A comparison of the effectiveness of zanamivir and oseltamivir for the treatment of influenza A and B

Treatment of respiratory viral infections through inhalation therapeutics: Challenges and opportunities

Respiratory viral infections are the leading cause of death worldwide. The current pandemic of coronavirus infection (COVID-19) challenged human beings for the treatment and prevention of this respiratory viral infection since its outbreak in 2019. Despite advancements in the medical field, scientists were helpless to give timely treatment and protection against this viral infection. Several drugs, whether antiviral or not, were given to the patients to reduce mortality and morbidity rate. Vaccines from various pharmaceutical manufacturers are now available to give immunization against covid-19. Still, coronavirus is continuously affecting people in the form of variants after mutation. Each new variant increases the infection risk and forces scientists to develop some innovative and effective treatments for this infection. The virus uses the host's cell machinery to grow and multiply in numbers. Therefore, scientists are facing challenges to develop antivirals that stop the virus without damaging the host cells too. The production of suitable antivirals or vaccines for the new virus would take several months, allowing the strain to cause severe damage to life. Inhalable formulation facilitates the delivery of medicinal products directly to the respiratory system without causing unwanted side effects associated with systemic absorption. Scientists are focusing on developing an inhaled version of the existing antivirals for the treatment of respiratory infections. This review focused on the inhalable formulations of antiviral agents in various respiratory viral infections including the ongoing covid-19 pandemic and important findings of the clinical studies. We also reviewed repurposed drugs that have been given through inhalation in covid-19 infection.

Indian Guidelines on Nebulization Therapy

Inhalational therapy, today, happens to be the mainstay of treatment in obstructive airway diseases (OADs), such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is also in the present, used in a variety of other pulmonary and even non-pulmonary disorders. Hand-held inhalation devices may often be difficult to use, particularly for children, elderly, debilitated or distressed patients. Nebulization therapy emerges as a good option in these cases besides being useful in the home care, emergency room and critical care settings. With so many advancements taking place in nebulizer technology; availability of a plethora of drug formulations for its use, and the widening scope of this therapy; medical practitioners, respiratory therapists, and other health care personnel face the challenge of choosing appropriate inhalation devices and drug formulations, besides their rational application and use in different clinical situations. Adequate maintenance of nebulizer equipment including their disinfection and storage are the other relevant issues requiring guidance. Injudicious and improper use of nebulizers and their poor maintenance can sometimes lead to serious health hazards, nosocomial infections, transmission of infection, and other adverse outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to have a proper national guideline on nebulization practices to bridge the knowledge gaps amongst various health care personnel involved in this practice. It will also serve as an educational and scientific resource for healthcare professionals, as well as promote future research by identifying neglected and ignored areas in this field. Such comprehensive guidelines on this subject have not been available in the country and the only available proper international guidelines were released in 1997 which have not been updated for a noticeably long period of over two decades, though many changes and advancements have taken place in this technology in the recent past. Much of nebulization practices in the present may not be evidence-based and even some of these, the way they are currently used, may be ineffective or even harmful. Recognizing the knowledge deficit and paucity of guidelines on the usage of nebulizers in various settings such as inpatient, out-patient, emergency room, critical care, and domiciliary use in India in a wide variety of indications to standardize nebulization practices and to address many other related issues; National College of Chest Physicians (India), commissioned a National task force consisting of eminent experts in the field of Pulmonary Medicine from different backgrounds and different parts of the country to review the available evidence from the medical literature on the scientific principles and clinical practices of nebulization therapy and to formulate evidence-based guidelines on it. The guideline is based on all possible literature that could be explored with the best available evidence and incorporating expert opinions. To support the guideline with high-quality evidence, a systematic search of the electronic databases was performed to identify the relevant studies, position papers, consensus reports, and recommendations published. Rating of the level of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation was done using the GRADE system. Six topics were identified, each given to one group of experts comprising of advisors, chairpersons, convenor and members, and such six groups (A-F) were formed and the consensus recommendations of each group was included as a section in the guidelines (Sections I to VI). The topics included were: A. Introduction, basic principles and technical aspects of nebulization, types of equipment, their choice, use, and maintenance B. Nebulization therapy in obstructive airway diseases C. Nebulization therapy in the intensive care unit D. Use of various drugs (other than bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) by nebulized route and miscellaneous uses of nebulization therapy E. Domiciliary/Home/Maintenance nebulization therapy; public & health care workers education, and F. Nebulization therapy in COVID-19 pandemic and in patients of other contagious viral respiratory infections (included later considering the crisis created due to COVID-19 pandemic). Various issues in different sections have been discussed in the form of questions, followed by point-wise evidence statements based on the existing knowledge, and recommendations have been formulated.

