duration of influenza symptoms, and thereby, informing the selection of suitable therapeutic regimens for patients with influenza. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing the clinical effects of four NAIs administered to patients with influenza and placebo. Relevant studies were found in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Unpublished studies were collected from the ClinicalTrials.gov registry and through hand searching. We carried out NWA to compare the different regimens with each other and across subgroups of age and medical status (high-risk patients). A total of 58 two-arm studies were identified. Five regimens were efficacious in reducing the time to alleviation of influenza symptoms in all populations; this efficacy was comparable. No significant improvements were seen in combination therapy groups. The mean difference in the time to alleviation of symptoms ranged from 12.78 to 19.51 h. According to the summarized mean difference and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), peramivir (SUCRA = 82.6%), zanamivir (SUCRA = 64%), and oseltamivir (SUCRA = 55.1%) were the three top-ranking drugs for treating influenza. Zanamivir and peramivir were the preferred pharmacologic intervention among all investigated interventions based on the calculated "value preference of SUCRA." This study is a network meta-analysis to explore the therapeutic effects of NAIs in patients with influenza. Peramivir might be the best choice for reducing the time to alleviation of symptoms.

Comparison of Antiviral Agents for Seasonal Influenza Outcomes in Healthy Adults and Children: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Antiviral treatment of influenza is recommended for patients with influenza-like illness during periods of community cocirculation of influenza viruses and SARS-CoV-2; however, questions remain about which treatment is associated with the best outcomes and fewest adverse events.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of neuraminidase inhibitors and the endonuclease inhibitor for the treatment of seasonal influenza among healthy adults and children.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials were searched from inception to January 2020 (the last search was updated in October 2020).

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were randomized clinical trials conducted among patients of all ages with influenza treated with neuraminidase inhibitors (ie, oseltamivir, peramivir, zanamivir, or laninamivir) or an endonuclease inhibitor (ie, baloxavir) compared with other active agents or placebo.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two investigators identified studies and independently abstracted data. Frequentist network meta-analyses were performed; relative ranking of agents was conducted using P-score probabilities. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria. Data were analyzed in October 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The time to alleviation of influenza symptoms (TTAS), complications of influenza, and adverse events (total adverse events, nausea, and vomiting).

RESULTS

A total of 26 trials were identified that investigated antiviral drugs at high or low doses; these trials included 11 897 participants, among whom 6294 (52.9%) were men and the mean (SD) age was 32.5 (16.9) years. Of all treatments comparing with placebo in efficacy outcomes, high-quality evidence indicated that zanamivir was associated with the shortest TTAS (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58-0.77), while baloxavir was associated with the lowest risk of influenza-related complications (risk ratio [RR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.32-0.80) based on moderate-quality evidence. In safety outcomes, baloxavir was associated with the lowest risk of total adverse events (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96) compared with placebo based on moderate-quality evidence. There was no strong evidence of associations with risk of nausea or vomiting among all comparisons, except for 75 mg oseltamivir, which was associated with greater occurrence of nausea (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.38-2.41) and vomiting (RR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.47-2.41).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, all 4 antiviral agents assessed were associated with shortening TTAS; zanamivir was associated with the shortest TTAS, and baloxavir was associated with reduced rate of influenza-related complications.

Neuraminidase inhibitors and single dose baloxavir are effective and safe in uncomplicated influenza: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Scarce evidence verifying the clinical impact of baloxavir on influenza complications is found.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched through December 2020. Randomized-controlled trials (RCT) that enrolled patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza receiving neuraminidase inhibitors (NAI) or baloxavir comparing to placebo were assessed. PROSPERO Registration-number: CRD42021226854.

RESULTS

Twenty-one RCTs (11,697 patients) were included. Antiviral administration significantly reduced time to clinical resolution (mean difference: -21.3 hours) and total influenza-related complications (OR:0.55, 95%CI: 0.42-0.73). Specifically, antivirals significantly decreased bronchitis (OR:0.54, 95%CI: 0.38-0.75), sinusitis (OR:0.51, 95%CI: 0.33-0.78), acute otitis media (OR:0.48, 95%CI: 0.30-0.77), and antibiotic prescription (OR:0.62; 95%CI: 0.48-0.80). A positive trend favored antivirals administration to reduce pneumonia (OR:0.47, 95%CI: 0.16-1.33), or hospitalization rates (OR:0.65; 95%CI: 0.34-1.24) compared to placebo, but did not reach statistical significance. Adverse events (AE) were reported in 11%, 8.9%, and 5.1% of NAIs, placebo and baloxavir recipients, respectively. Compared with NAIs, administration of baloxavir showed non-significantly reduced AEs (OR:0.74, 95%CI: 0.53-1.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose baloxavir and NAIs were superior to placebo to reduce complications in uncomplicated influenza, with 40% significant reduction in antibiotic prescription. Safety and efficacy of single-dose baloxavir were non-inferior to NAIs.

