Increased symptom severity but unchanged neuraminidase inhibitor effectiveness for A(H1N1)pdm09 in the 2010-2011 season: comparison with the previous season and with seasonal A(H3N2) and B

Clinical characteristics and severity of influenza infections by virus type, subtype, and lineage: A systematic literature review

Aim

Studies carried out in the early 2000s found that the number of influenza‐associated hospitalizations and deaths was highest in seasons dominated by A(H3N2), suggesting that the clinical presentation and severity of influenza may differ across virus types, subtypes, and lineages. We aimed to review the studies that examined this hypothesis.

Method

We conducted a literature review of studies published until January 2017 that compared the clinical presentation, disease severity, and case‐fatality ratio of influenza patients infected with different virus types (A, B), subtypes (pre‐pandemic A(H1N1), A(H1N1)p, A(H3N2)), and lineages (Victoria, Yamagata).

Results

The literature search resulted in over 1700 entries: After applying in‐ and exclusion criteria, 47 studies were included in the literature review. Studies showed a wide diversity in setting and populations. Only a minority of studies provided results adjusted by patient's age and other potential confounders. There were very few differences in the clinical presentation of patients infected with different influenza viruses. We found weak evidence that the A(H1N1)p subtype in the post‐pandemic period was more often associated with secondary bacterial pneumonia, ICU admission, and death, than the other influenza virus (sub)types.

Conclusion

Contrary to what is commonly assumed, the causal virus subtype does not seem to be a major determinant of clinical presentation and severity of influenza illness. However, drawing conclusions was made difficult by the low comparability and methodological shortcomings of included studies, and more well‐designed studies are warranted.

A meta-analysis of laninamivir octanoate for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza

BACKGROUND

Laninamivir octanoate is a recently developed inhaled neuraminidase inhibitor for treating influenza virus infection. We performed meta-analyses to clarify the efficacy of laninamivir octanoate on influenza treatment and prevention.

METHODS

MEDLINE and CENTRAL were searched to identify eligible studies. The log median time to event ratios (logMRs) and log odds ratios (logORs) were combined with meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Nine studies in treatment settings and three studies in prophylaxis settings were eligible for this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between laninamivir octanoate and oseltamivir (8 studies, logMR 0.04, 95% CI [-0.05, 0.14]; P=0.36) or zanamivir (4 studies, logMR -0.01, 95% CI [-0.12, 0.11]; P=0.93) in alleviating fever. However, laninamivir octanoate was associated with significantly longer fever duration in treating H3N2 influenza as compared to oseltamivir (4 studies, logMR 0.29, 95% CI [0.00, 0.59]; P=0.047). Laninamivir octanoate was associated with significantly longer duration of fever as compared to peramivir (4 studies, logMR 0.46, 95% CI [0.14, 0.77]; P=0.004). Laninamivir octanoate significantly reduced the incidence of clinical influenza in post-exposure settings (3 studies, logOR -1.17, 95% CI [-1.72, -0.62]; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the efficacy of laninamivir octanoate in treating influenza was comparable to that of oseltamivir or zanamivir, but it should be noted that laninamivir octanoate was associated with significantly longer fever duration in treating influenza H3N2 as compared to oseltamivir and oseltamivir-resistant mutations in seasonal influenza H1N1 might have affected the results. Peramivir may be superior to laninamivir in treating influenza. Laninamivir octanoate is effective in preventing influenza in post-exposure settings as compared to placebo.

Outbreaks of influenza B infection and pneumococcal pneumonia at a mental health facility in Japan

BACKGROUND

Japan has an aging population and an increasing number of patients who reside in long-term care and mental health facilities. Both pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza B infection outbreaks have been observed in these populations, although no reports have described concurrent outbreaks of pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza B infection in these facilities.

CASE PRESENTATION

Six patients and two staffs were initially diagnosed with influenza B infection at a mental health facility on March 14, 2015. By March 21, influenza B infection was diagnosed in 26 patients and 10 staff; all individuals received anti-influenza drugs. On March 19, two patients were diagnosed with pneumococcal pneumonia, and seven patients had developed pneumococcal pneumonia by March 24. Six of these seven patients also had influenza B infection. All individuals who developed pneumococcal pneumonia were hospitalized and treated using ampicillin/sulbactam at our hospital, and their symptoms subsequently subsided. Among the seven pneumococcal strains that were frozen and stored, two strains were type 3 and five strains were type 11A/E. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis testing revealed that each of the serum types were from the same clone.