Influenza antivirals and animal models

Influenza A and B viruses are among the most prominent human respiratory pathogens. About 3-5 million severe cases of influenza are associated with 300 000-650 000 deaths per year globally. Antivirals effective at reducing morbidity and mortality are part of the first line of defense against influenza. FDA-approved antiviral drugs currently include adamantanes (rimantadine and amantadine), neuraminidase inhibitors (NAI; peramivir, zanamivir, and oseltamivir), and the PA endonuclease inhibitor (baloxavir). Mutations associated with antiviral resistance are common and highlight the need for further improvement and development of novel anti-influenza drugs. A summary is provided for the current knowledge of the approved influenza antivirals and antivirals strategies under evaluation in clinical trials. Preclinical evaluations of novel compounds effective against influenza in different animal models are also discussed.

Inhaled Zanamivir versus Oral Oseltamivir to Prevent Influenza-related Hospitalization or Death: a Nationwide Population-based Quasi-experimental Study

BACKGROUND

Individual patient data meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials show that early oseltamivir treatment for influenza cut risk of pneumonia and hospitalization by 44% and 63%, respectively. However, data are lacking for inhaled zanamivir on its effectiveness to prevent hospitalization and death.

METHODS

This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all outpatients treated with inhaled zanamivir or oral oseltamivir, within 48 hours after a clinical diagnosis of influenza, before and after the rollout of inhaled zanamivir as the first-line antiviral in Taiwan. The main outcome is influenza-related hospitalization or death within 14 days, ascertained using Taiwan national health insurance database and national death registry, respectively. Those developed the outcome within 2 days were excluded from analyses. Propensity score stratification was used to control confounding from covariates.

RESULTS

A total of 865,032 eligible influenza outpatients were included in the analysis. The risk of developing the main outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 1.06) did not differ between inhaled zanamivir group (n = 595,897, 68.9%, the reference) and oral oseltamivir group (n = 269,135, 31.1%). Prespecified analysis on high-risk subgroups further showed that inhaled zanamivir is not inferior to oral oseltamivir in either >65 years elderly patients (aHR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.25) or patients with chronic lung diseases (aHR: 1.23, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.41).

CONCLUSION

Inhaled zanamivir is not inferior to oral oseltamivir as outpatient treatment to prevent influenza-related hospitalization or death, for patients whose conditions do not require hospitalization within 2 days.

A New Master Donor Virus for the Development of Live-Attenuated Influenza B Virus Vaccines

Influenza B viruses (IBV) circulate annually, with young children, the elderly and immunocompromised individuals being at high risk. Yearly vaccinations are recommended to protect against seasonally influenza viruses, including IBV. Live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIV) provide the unique opportunity for direct exposure to the antigenically variable surface glycoproteins as well as the more conserved internal components. Ideally, LAIV Master Donor Viruses (MDV) should accurately reflect seasonal influenza strains. Unfortunately, the continuous evolution of IBV have led to significant changes in conserved epitopes compared to the IBV MDV based on B/Ann Arbor/1/1966 strain. Here, we propose a recent influenza B/Brisbane/60/2008 as an efficacious MDV alternative, as its internal viral proteins more accurately reflect those of circulating IBV strains. We introduced the mutations responsible for the temperature sensitive (ts), cold adapted (ca) and attenuated (att) phenotype of B/Ann Arbor/1/1966 MDV LAIV into B/Brisbane/60/2008 to generate a new MDV LAIV. In vitro and in vivo analysis demonstrated that the mutations responsible of the ts, ca, and att phenotype of B/Ann Arbor/1/1966 MDV LAIV were able to infer the same phenotype to B/Brisbane/60/2008, demonstrating its potential as a new MDV for the development of LAIV to protect against contemporary IBV strains.

Volatile molecules for COVID-19: A possible pharmacological strategy?

COVID-19 is a novel coronavirus disease with a higher incidence of bilateral pneumonia and pleural effusion. The high pulmonary tropism and contagiousness of the virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have stimulated new approaches to combat its widespread diffusion. In developing new pharmacological strategies, the chemical characteristic of volatility can add therapeutic value to the hypothetical drug candidate. Volatile molecules are characterized by a high vapor pressure and are consequently easily exhaled by the lungs after ingestion. This feature could be exploited from a pharmacological point of view, reaching the site of action in an uncommon way but allowing for drug delivery. In this way, a hypothetical molecule for COVID-19 should have a balance between its lung exhalation characteristics and both antiviral and anti-inflammatory pharmacological action. Here, the feasibility, advantages, and disadvantages of a therapy based on oral administration of possible volatile drugs for COVID-19 will be discussed. Both aerosolized antiviral therapy and oral intake of volatile molecules are briefly reviewed, and an evaluation of 1,8-cineole is provided in view of a possible clinical use and also for asymptomatic COVID-19.