Neuraminidase inhibitors are effective and safe in reducing influenza complications: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There is scarce evidence verifying the impact of neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) in reducing influenza complications. The aim was to evaluate the available evidence from randomized-controlled trials (RCT) regarding the efficacy and safety of NAIs in reducing influenza complications.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was performed in the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Web of Science databases (2006-2019). Eligibility criteria were RCT that enrolled patients of any age or clinical severity with seasonal influenza (H₁N₁, H₃N_2, or B) or influenza-like syndrome and receiving NAIs comparing to placebo therapy.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCTs (9004 patients) were included: nine focused on oral oseltamivir, six on inhaled zanamivir, and three on intravenous peramivir. Administration of NAIs therapy significantly decreased the time to clinical resolution (median difference: -17.7 hours; and total influenza-related complications (OR: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.51-0.82). In addition, NAIs significantly decreased acute otitis media complication (OR: 0.50, 95%CI: 0.31-0.82) and need for antibiotic treatment (OR: 0.64, 95%CI: 0.46-0.90); and showed a trend towards a reduced occurrence of pneumonia (OR: 0.44, 95%CI: 0.10-2.00), bronchitis (OR: 0.80, 95%CI: 0.43-1.48), sinusitis (OR: 0.73, 95%CI: 0.40-1.32), asthma exacerbations (OR: 0.57, 95%CI: 0.28-1.16), and hospitalizations (OR: 0.57, 95%CI: 0.24-1.38). The overall proportion of AEs tend to increase with NAIs treatment (OR: 1.16, 95%CI: 0.92-1.47). Use of NAIs was associated with a significant increase of nausea and vomiting (OR: 1.61, 95%CI: 1.04-2.50) and a decrease on diarrhea (OR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.65-1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

NAIs are effective in reducing time to clinical resolution, total influenza-related complications, otitis media, and need of antibiotic administration. Reductions on mortality, pneumonia, asthma exacerbations or hospitalization rates only did demonstrate a trend benefit in favor of NAIs. The only significant AE is the increased occurrence of nausea and vomiting.

[A network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of baloxavir marboxil versus neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment of influenza in otherwise healthy patients]

AIM

Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is the first cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor being studied for the treatment of influenza in single oral dosing regimen. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the efficacy and safety of baloxavir compared to other antivirals for influenza in otherwise healthy patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed on 14 November 2016 in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and ICHUSHI to identify randomized controlled trials assessing antivirals for influenza. A NMA including 22 trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of baloxavir with other antivirals.

RESULTS

The time to alleviation of all symptoms was significantly shorter for baloxavir compared to zanamivir (difference in median time 19.96 h; 95% CrI [3.23, 39.07]). The time to cessation of viral shedding was significantly shorter for baloxavir than zanamivir and oseltamivir (47.00 h; 95% CrI [28.18, 73.86] and 56.03 h [33.74, 87.86], respectively). The mean decline in virus titer from baseline to 24 h was significantly greater for baloxavir than for the other drugs. Other differences in efficacy outcomes were not significant. No significant differences were found between baloxavir and the other antivirals for safety, except total drug-related adverse events where baloxavir demonstrated a decrease compared to oseltamivir and laninamivir.

CONCLUSION

The NMA suggests that baloxavir demonstrated better or similar efficacy results compared to other antivirals with a comparable safety profile. Baloxavir led to a significant decrease in viral titer versus zanamivir, oseltamivir and peramivir and decreased viral shedding versus zanamivir and oseltamivir.

A network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of baloxavir marboxil versus neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment of influenza in otherwise healthy patients

Objective: Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is the first cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor being studied for the treatment of influenza in single oral dosing regimen. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the efficacy and safety of baloxavir compared to other antivirals for influenza in otherwise healthy patients. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on 14 November 2016 in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and ICHUSHI to identify randomized controlled trials assessing antivirals for influenza. A NMA including 22 trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of baloxavir with other antivirals. Results: The time to alleviation of all symptoms was significantly shorter for baloxavir compared to zanamivir (difference in median time 19.96 h; 95% CrI [3.23, 39.07]). The time to cessation of viral shedding was significantly shorter for baloxavir than zanamivir and oseltamivir (47.00 h; 95% CrI [28.18, 73.86] and 56.03 h [33.74, 87.86], respectively). The mean decline in virus titer from baseline to 24 h was significantly greater for baloxavir than for the other drugs. Other differences in efficacy outcomes were not significant. No significant differences were found between baloxavir and the other antivirals for safety, except total drug-related adverse events where baloxavir demonstrated a decrease compared to oseltamivir and laninamivir. Conclusions: The NMA suggests that baloxavir demonstrated better or similar efficacy results compared to other antivirals with a comparable safety profile. Baloxavir led to a significant decrease in viral titer versus zanamivir, oseltamivir and peramivir and decreased viral shedding versus zanamivir and oseltamivir.

Sequential influenza B viral load and susceptibility in children treated with oseltamivir and zanamivir

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to estimate the efficacy of the neuraminidase (NA) inhibitors (NAIs) oseltamivir and zanamivir for decreasing viral load and to investigate whether NAI treatment decreases viral susceptibility to NAIs over time in children with influenza B virus infection.

METHODS

Of 27 patients with influenza B virus infection, 8 and 9 were treated with oseltamivir and zanamivir, respectively, whereas 10 received no NAI. Nasal aspiration samples, collected every morning until negative antigen results in 2 consecutive samples were observed, were subjected to viral load measurements by quantitative real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and viral susceptibility to NAI by NA inhibition assays.