CONCLUSION

It appears that an outbreak of influenza B infection was followed by the spread of multi-clone pneumococcal pneumonia among elderly patients at a mental health facility. Therefore, it may be prudent to use vaccinations to prevent the spread of pneumococcal pneumonia among elderly patients and this diagnosis should be actively considered during outbreaks of influenza infection at elder care facilities.

Japanese Surveillance Systems and Treatment for Influenza

Influenza management and surveillance programs in Japan possess several unique features. The national influenza surveillance is affiliated with National Epidemiological Surveillance for Infectious Diseases (NESID) and features sentinel outpatient surveillance, virological surveillance, and reports on hospitalization, mortality, and influenza-associated encephalopathy. Of note, information on the number of student absences and class/grade/school closures due to influenza are also reported to the government and made publically available. A private online influenza surveillance portal by volunteer doctors provides a real-time information source for the Japanese clinicians and the general public. For influenza treatment, three classes of drugs are approved and covered by national medical insurance in Japan: M2 inhibitors, neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs), and a polymerase inhibitor. Four NAIs, oseltamivir, zanamivir, laninamivir, and peramivir, are licensed in Japan and are prescribed to seven to eight million patients annually. NAIs are prescribed to any influenza outpatient rather than being limited to severe cases. The majority (80-95 %) of patients start the treatment within 48 h of onset. Laninamivir and peramivir were used almost solely in Japan, until the approval of the latter drug by the FDA. Observational studies showed that the two drugs have equal effectiveness as oseltamivir and zanamivir. The Japanese approach to influenza surveillance and management has facilitated bringing new influenza antivirals to the markets and has driven innovative research in this field. New classes of antivirals, including polymerase inhibitors and cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor, provide novel tools for treatment of influenza in Japan and the rest of the world.

Epidemiology of influenza virus types and subtypes in South Africa, 2009-2012

Patient age and co-infections, but not disease severity, were associated with virus type and subtype.

To determine clinical and epidemiologic differences between influenza caused by different virus types and subtypes, we identified patients and tested specimens. Patients were children and adults hospitalized with confirmed influenza and severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) identified through active, prospective, hospital-based surveillance from 2009–2012 in South Africa. Respiratory specimens were tested, typed, and subtyped for influenza virus by PCR. Of 16,005 SARI patients tested, 1,239 (8%) were positive for influenza virus. Patient age and co-infections varied according to virus type and subtype, but disease severity did not. Case-patients with influenza B were more likely than patients with influenza A to be HIV infected. A higher proportion of case-patients infected during the first wave of the 2009 influenza pandemic were 5–24 years of age (19%) than were patients infected during the second wave (9%). Although clinical differences exist, treatment recommendations do not differ according to subtype; prevention through vaccination is recommended.

Patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed influenza during the 2010-2011 influenza season: exploring disease severity by virus type and subtype

BACKGROUND

 The 2010-2011 influenza season was dominated by influenza A(H3N2) virus, but influenza A(H1N1) pdm09 (pH1N1) and B viruses cocirculated. This provided an opportunity to explore within-season predictors of severity among hospitalized patients, avoiding biases associated with season-to-season differences in strain virulence, population immunity, and healthcare seeking.

METHODS

 Population-based, laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization surveillance data were used to examine the association between virus type/subtype and outcomes in children and adults. Multivariable analysis explored virus type/subtype, prompt antiviral treatment, medical conditions, and age as predictors for severity (intensive care unit admission or death).

RESULTS

 In children, pH1N1 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-4.3), chronic metabolic disease (aOR, 5.23; 95% CI, 1.74-15.69), and neuromuscular disorder (aOR, 4.84; 95% CI, 2.02-11.58) were independently associated with severity. In adults, independent predictors were pH1N1 (aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.66-2.94), chronic lung disease (aOR, 1.46, 95% CI, 1.12-1.89), and neuromuscular disorder (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.11-2.52).Antiviral treatment reduced the odds of severity among adults (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, .33-.68).

CONCLUSIONS

 During the 2010-2011 season, pH1N1 caused more severe disease than H3N2 or B in hospitalized patients. Underlying medical conditions increased severity despite virus strain. Antiviral treatment reduced severity among adults. Our findings underscore the importance of influenza prevention.