Efficacy of clarithromycin-naproxen-oseltamivir combination therapy versus oseltamivir alone in hospitalized pediatric influenza patients

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of clarithromycin-naproxen-oseltamivir combination therapy to that of oseltamivir therapy alone in hospitalized pediatric influenza patients.

METHODS

This prospective, single-blind study included children aged 1-18 years hospitalized with influenza, in MacKay Children's Hospital, Taiwan, between December 2017 and December 2019. The primary outcomes were the time to defervescence and decrease of the Pediatric Respiratory Severity Score (PRESS) during hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were serial changes in virus titers, measured using real-time polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were enrolled (28 in the control group and 26 in the combination group) in total. There were no differences in the patients' baseline characteristics between the groups. The time to defervescence was significantly shorter in the combination group than the oseltamivir group (13.2 h vs. 32.1 h, p = 0.002). The decrease in the virus titer from days 1-3 (log Δ13) was more pronounced in the combination group than the oseltamivir group. (39% vs. 19%, p = 0.001). There were no differences in adverse effects such as vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain during the study or within 30 days after antiviral therapy.

CONCLUSION

The clarithromycin-naproxen-oseltamivir combination group experienced a more rapid defervescence and a more rapid decline of influenza virus titer than the group treated with oseltamivir alone. Further consideration should be given to whether the overall benefits of combination therapy in hospitalized pediatric influenza patients outweigh the risks.

Utilising animal models to evaluate oseltamivir efficacy against influenza A and B viruses with reduced in vitro susceptibility

The neuraminidase (NA) inhibitor (NAI) oseltamivir (OST) is the most widely used influenza antiviral drug. Several NA amino acid substitutions are reported to reduce viral susceptibility to OST in in vitro assays. However, whether there is a correlation between the level of reduction in susceptibility in vitro and the efficacy of OST against these viruses in vivo is not well understood. In this study, a ferret model was utilised to evaluate OST efficacy against circulating influenza A and B viruses with a range of in vitro generated 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC50) values for OST. OST efficacy against an A(H1N1)pdm09 and an A(H1N1)pdm09 virus with the H275Y substitution in neuraminidase was also tested in the macaque model. The results from this study showed that OST had a significant impact on virological parameters compared to placebo treatment of ferrets infected with wild-type influenza A viruses with normal IC50 values (~1 nM). However, this efficacy was lower against wild-type influenza B and other viruses with higher IC50 values. Differing pathogenicity of the viruses made evaluation of clinical parameters difficult, although some effect of OST in reducing clinical signs was observed with influenza A(H1N1) and A(H1N1)pdm09 (H275Y) viruses. Viral titres in macaques were too low to draw conclusive results. Analysis of the ferret data revealed a correlation between IC50 and OST efficacy in reducing viral shedding but highlighted that the current WHO guidelines/criteria for defining normal, reduced or highly reduced inhibition in influenza B viruses based on in vitro data are not well aligned with the low in vivo OST efficacy observed for both wild-type influenza B viruses and those with reduced OST susceptibility.

Epidemiology, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Influenza Infection in Oncology Patients

Influenza infection causes increased morbidity and higher mortality in patients receiving treatment of underlying cancer, particularly in those with hematological malignancy or patients who have undergone hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. The illness is characterized by seasonality and nonspecific clinical manifestations of upper respiratory infection at a time when other respiratory illnesses are common in the community, making the diagnosis challenging. However, accurate and timely diagnosis by new molecular techniques is crucial in the management of immunocompromised patients, because delays in initiating appropriate therapy can have devastating consequences. Emergence of viral resistance to currently used antiviral agents is of concern, particularly in immunocompromised hosts, and warrants continued monitoring and surveillance. Early and effective treatment improves outcomes, but optimal therapeutic strategies in patients with cancer are not well defined. Health care and research efforts should focus on defining treatment guidelines in patients with cancer and attempt to improve on current vaccination strategies.

Effectiveness of four types of neuraminidase inhibitors approved in Japan for the treatment of influenza

Background

Neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) effectively treat influenza. The clinical effectiveness of four NAIs (oseltamivir, zanamivir, laninamivir, and peramivir) was evaluated against influenza A/H1N1pdm09, A/H3N2, and B viruses. Additionally, fever duration in patients infected with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A/H1N1pdm09 with the H275Y mutation was evaluated.