RESULTS

Viral load decreased in both the oseltamivir and zanamivir groups by day 2 but increased in the no-NAI treatment group. Viral load in the oseltamivir and zanamivir groups on day 5 was 2.6% and 9.2% of that on day 0, respectively, whereas it was 26.4% in the no-NAI treatment group. Mean 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) values of oseltamivir and zanamivir in the no-NAI treatment group were 5.0-6.6 and 1.3-1.8 nM, respectively. Mean IC50 values of oseltamivir and zanamivir in patients treated with oseltamivir and zanamivir were 3.9-8.8 and 1.3-1.8 nM, respectively. No major decrease in viral susceptibility to NAIs was observed during or after NAI treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

NAI treatment was effective for inhibiting viral replication during the early days of illness and did not decrease viral susceptibility to NAIs in patients with influenza B virus infection.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of intravenous zanamivir treatment in hospitalized adults with influenza: an open-label, multicenter, single-arm, phase II study

Background. Intravenous zanamivir is a neuraminidase inhibitor suitable for treatment of hospitalized patients with severe influenza.

Methods. Patients were treated with intravenous zanamivir 600 mg twice daily, adjusted for renal impairment, for up to 10 days. Primary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), and clinical/laboratory parameters. Pharmacokinetics, viral load, and disease course were also assessed.

Results. One hundred thirty patients received intravenous zanamivir (median, 5 days; range, 1–11) a median of 4.5 days (range, 1–7) after onset of influenza; 83% required intensive care. The most common influenza type/subtype was A/H1N1pdm09 (71%). AEs and serious AEs were reported in 85% and 34% of patients, respectively; serious AEs included bacterial pulmonary infections (8%), respiratory failure (7%), sepsis or septic shock (5%), and cardiogenic shock (5%). No drug-related trends in safety parameters were identified. Protocol-defined liver events were observed in 13% of patients. The 14- and 28-day all-cause mortality rates were 13% and 17%. No fatalities were considered zanamivir related. Pharmacokinetic data showed dose adjustments for renal impairment yielded similar zanamivir exposures. Ninety-three patients, positive at baseline for influenza by quantitative polymerase chain reaction, showed a median decrease in viral load of 1.42 log₁₀ copies/mL after 2 days of treatment.

Conclusions. Safety, pharmacokinetic and clinical outcome data support further investigation of intravenous zanamivir.

Clinical Trials Registration NCT01014988.

The value of neuraminidase inhibitors for the prevention and treatment of seasonal influenza: a systematic review of systematic reviews

Controversy has arisen regarding the effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs), especially against influenza-related complications. A literature search was performed to critically assess the evidence collected by the available systematic reviews (SRs) regarding the benefits and disadvantages of NIs (oseltamivir, zanamivir) compared to placebos in healthy and at-risk individuals of all ages for prophylaxis and treatment of seasonal influenza. A SR was done using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Technology Assessment Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Medline (January 2006-July 2012). Two reviewers selected SRs based on randomized clinical trials, which were restricted to intention-to-treat results, and they assessed review (AMSTAR) and study quality indicators (GRADE). The SRs included (N = 9) were of high quality. The efficacy of NIs in prophylaxis ranged from 64% (16-85) to 92% (37-99); the absolute risk reduction ranged from 1.2% to 12.1% (GRADE moderate to low). Clinically relevant treatment benefits of NIs were small in healthy adults and children suffering from influenza-like illness (GRADE high to moderate). Oseltamivir reduced antibiotic usage in healthy adults according to one SR, but this was not confirmed by other reviews (GRADE low). Zanamivir showed a preventive effect on antibiotic usage in children (95% (77-99);GRADE moderate) and on the occurrence of bronchitis in at-risk individuals (59% (30-76);GRADE moderate). No evidence was available on the treatment benefits of NIs in elderly and at-risk groups and their effects on hospitalization and mortality. In oseltamivir trials, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea were significant side-effects. For zanamivir trials, no adverse effects have been reported. The combination of diagnostic uncertainty, the risk for virus strain resistance, possible side effects and financial cost outweigh the small benefits of oseltamivir or zanamivir for the prophylaxis and treatment of healthy individuals. No relevant benefits of these NIs on complications in at-risk individuals have been established.

A phase II study of DAS181, a novel host directed antiviral for the treatment of influenza infection

BACKGROUND

DAS181, a novel host-directed antiviral in development for influenza treatment, was assessed in this phase II clinical trial.

METHODS

This study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II clinical trial assessing influenza viral load and patient safety in otherwise healthy influenza-infected participants. Participants were randomized to a single-dose, multiple-dose, or placebo group and were followed for safety and virologic outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 177 laboratory-confirmed influenza-infected participants were enrolled in the trial, which encompassed 3 influenza seasons from 2009-2011 in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Thirty-seven percent of participants had confirmed infection with influenza B, 33% with seasonal H3N2, 29% with pandemic 2009 H1N1, and 1 participant was positive for both influenza B and pandemic 2009 H1N1. Significant effects were observed in regard to decreased change from baseline viral load and viral shedding in the multiple-dose group compared with placebo as measured by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (P < .05). No instances of H274Y were observed among viral isolates from this trial. Overall, the drug was generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

DAS181 significantly reduced viral load in participants infected with influenza, thus warranting future clinical development of this novel host-directed therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01037205.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children

BACKGROUND

Planning for outbreaks of influenza is a high priority public health issue for national governments. Neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs) are thought to help reduce the symptoms of influenza with several possible mechanisms proposed. NIs have been stockpiled with a view to their widespread use in the event of a pandemic. However, the evidence base for this class of agents remains a source of debate. In a previous review we have documented substantial risks of publication bias of trials of NIs for influenza (60% of patient data from phase III treatment trials of oseltamivir have never been published) and reporting bias in the published trials. Our confidence in the conclusions of previous versions of this review has been subsequently undermined. Since we have become aware of a large number of unpublished trials of NIs in the management of influenza, this review updates and merges existing reviews in this area.