Methods

Patients aged <20 years who visited outpatient clinics in Japan with influenza-like illnesses were enrolled during 4 influenza seasons from 2012/2013 to 2015/2016. After obtaining informed consent, patients who tested positive for influenza with rapid tests received one of the four NAIs. Patients recorded their body temperature daily for 8 days from the first visit. The influenza strain was identified using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to evaluate factors influencing fever duration. In children aged ≤5 years treated with oseltamivir, fever duration in oseltamivir-resistant A/H1N1pdm09-infected patients was compared to that in oseltamivir-sensitive A/H1N1pdm09-infected patients.

Results

Of the 1,368 patients analyzed, 297 (21.7%), 683 (49.9%), and 388 (28.4%) were infected with influenza A/H1N1pdm09, A/H3N2, and B, respectively. In multivariable analysis factors associated with significantly prolonged fever duration included: treatment with laninamivir (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, p = 0.006, compared to oseltamivir), influenza B (HR: 0.58, p<0.001, compared to influenza A/H1N1pdm09), and a higher body temperature at the clinic visit (HR: 0.87 per degree Celsius, p<0.001). Increasing age was associated with a significantly shorter duration of fever (HR: 1.31 for 6–9 years old, p<0.001; and HR: 1.65 for 10–19 years old, p<0.001, respectively, compared to 0–5 years old). Following treatment with oseltamivir, fever duration was significantly longer for oseltamivir-resistant A/H1N1pdm09-infected patients (n = 5) than for oseltamivir-sensitive A/H1N1pdm09 infected patients (n = 111) (mean, 89 versus 40 hours, p<0.001).

Conclusions

Our results revealed characteristic information on the effectiveness of the four NAIs and also on oseltamivir-resistant viruses that may affect patients’ clinical care.

Use of antiviral drugs for seasonal influenza: Foundation document for practitioners-Update 2019

This document updates the previous AMMI Canada Foundation Guidance (2013) on the use of antiviral therapy for influenza.

The continual threat of influenza virus infections at the human-animal interface: What is new from a one health perspective?

This year, in 2018, we mark 100 years since the 1918 influenza pandemic. In the last 100 years, we have expanded our knowledge of public health and increased our ability to detect and prevent influenza; however, we still face challenges resulting from these continually evolving viruses. Today, it is clear that influenza viruses have multiple animal reservoirs (domestic and wild), making infection prevention in humans especially difficult to achieve. With this report, we summarize new knowledge regarding influenza A, B, C and D viruses and their control. We also introduce how a multi-disciplinary One Health approach is necessary to mitigate these threats.

Clinical Implications of Antiviral Resistance in Influenza

Influenza is a major cause of severe respiratory infections leading to excessive hospitalizations and deaths globally; annual epidemics, pandemics, and sporadic/endemic avian virus infections occur as a result of rapid, continuous evolution of influenza viruses. Emergence of antiviral resistance is of great clinical and public health concern. Currently available antiviral treatments include four neuraminidase inhibitors (oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir, laninamivir), M2-inibitors (amantadine, rimantadine), and a polymerase inhibitor (favipiravir). In this review, we focus on resistance issues related to the use of neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs). Data on primary resistance, as well as secondary resistance related to NAI exposure will be presented. Their clinical implications, detection, and novel therapeutic options undergoing clinical trials are discussed.

A 3D-RISM/RISM study of the oseltamivir binding efficiency with the wild-type and resistance-associated mutant forms of the viral influenza B neuraminidase

The binding affinity of oseltamivir to the influenza B neuraminidase and to its variants with three single substitutions, E119G, R152K, and D198N, is investigated by the MM/3D-RISM method. The binding affinity or the binding free energy of ligand to receptor was found to be determined by a subtle balance of two major contributions that largely cancel out each other: the ligand-receptor interactions and the dehydration free energy. The theoretical results of the binding affinity of the drug to the mutants reproduced the observed trend in the resistivity, measured by IC50 ; the high-level resistance of E119G and R152K, and the low-level resistance of D198N. For E119G and R152K, reduction of the direct drug-target interaction, especially at the mutated residue, is the main source of high-level oseltamivir resistance. This phenomenon, however, is not found in the D198N strain, which is located in the framework of the active-site.

Inhaled anti-infective chemotherapy for respiratory tract infections: successes, challenges and the road ahead

One of the most common causes of illnesses in humans is from respiratory tract infections caused by bacterial, viral or fungal pathogens. Inhaled anti-infective drugs are crucial for the prophylaxis and treatment of respiratory tract infections. The benefit of anti-infective drug delivery via inhalation is that it affords delivery of sufficient therapeutic dosages directly to the primary site of infection, while minimizing the risks of systemic toxicity or avoiding potential suboptimal pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics associated with systemic drug exposure. This review provides an up-to-date treatise of approved and novel developmental inhaled anti-infective agents, with particular attention to effective strategies for their use, pulmonary pharmacokinetic properties and safety.

Antivirals for influenza: a summary of a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Despite the use of antivirals to treat patients with severe influenza, questions remain with respect to effects and safety. Although a recent systematic review has provided some indication of benefit, the analysis is limited by the quality of the available evidence from randomized controlled trials. To supplement the existing information, the authors conducted a systematic review of observational studies of antiviral treatment for influenza. This report summarises the findings of that review. Similar to the randomised trials, the confidence in the estimates of the effects for decision-making is low to very low primarily due to the risk of selection and publication bias in the observational studies. From these observational studies, the summary estimates suggest that oseltamivir may reduce mortality, hospitalisation and duration of symptoms compared with no treatment. Inhaled zanamivir may also reduce symptom duration and hospitalisations, but patients may experience more complications compared with no treatment. Earlier treatment with antivirals is generally associated with better outcomes than later treatment. Further high-quality evidence is needed to inform treatment guidelines because of the overall low to very low quality of evidence.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for influenza B virus infection: efficacy and resistance

Many aspects of the biology and epidemiology of influenza B viruses are far less studied than for influenza A viruses, and one of these aspects is efficacy and resistance to the clinically available antiviral drugs, the neuraminidase (NA) inhibitors (NAIs). Acute respiratory infections are one of the leading causes of death in children and adults, and influenza is among the few respiratory infections that can be prevented and treated by vaccination and antiviral treatment. Recent data has suggested that influenza B virus infections are of specific concern to pediatric patients because of the increased risk of severe disease. Treatment of influenza B is a challenging task for the following reasons: This review presents current knowledge of the efficacy of NAIs for influenza B virus and antiviral resistance in clinical, surveillance, and experimental studies.

Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of zanamivir and laninamivir octanoate for children with influenza A(H3N2) and B in the 2011-2012 season

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the two inhaled neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs), zanamivir (ZN) and laninamivir octate (LO), for influenza A(H3N2) and B virus infections.

DESIGN

A prospective, multicenter observational study was conducted from January to April in 2012.

SETTING

Outpatients aged 5-18 years who had a temperature of 37.5°C or higher and were diagnosed as having influenza based on an immunochromatographic assay were enrolled.

SAMPLE

A total of 338 patients treated with ZN and 314 patients treated with LO were compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The duration of fever after administration of the first dose of each NAI was evaluated as a primary endpoint. The secondary endpoint was episodes of biphasic fever.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in the duration of fever was found between the ZN and LO groups (log-rank test, P = 0.117). A logistic regression model showed that episodes of biphasic fever increased by 1.19 times for every decrease of 1 year of age (P = 0.016) and that the number of biphasic fever episodes in patients treated with LO was 5.80-times greater than that in patients treated with ZN (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the duration of fever in the LO group was comparable to that in the ZN group, episodes of biphasic fever were more frequent in younger children and in the LO group than in the ZN group.

Therapeutics against influenza

Despite 75 years of research into prevention and treatment of influenza, the viruses that cause this disease continue to rank as some of the most important pathogens afflicting humans today. Progress in development of therapeutics for influenza has been slow for much of that time, but has accelerated in pace over the last two decades. Two classes of antiviral medications are used in humans at present, but each has limitations in scope and effectiveness of use. New strategies involving these licensed agents, including alternate forms of delivery and combination therapy with other drugs, are currently being explored. In addition, several novel antiviral compounds are in various clinical phases of development. Together with strategies designed to target the virus itself, new approaches to interrupt host–pathogen interactions or modulate detrimental aspects of the immune response have been proposed. Therapy for influenza will likely undergo substantial changes in the decades to come, evolving with our knowledge of pathogenesis as new approaches become viable and are validated clinically.

Utility of Maoto in an influenza season where reduced effectiveness of oseltamivir was observed - a clinical, non-randomized study in children

BACKGROUND

In an influenza season where reduced effectiveness of oseltamivir was observed, we investigated the effectiveness of Maoto for influenza infection in children.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with influenza by rapid diagnostic kit underwent treatment in one of the following groups: Maoto-treated group (group 1 (M)); oseltamivir-treated group (group 2 (O)); Maoto+oseltamivir-treated group (group 3 (M+O)); zanamivir-treated group (group 4 (Z)); and Maoto+zanamivir-treated group (group 5 (M+Z)).

RESULTS

In influenza A patients who completed the study (n = 150), the mean duration of fever after administration (DFA) was significantly shorter in group 3 (M+O) (31.1 h, p < 0.01) and in group 4 (Z) (35.2 h, p < 0.05), as compared to group 2 (O) (56.0 h). Among these, in patients aged ≤5 years (n = 54), DFA was significantly shorter in group 1 (M) (33.2 h, p < 0.05) and in group 3 (M+O) (34.6 h, p < 0.05), as compared to group 2 (O) (61.4 h). In influenza B patients who completed the study (n = 70), no significant differences in DFA were observed among the groups.