OBJECTIVES

To review clinical study reports of placebo-controlled randomised trials, regulatory comments and reviews ('regulatory information') of the effects of the NIs oseltamivir and zanamivir for influenza in all age groups and appraise trial programmes, rather than single studies.Clinical study reports are very detailed, unpublished clinical trial data containing in-depth descriptions of protocol rationale, methods analysis plans, trial results and organisational documents (such as contracts). A series of clinical studies designed and conducted by one sponsor represents a trial programme of a drug indication (for example treatment of influenza).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched trial registries, cross-referencing published and unpublished sources and corresponded with manufacturers and regulators. We searched the archives of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European and Japanese regulators. The evidence in this review reflects searches to obtain relevant information up to 12 April 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included regulatory information based on assessments of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in people of any age who had either confirmed or suspected influenza, or who had been exposed to influenza in the local community or place of residence. We included information which had been made available by our deadline.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We indexed regulatory information in two purpose-built instruments and reconstructed trials using CONSORT statement-based templates. To progress to Stage 2 (full analysis) we sought manufacturer explanations of discrepancies in the data. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) offered us individual patient data and responded to our queries, but Roche did not provide us with complete clinical study reports. In Stage 2 we intended to analyse trials with validated data (i.e. assuming our validation questions aimed at clarifying omissions and discrepancies were resolved). No studies progressed to Stage 2. We carried out analyses of the effects of oseltamivir on time to first alleviation of symptoms and hospitalisations using the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and tested five hypotheses generated post-protocol publication.

MAIN RESULTS

We included and analysed data from 25 studies (15 oseltamivir and 10 zanamivir studies). We could not use data from a further 42 studies due to insufficient information or unresolved discrepancies in their data. The included trials were predominantly conducted in adults during influenza seasons in both hemispheres. A small number of studies were conducted in older people residing in care homes and in people with underlying respiratory diseases. The studies had adequate randomisation and blinding procedures, but imbalances in the analysis populations available (ITT influenza-infected) left many of the studies at risk of attrition bias. All the studies were sponsored by manufacturers of NIs. Time to first alleviation of symptoms in people with influenza-like illness symptoms (i.e. ITT population) was a median of 160 hours (range 125 to 192 hours) in the placebo groups and oseltamivir shortened this by around 21 hours (95% confidence interval (CI) -29.5 to -12.9 hours, P < 0.001; five studies) but there was no evidence of effect on hospitalisations based on seven studies with a median placebo group event rate of 0.84% (range 0% to 11%): odds ratio (OR) 0.95; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.61, P = 0.86). These results are based on the comprehensive ITT population data and are unlikely to be biased. A post-protocol analysis showed that participants randomised to oseltamivir in treatment trials had a reduced odds being diagnosed with influenza (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.94, P = 0.003; eight studies), probably due to an altered antibody response. Zanamivir trials showed no evidence of this. Due to limitations in the design, conduct and reporting of the trial programme, the data available to us lacked sufficient detail to credibly assess a possible effect of oseltamivir on complications and viral transmission. We postponed analysis of zanamivir evidence because of the offer of individual patient data (IPD) from its manufacturer. The authors have been unable to obtain the full set of clinical study reports or obtain verification of data from the manufacturer of oseltamivir (Roche) despite five requests between June 2010 and February 2011. No substantial comments were made by Roche on the protocol of our Cochrane Review which has been publicly available since December 2010.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found a high risk of publication and reporting biases in the trial programme of oseltamivir. Sub-population analyses of the influenza infected population in the oseltamivir trial programme are not possible because the two arms are non-comparable due to oseltamivir's apparent interference with antibody production. The evidence supports a direct oseltamivir mechanism of action on symptoms but we are unable to draw conclusions about its effect on complications or transmission. We expect full clinical study reports containing study protocol, reporting analysis plan, statistical analysis plan and individual patient data to clarify outstanding issues. These full clinical study reports are at present unavailable to us.

Influenza vaccination, diagnosis, and treatment in children

Between 2009 and 2010, the influenza H1N1 pandemic swept across the globe, disproportionately affecting the pediatric population. This pandemic strain is expected to circulate again with other seasonal influenza strains during the 2010-2011 season. This article reviews the new 2010 to 2011 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for vaccination against the influenza virus for pediatric patients. It reviews the various testing modalities and the benefits and disadvantage of each test and offers an approach to diagnostic testing. Lastly, it reviews the indications and recommendations for treatment of children with presumed or confirmed influenza infection.

Virus detection and duration of illness among patients with 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in Texas

Knowledge from early outbreaks is limited regarding the virus detection and illness duration of the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) infections. During the period from April to May 2009 in Texas, we collected serial nasopharyngeal (NP) and stool specimens from 35 participants, testing by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and culture. The participants were aged 2 months to 71 years; 25 (71%) were under 18. The median duration of measured fever was 3.0 days and of virus detection in NP specimens was 4.2 days; however, few specimens were collected between days 5-9. The duration of virus detection (4.2 days) was similar to the duration of fever (3.5 days) (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, .66-1.95; P = .8), but was shorter than the duration of cough (11.0 days) (RR, .41; 95% CI, .24-.68; P < .001). We detected viral RNA in two participants' stools. All cultures were negative. This investigation suggests that the duration of virus detection was likely similar to the seasonal influenza virus.