CONCLUSION

Maoto may be useful, particularly in cases of influenza with low sensitivity to oseltamivir and in patients aged ≤5 years for whom the use of zanamivir is difficult.

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

BACKGROUND

No studies of the clinical symptoms before starting therapy or of the effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) have been carried out of the 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 seasons that compare A(H1N1)pdm09 or the three circulating types of influenza virus.

METHODS

The clinical symptoms and duration of fever (body temperature ≥37·5°C) after the first dose of an NAI (oseltamivir, zanamivir, laninamivir) were analyzed. PCR was carried out for 365 patients with A(H1N1)pdm09 in the 2009-2010 season and for 388 patients with one of the three types of influenza circulating in the 2010-2011 season. IC50 for the three NAIs was also analyzed in 51 patients in the 2010-2011 season.

RESULTS

The peak body temperature was significantly higher in 2010-2011 than in 2009-2010 for patients under 20 years with A(H1N1)pdm09, and in the 2010-2011 season for children 15 years or younger with A(H1N1)pdm09 than for those with other virus types. The percentage of A(H1N1)pdm09 patients with loss of appetite or fatigue was significantly higher in 2010-2011 than in the previous season. The duration of fever was not affected by the kind of NAI or by age in multiple regression analysis. The percentage of patients afebrile at 48 hours after the first dose of NAI was significantly higher for A(H1N1)pdm09 than for A(H3N2) (laninamivir) or B (oseltamivir and laninamivir).

CONCLUSION

Although the clinical symptoms of A(H1N1)pdm09 were slightly more severe in the 2010-2011 season, the effectiveness of the NAIs remained high in comparison with 2009-2010 and with other types of seasonal influenza.

Unexpected severity of cases of influenza B infection in patients that required hospitalization during the first postpandemic wave

OBJECTIVES

After the last pandemic the knowledge regarding influenza A infection has improved however, the outcomes of influenza B infection remain poorly studied. The aim of this study was to compare the features of influenza B versus influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infections during the 2010-2011 epidemic-season.

METHODS

A prospective, observational-cohort of adults with laboratory-confirmed influenza infection during the 2010-2011 epidemic-season was studied

RESULTS

Fifty cases of influenza B and 80 of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection were enrolled. Among patients with influenza B, the median age was 34 years-old (23-64), 30% pregnant, 24% obese, 34% transplant recipients and 14% with bacterial co-infection. Twenty-eight percent of patients had pneumonia with alveolar localized pattern and five (10%) died. Pneumonia was associated with delayed antiviral therapy, older age, higher Charlson score, invasive mechanical ventilation and bacterial co-infection. Obesity and pregnancy were not associated with complicated influenza B infection. The proportion of pneumonia, admission to the ICU and mortality did not differ between cases of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza B infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza B infection causes severe infection and it is associated with pneumonia or death, similar to influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection. Rapid diagnosis and early antiviral therapy are necessary for managing influenza pneumonia during epidemic periods.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in children (published trials only)

BACKGROUND

During epidemics, influenza attack rates in children may exceed 40%. Options for prevention and treatment currently include the neuraminidase inhibitors zanamivir and oseltamivir. Laninamivir octanoate, the prodrug of laninamivir, is currently being developed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of neuraminidase inhibitors in the treatment and prevention of influenza in children.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to January week 2, 2011) and EMBASE (January 2010 to January 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing neuraminidase inhibitors with placebo or other antiviral drugs in children aged up to and including 12 years. We also included safety and tolerability data from other types of studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors selected studies, assessed study quality and extracted data for the current and previous versions of this review. We analysed data separately for oseltamivir versus placebo, zanamivir versus placebo and laninamivir octanoate versus oseltamivir.

MAIN RESULTS

Six treatment trials involving 1906 children with clinical influenza and 450 children with influenza diagnosed on rapid near-patient influenza testing were included. Of these 2356 children, 1255 had laboratory-confirmed influenza. Three prophylaxis trials involving 863 children exposed to influenza were also included. In children with laboratory-confirmed influenza oseltamivir reduced median duration of illness by 36 hours (26%, P < 0.001). One trial of oseltamivir in children with asthma who had laboratory-confirmed influenza showed only a small reduction in illness duration (10.4 hours, 8%), which was not statistically significant (P = 0.542). Laninamivir octanoate 20 mg reduced symptom duration by 2.8 days (60%, P < 0.001) in children with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A/H1N1. Zanamivir reduced median duration of illness by 1.3 days (24%, P < 0.001). Oseltamivir significantly reduced acute otitis media in children aged one to five years with laboratory-confirmed influenza (risk difference (RD) -0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.24 to -0.04). Prophylaxis with either zanamivir or oseltamivir was associated with an 8% absolute reduction in developing influenza after the introduction of a case into a household (RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.05, P < 0.001). The adverse event profile of zanamivir was no worse than placebo but vomiting was more commonly associated with oseltamivir (number needed to harm = 17, 95% CI 10 to 34). The adverse event profiles of laninamivir octanoate and oseltamivir were similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oseltamivir and zanamivir appear to have modest benefit in reducing duration of illness in children with influenza. However, our analysis was limited by small sample sizes and an inability to pool data from different studies. In addition, the inclusion of data from published trials only may have resulted in significant publication bias. Based on published trial data, oseltamivir reduces the incidence of acute otitis media in children aged one to five years but is associated with a significantly increased risk of vomiting. One study demonstrated that laninamivir octanoate was more effective than oseltamivir in shortening duration of illness in children with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A/H1N1. The benefit of oseltamivir and zanamivir in preventing the transmission of influenza in households is modest and based on weak evidence. However, the clinical efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors in 'at risk' children is still uncertain. Larger high-quality trials are needed with sufficient power to determine the efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing serious complications of influenza (such as pneumonia or hospital admission), particularly in 'at risk' groups.

Antivirals for treatment of influenza: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials in patients with influenza suggest a lack of evidence about the effects of antiviral therapy on several patient-important outcomes of influenza.

PURPOSE

To systematically review observational studies for benefits and harms of oseltamivir, zanamivir, amantadine, or rimantadine in the treatment of influenza.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, SIGLE, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Panteleimon, and LILACS up to November 2010; contact with pharmaceutical companies; and reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Observational studies in any language that compared single antiviral therapy with no therapy or other antiviral therapy, or that had no comparator, for influenza or influenza-like illness.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent investigators extracted data. Confidence in the estimates of the obtained effects (quality of evidence) was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

74 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses of the few studies providing effects with adjustment for confounders suggest that, in high-risk populations, oral oseltamivir may reduce mortality (odds ratio, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.43]; low-quality evidence), hospitalization (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.66 to 0.89]; low-quality evidence), and duration of symptoms (33 hours [CI, 21 to 45 hours]; very low-quality evidence) compared with no treatment. Earlier treatment with oseltamivir was generally associated with better outcomes. Inhaled zanamivir may lead to shorter symptom duration (23 hours [CI, 17 to 28 hours]; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer hospitalizations (odds ratio, 0.66 [CI, 0.37 to 1.18]) but more complications than no treatment. Direct comparison of oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir suggests no important differences in key outcomes. Data from 1 study suggest that oral amantadine may reduce mortality and pneumonia associated with influenza A. No included study evaluated rimantadine.

LIMITATIONS

Mortality was assessed in high-risk patients, and generalizability is limited. The overall body of evidence is limited by risk for confounding and selection, reporting, and publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Therapy with oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir may provide a net benefit over no treatment of influenza. However, as with the randomized trials, the confidence in the estimates of the effects for decision making is low to very low. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCES: World Health Organization and McMaster University.

A randomized, controlled trial comparing traditional herbal medicine and neuraminidase inhibitors in the treatment of seasonal influenza

The herbal medicine, maoto, has been traditionally prescribed to patients with influenza in Japan. To better understand the efficacy of maoto for the treatment of influenza, a randomized trial was conducted for comparison with oseltamivir or zanamivir. Adult patients with influenza symptoms, including fever, positive for quick diagnostic kit for influenza within 48 h of fever onset were assessed for enrollment. The data of 28 patients randomly assigned to maoto (n = 10), oseltamivir (n = 8), or zanamivir (n = 10) were analyzed for the duration of fever (>37.5°C) and total symptom score from symptom cards recorded by the patient. Viral isolation and serum cytokine measurements were also done on days 1, 3, and 5. Maoto granules, a commercial medical dosage form, are made from four plants: Ephedra Herb, Apricot Kernel, Cinnamon Bark, and Glycyrrhiza Root. Median durations of fever of patients assigned maoto, oseltamivir, or zanamivir were 29, 46, or 27 h, respectively, significantly different for maoto and oseltamivir. No significant between-group differences were found in total symptom score among three groups. Viral persistent rates and serum cytokine levels (IFN-α, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, and TNF-α) during the study period showed no differences among three groups. The administration of oral maoto granules to healthy adults with seasonal influenza was well tolerated and associated with equivalent clinical and virological efficacy to neuraminidase inhibitors.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in children

BACKGROUND

During epidemics, influenza attack rates in children may exceed 40%. Options for prevention and treatment currently include the neuraminidase inhibitors zanamivir and oseltamivir. Laninamivir octanoate, the prodrug of laninamivir, is currently being developed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of neuraminidase inhibitors in the treatment and prevention of influenza in children.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1) which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to January week 2, 2011) and EMBASE (January 2010 to January 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing neuraminidase inhibitors with placebo or other antiviral drugs in children aged up to and including 12 years. We also included safety and tolerability data from other types of studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors selected studies, assessed study quality and extracted data for the current and previous versions of this review. We analysed data separately for oseltamivir versus placebo, zanamivir versus placebo and laninamivir octanoate versus oseltamivir.