Efficacy of oseltamivir-zanamivir combination compared to each monotherapy for seasonal influenza: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Neuraminidase inhibitors are thought to be efficacious in reducing the time to alleviation of symptoms in outpatients with seasonal influenza. The objective of this study was to compare the short-term virological efficacy of oseltamivir-zanamivir combination versus each monotherapy plus placebo.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled trial with 145 general practitioners throughout France during the 2008-2009 seasonal influenza epidemic. Patients, general practitioners, and outcome assessors were all blinded to treatment assignment. Adult outpatients presenting influenza-like illness for less than 36 hours and a positive influenza A rapid test diagnosis were randomized to oseltamivir 75 mg orally twice daily plus zanamivir 10 mg by inhalation twice daily (OZ), oseltamivir plus inhaled placebo (O), or zanamivir plus oral placebo (Z). Treatment efficacy was assessed virologically according to the proportion of patients with nasal influenza reverse transcription (RT)-PCR below 200 copies genome equivalent (cgeq)/µl at day 2 (primary outcome), and clinically to the time to alleviation of symptoms until day 14. Overall 541 patients (of the 900 planned) were included (OZ,  =192; O, n=176; Z, n=173), 49% male, mean age 39 years. In the intention-to-treat analysis conducted in the 447 patients with RT-PCR-confirmed influenza A, 46%, 59%, and 34% in OZ (n=157), O (n=141), and Z (n=149) arms had RT-PCR<200 cgeq/µl (-13.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -23.1 to -2.9, p=0.025; +12.3%, 95% CI 2.39-22.2, p=0.028 for OZ/O and OZ/Z comparisons). Mean day 0 to day 2 viral load decrease was 2.14, 2.49, and 1.68 log(10) cgeq/µl (p=0.060, p=0.016 for OZ/O and OZ/Z). Median time to alleviation of symptoms was 4.0, 3.0, and 4.0 days (+1.0, 95% CI 0.0-4.0, p=0.018; +0.0, 95% CI -3.0 to 3.0, p=0.960 for OZ/O and OZ/Z). Four severe adverse events were observed. Nausea and/or vomiting tended to be more frequent in the combination arm (OZ, n=13; O, n=4; and Z, n=5 patients, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with seasonal influenza A mainly H3N2 virus infection, the oseltamivir-zanamivir combination appeared less effective than oseltamivir monotherapy, and not significantly more effective than zanamivir monotherapy. Despite the theoretical potential for the reduction of the emergence of antiviral resistance, the lower effectiveness of this combination calls for caution in its use in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.ClinicalTrials.govNCT00799760.

Methodological considerations for future controlled influenza treatment trials in complementary and alternative medicine

BACKGROUND

The continuous threat of influenza pandemic, as well as the ongoing costs to human life and health care systems from yearly epidemics, create a continual need for progress in this area of public health. The diversity of available complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatment options are well known to the CAM profession, but poorly understood and accepted in mainstream medicine. This situation comes as no surprise given conventional medicine's reliance on repeated, large-scale randomized controlled trials of standardized design to support evidence-based clinical use of influenza antiviral drugs. The relatively low volume of well-conducted clinical trials on the treatment of influenza with CAM therapies compared to the high availability of conventional antiviral drug trials magnifies this problem.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to provide structured guidelines for future CAM influenza studies based on a thorough review of consistent and standard design elements present in the controlled-trial design of conventional antiviral influenza therapies.

RESULTS

A selection of high-quality, influenza antiviral controlled trials from the published literature is reviewed, and important design elements are extracted and summarized to show both the consistency and the flexibility within study design elements.

CONCLUSIONS

The standardized elements from influenza antiviral trials can be considered and mirrored in future CAM studies. In this way, CAM therapies might be looked at on similar grounds as conventional medicines in terms of potential usefulness and benefit in the treatment of influenza.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are recommended for use against influenza and its complications in inter-pandemic years and during pandemics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NIs in preventing and treating influenza, its transmission, and its complications in otherwise healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1950 to August 2009) and EMBASE (1980 to August 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised placebo-controlled trials of NIs in healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We structured the comparisons into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four prophylaxis, 12 treatment and four post-exposure prophylaxis trials. In prophylaxis compared to placebo, NIs had no effect against influenza-like illnesses (ILI) (risk ratio (RR) ranging from 1.28 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily to 0.76 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic influenza was 76% (at 75 mg daily), and 73% (at 150 mg daily). Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily performed similarly. Neither NI had a significant effect on asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio (OR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.93). Oseltamivir for post-exposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% and 84% in two trials for households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of symptoms were in favour of the treated group 1.20 (1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Because of the exclusion of a review of mainly unpublished trials of oseltamivir, insufficient evidence remained to reach a conclusion on the prevention of complications requiring antibiotics in influenza cases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37). Analysis of the US FDA and Japan's PMDA regulators' pharmacovigilance dataset, revealed incomplete reporting and description of harms preventing us from reaching firm conclusions on the central nervous system toxicity of neuraminidase inhibitors.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Numerous inconsistencies detected in the available evidence, followed by an inability to adequately access the data, has undermined confidence in our previous conclusions for oseltamivir. Independent RCTs to resolve these uncertainties are needed.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To update a 2005 Cochrane review that assessed the effects of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing or ameliorating the symptoms of influenza, the transmission of influenza, and complications from influenza in healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects. Search strategy An updated search of the Cochrane central register of controlled trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's specialised register, Medline (1950-Aug 2009), Embase (1980-Aug 2009), and post-marketing pharmacovigilance data and comparative safety cohorts. Selection criteria Randomised placebo controlled studies of neuraminidase inhibitors in otherwise healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Duration and incidence of symptoms; incidence of lower respiratory tract infections, or their proxies; and adverse events.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Data analysis Comparisons were structured into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

RESULTS

20 trials were included: four on prophylaxis, 12 on treatment, and four on postexposure prophylaxis. For prophylaxis, neuraminidase inhibitors had no effect against influenza-like illness or asymptomatic influenza. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic laboratory confirmed influenza was 61% (risk ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.85) at 75 mg daily and 73% (0.27, 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily was 62% efficacious (0.38, 0.17 to 0.85). Oseltamivir for postexposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% (95% confidence interval 15% to 79%) and 84% (49% to 95%) in two trials of households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza-like illness symptoms were in favour of treatment: 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Eight unpublished studies on complications were ineligible and therefore excluded. The remaining evidence suggests oseltamivir did not reduce influenza related lower respiratory tract complications (risk ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 1.35). From trial evidence, oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 2.93). Evidence of rarer adverse events from pharmacovigilance was of poor quality or possibly under-reported.

CONCLUSION

Neuraminidase inhibitors have modest effectiveness against the symptoms of influenza in otherwise healthy adults. The drugs are effective postexposure against laboratory confirmed influenza, but this is a small component of influenza-like illness, so for this outcome neuraminidase inhibitors are not effective. Neuraminidase inhibitors might be regarded as optional for reducing the symptoms of seasonal influenza. Paucity of good data has undermined previous findings for oseltamivir's prevention of complications from influenza. Independent randomised trials to resolve these uncertainties are needed.

Prescription of anti-influenza drugs for healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In publicly funded health systems with finite resources, management decisions are based on assessments of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. The UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence commissioned a systematic review to inform their 2009 update to guidance on the use of antiviral drugs for the treatment of influenza. We searched databases for studies of the use of neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment of seasonal influenza. We present the results for healthy adults (ie, adults without known comorbidities) and people at-risk of influenza-related complications. There was an overall reduction in the median time to symptom alleviation in healthy adults by 0.57 days (95% CI -1.07 to -0.08; p=0.02; 2701 individuals) with zanamivir, and 0.55 days (95% CI -0.96 to -0.14; p=0.008; 1410 individuals) with oseltamivir. In those at risk, the median time to symptom alleviation was reduced by 0.98 days (95% CI -1.84 to -0.11; p=0.03; 1252 individuals) with zanamivir, and 0.74 days (95% CI -1.51 to 0.02; p=0.06; 1472 individuals) with oseltamivir. Little information was available on the incidence of complications. In view of the advantages and disadvantages of different management strategies for controlling seasonal influenza in healthy adults recommending the use of antiviral drugs for the treatment of people presenting with symptoms is unlikely to be the most appropriate course of action.

Determination of zanamivir in rat and monkey plasma by positive ion hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC)/tandem mass spectrometry

A hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC)/mass spectrometric assay was developed for the determination of zanamivir, a neuraminidase inhibitor used to treat influenza, in rat and monkey plasma. An organic solvent with hydrophilic properties, methanol, was used to precipitate proteins in plasma to assure the highly polar zanamivir of staying in solution. Chromatographic separation was obtained using a HILIC silica column with multiple reaction monitoring turboionspray positive ion detection. The stable label of zanamivir, [(13)C(1)(15)N(2)] GR121167C, was used as the internal standard. The assay was validated for the determination of zanamivir in rat and monkey plasma. The lower and upper limits of quantitation were 2 and 10000 ng/mL, using 0.05 mL plasma aliquot, respectively. The signal to noise ratio of a typical 2 ng/mL was approximately 5:1. The inter-day precision (relative standard deviation) and accuracy (relative error) in rat plasma, derived from the analysis of validation samples at 5 concentrations, ranged from 6 to 10% and -6.5 to 0.2%, respectively. The inter-day precision (relative standard deviation) and accuracy (relative error) in monkey plasma, derived from the analysis of validation samples at five concentrations, ranged from 2 to 8% and -2.3 to 2.1%, respectively. Zanamivir was found to be stable for at least 5 days at approximately -80 degrees C and at room temperature in plasma. This assay incorporates a simple protein precipitation with methanol and hydrophilic interaction chromatography which is sensitive, accurate, precise, and is being used to support oral formulation and toxicokinetic studies in rat and monkey, respectively.

WHO Rapid Advice Guidelines for pharmacological management of sporadic human infection with avian influenza A (H5N1) virus

Recent spread of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus to poultry and wild birds has increased the threat of human infections with H5N1 virus worldwide. Despite international agreement to stockpile antivirals, evidence-based guidelines for their use do not exist. WHO assembled an international multidisciplinary panel to develop rapid advice for the pharmacological management of human H5N1 virus infection in the current pandemic alert period. A transparent methodological guideline process on the basis of the Grading Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to develop evidence-based guidelines. Our development of specific recommendations for treatment and chemoprophylaxis of sporadic H5N1 infection resulted from the benefits, harms, burden, and cost of interventions in several patient and exposure groups. Overall, the quality of the underlying evidence for all recommendations was rated as very low because it was based on small case series of H5N1 patients, on extrapolation from preclinical studies, and high quality studies of seasonal influenza. A strong recommendation to treat H5N1 patients with oseltamivir was made in part because of the severity of the disease. Similarly, strong recommendations were made to use neuraminidase inhibitors as chemoprophylaxis in high-risk exposure populations. Emergence of other novel influenza A viral subtypes with pandemic potential, or changes in the pathogenicity of H5N1 virus strains, will require an update of these guidelines and WHO will be monitoring this closely.

The fight against new types of influenza virus

In 1997, during an outbreak in chickens in Hong Kong the avian H5N1 influenza virus crossed the species barrier and infected 18 people, of which 6 cases were fatal. The virus also infected wild birds and continued to circulate and mutate in geese and ducks in southeastern China. Since this occurrence, new antigenic variants that are highly pathogenic for humans as well as wild, domestic, and exotic waterfowl continue to appear in Hong Kong. This virus is spreading across Asia, and is encroaching upon Europe and other continents. Wild birds are now considered as the main reservoir of H5N1 virus. Humans become infected with this H5N1 virus usually via close contact with infected birds or a highly contaminated environment. The very low transmissibility of this virus prevented further person-to-person dissemination in spite of the complete absence of immunity in the human population to H5N1 viruses. Viruses of the H5N1 subtype are characterized by an exceptionally high pathogenicity for humans. The cause of the viral virulence is not known so far; however, several virulence factors are considered. The unprecedented capability of H5N1 viruses to kill humans intensifies the concern about its pandemic potential with catastrophic consequences. The effectiveness of existing antivirals as well as vaccines for humans and birds are reviewed.

Safety of neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza

Neuraminidase inhibitors, oseltamivir and zanamivir, are used for the treatment of, and protection from, influenza. The safety of these compounds has been assessed in systematic reviews. However, the data presented are somewhat limited by the paucity of good quality adverse event data available. The majority of safety outcomes are based on evidence from just one or two randomised controlled trials. The results of the systematic reviews suggest that neuraminidase inhibitors have a reasonable side effect and adverse effect profile if they are to be used to treat or protect patients against a life-threatening disease. However, if these compounds are to be prescribed in situations in which avoidance of inconvenience or minor discomfort is hoped for, then the balance of harms to benefits will be more difficult to judge.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are recommended for use against influenza and its complications in interpandemic years and in a pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NIs in preventing or ameliorating influenza, its transmission and its complications in healthy adults and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (2004 to September, Week 4 2005), EMBASE (2003 to June 2005) and contacted manufacturers, researchers in the field, and authors of studies evaluated in the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised placebo-controlled studies of NIs in healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We structured the comparisons into prophylaxis, treatment and adverse events with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four prophylaxis, 13 treatment and four post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) trials. In prophylaxis compared to placebo, NIs have no effect against influenza-like illnesses (ILI) (relative risk (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 3.66 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily; RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.95 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). The efficacy of oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily against symptomatic influenza is 61% (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85), or 73% (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily is 62% efficacious (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.85). Neither NI has a significant effect on asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induces nausea (odds ratio (OR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.93). Oseltamivir for PEP has an efficacy of 58.5% (15.6% to 79.6) for households and of 68% (34.9 to 84.2%) to 89% in contacts of index cases. Zanamivir has similar performance. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza symptoms were in favour of the treated group 1.33 (1.29 to 1.37) for zanamivir and 1.30 (1.13 to 1.50) for oseltamivir. Viral nasal titres were significantly diminished by both NIs. Oseltamivir 150 mg daily prevented lower respiratory tract complications (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.57). We could find no comparative data on the effects of oseltamivir on avian influenza.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of their low effectiveness, NIs should not be used in routine seasonal influenza control. In a serious epidemic or pandemic, NIs should be used with other public health measures. We are unsure of the generalisability of our conclusions from seasonal to pandemic or avian influenza.

Antivirals for influenza in healthy adults: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Use of antivirals is recommended for the control of seasonal and pandemic influenza. Our aim was to review the evidence of efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of registered antivirals against naturally occurring influenza in healthy adults.

METHODS

We searched various Databases to October, 2005, and contacted manufacturers and corresponding authors. We included randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic (n=27) or treatment (n=27) efficacy against symptomatic or asymptomatic influenza. We did a meta-analysis and expressed prophylactic efficacy as a proportion (1-relative risk [RR]). For treatment trials, because of inconsistent and non-standardised reporting, we expressed continuous outcomes either as means or as hazard ratios.

FINDINGS

We included 51 reports of 52 randomised controlled trials. Amantadine prevented 61% (95% CI 35-76) of influenza A cases and 25% (13-36) of cases of influenza-like illness, but caused nausea (OR 2.56, 1.37-4.79), insomnia and hallucinations (2.54, 1.50-4.31), and withdrawals because of adverse events (2.54, 1.60-4.06). There was no effect on asymptomatic cases (RR 0.85, 0.40-1.80). In treatment, amantadine significantly shortened duration of fever compared with placebo (by 0.99 days, -1.26 to -0.71), but had no effect on nasal shedding of influenza A viruses (0.93, 0.71-1.21). The fewer data for rimantadine showed comparable effects. In prophylaxis, compared with placebo, neuraminidase inhibitors have no effect against influenza-like illness (1.28, 0.45-3.66 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily, 1.51, 0.77-2.95 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). Higher doses appear to make no difference. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily against symptomatic influenza is 61% (15-82), or 73% (33-89) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily is 62% efficacious (15-83). Neither neuraminidase inhibitor appeared effective against asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induces nausea (OR 1.79, 1.10-2.93), especially at higher prophylactic doses (2.29, 1.34-3.92). Oseltamivir in a post-exposure prophylaxis role has a protective efficacy of 58.5% (15.6-79.6) for households and from 68% (34.9-84.2) to 89% (67-97) in contacts of index cases. In influenza cases, compared with placebo the hazard ratios for time to alleviation of symptoms were 1.33, 1.29-1.37 for zanamivir; 1.30, 1.13-1.50 for oseltamivir provided medication was started within 48 h of symptom onset. Viral nasal titres were significantly diminished by both drugs (weighted mean difference -0.62, -0.82 to -0.41). Oseltamivir at 150 mg daily was effective in preventing lower respiratory tract complications in influenza cases (OR 0.32, 0.18-0.57). We could find no credible data on the effects of oseltamivir on avian influenza.

INTERPRETATION

The use of amantadine and rimantadine should be discouraged. Because of their low effectiveness, neuraminidase inhibitors should not be used in seasonal influenza control and should only be used in a serious epidemic or pandemic alongside other public-health measures.

Viral shedding in children with influenza virus infections treated with neuraminidase inhibitors

We examined the efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors for reducing the duration of virus shedding after naturally occurring influenza virus infection. The duration of fever was significantly shorter in patients treated with neuraminidase inhibitors than in untreated patients. The durations of virus shedding from patients treated with neuraminidase inhibitors were not significantly shorter than those of untreated patients.

Management of influenza virus infections with neuraminidase inhibitors: detection, incidence, and implications of drug resistance

Although influenza vaccination remains the primary method for the prevention of influenza, efficacy may be limited by a poor match between the vaccine and circulating strains and the poor response of elderly patients. Hence, there is an important role for antiviral therapy in the management of influenza. While amantadine and rimantadine have been available for the treatment of influenza in some countries for several years, they are only effective against influenza A viruses, they can have neurological and gastrointestinal adverse effects, and resistant virus is rapidly generated. Neuraminidase inhibitors, a new class of drug, are potent and specific inhibitors of all strains of influenza virus, and they have minimal adverse effects. The greatest benefit is seen in those patients presenting <30 hours after development of influenza symptoms, those with severe symptoms or those in high-risk groups. In addition to treatment of the infection, both drugs are effective prophylactically and have been shown to limit spread of infection in close communities, such as families and in nursing homes. No resistant virus strains have been isolated from normal individuals treated with zanamivir. Resistant virus can be isolated from approximately 1% of adults and 5% of paediatric patients with influenza treated with oseltamivir. However, infectivity of mutant viruses is generally compromised. Governments spend millions of dollars on influenza vaccination campaigns; however, once influenza virus is circulating in the community, vaccination cannot limit the spread of disease. A greater promotion of the use of neuraminidase inhibitors for the treatment and prevention of influenza could have a significant impact on limiting its spread. This could result in saving millions of dollars, not only in direct costs associated with medical and hospital care, but also significant savings in indirect costs associated with the loss of productivity at work, school and home environments. For the benefit of all communities, there needs to be a greater awareness of the symptoms of influenza and the efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors in disease treatment.

Design and performance testing of quantitative real time PCR assays for influenza A and B viral load measurement

BACKGROUND

The antiviral effect of anti-influenza drugs such as zanamivir may be demonstrated in patients as an increased rate of decline in viral load over a time course of treatment as compared with placebo. Historically this was measured using plaque assays, or Culture Enhanced Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (CE-ELISA).

OBJECTIVES

to develop and characterise real time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays to measure influenza A and B viral load in clinical samples, that offer improvements over existing methods, in particular virus infectivity assays.

STUDY DESIGN

The dynamic range and robustness were established for the real time qPCR assays along with stability of the assay components. Cross validation of the real time PCR assays with CE-ELISA was performed by parallel testing of both serial dilutions of three different subtypes of cultured virus and a panel of influenza positive throat swab specimens.

RESULTS

the assays were specific for influenza A and B and the dynamic ranges were at least seven logs. The assay variability was within acceptable limits but increased towards the lower limit of quantification, which was 3.33 log(10) viral cDNA copies/ml of virus transport medium (ten viral RNA copies/PCR). The components of the assay were robust enough to withstand extended storage and several freeze-thaw cycles. For the real time PCR assays the limit of quantification was equivalent to the virus infectivity cut off, which equates to a 93-fold increase in sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

Well characterised real time PCR assays offer significant improvements over the existing methods for measuring the viral load of strains of influenza A and B in clinical specimens.

Emerging genetic technologies in clinical and research settings

With the rapid expansion of genomic health care, nurses are exposed to emerging genetic technologies in a wide variety of clinical and research settings; however, nurses have limited knowledge about these technologies. The polymerase chain reaction procedure, which is the foundation of current molecular genetic technologies, real-time polymerase chain reaction, and microarray analysis are described in this article. The applications, strengths, and limitations of each technology are discussed.