MAIN RESULTS

Six treatment trials involving 1906 children with clinical influenza and 450 children with influenza diagnosed on rapid near-patient influenza testing were included. Of these 2356 children, 1255 had laboratory-confirmed influenza. Three prophylaxis trials involving 863 children exposed to influenza were also included. In children with laboratory-confirmed influenza oseltamivir reduced median duration of illness by 36 hours (26%, P < 0.001). One trial of oseltamivir in children with asthma who had laboratory-confirmed influenza showed only a small reduction in illness duration (10.4 hours, 8%), which was not statistically significant (P = 0.542). Laninamivir octanoate 20 mg reduced symptom duration by 2.8 days (60%, P < 0.001) in children with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A/H1N1. Zanamivir reduced median duration of illness by 1.3 days (24%, P < 0.001). Oseltamivir significantly reduced acute otitis media in children aged one to five years with laboratory-confirmed influenza (risk difference (RD) -0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.24 to -0.04). Prophylaxis with either zanamivir or oseltamivir was associated with an 8% absolute reduction in developing influenza after the introduction of a case into a household (RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.12 to -0.05, P < 0.001). The adverse event profile of zanamivir was no worse than placebo but vomiting was more commonly associated with oseltamivir (number needed to harm = 17, 95% CI 10 to 34). The adverse event profiles of laninamivir octanoate and oseltamivir were similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oseltamivir and zanamivir appear to have modest benefit in reducing duration of illness in children with influenza. However, our analysis was limited by small sample sizes and an inability to pool data from different studies. Oseltamivir reduces the incidence of acute otitis media in children aged one to five years but is associated with a significantly increased risk of vomiting. One study demonstrated that laninamivir octanoate was more effective than oseltamivir in shortening duration of illness in children with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A/H1N1. The benefit of oseltamivir and zanamivir in preventing the transmission of influenza in households is modest and based on weak evidence. However, the clinical efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors in 'at risk' children is still uncertain. Larger high-quality trials are needed with sufficient power to determine the efficacy of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing serious complications of influenza (such as pneumonia or hospital admission), particularly in 'at risk' groups.

The use of antiviral drugs for influenza: Guidance for practitioners 2012/2013

The present article addresses the use of antiviral drugs in the management of seasonal influenza illness for the 2012/2013 season. It updates the previous document published in 2011 (1). Noteworthy guidance updates since 2011 include the following: Seasonal influenza in 2012/2013 is predicted to be caused by two human influenza A and one influenza B strain, all of which are anticipated to remain generally susceptible to oseltamivir.The predicted strains are A/California/7/2009 (H1N1) pdm09-like, A/Victoria/361/2011 (H3N2)-like and B/Wisconsin/1/2010-like (Yamagata lineage). All are included in the seasonal influenza vaccine and are susceptible to oseltamivir.Swine-variant H3N2v, which has rarely caused infection in humans exposed to infected swine within the past year in the United States, is susceptible to oseltamivir. It is not included in the current seasonal influenza vaccine.It is still considered that initiation of antiviral therapy more than 36 h to 48 h after onset of symptoms is beneficial in patients hospitalized with complicated influenza and severe illness.Oseltamivir continues to be recommended for the treatment of influenza in pregnant women.The use of antiviral drugs among measures to control outbreaks of influenza in closed facilities such as correctional institutions is now included in the present document.

Neurological complications of pandemic influenza A H1N1 2009 infection: European case series and review

Neurological manifestations and outcomes of children with the 2009 H1N1 virus infection have been reported in three American series and from smaller cohorts and case reports worldwide. Of the 83 children admitted between April 2009 and March 2010 with H1N1 virus infection to a tertiary children's hospital in a European setting, five children aged between 2 and 10 years had neurological symptoms. Four patients had seizures and encephalopathy at presentation. One patient presented with ataxia; one developed neuropsychiatric manifestations, and two developed movement disorders during the disease course. Early neuroimaging showed evidence of acute necrotising encephalopathy (ANE) in one case and non-specific white matter changes in another. Initial neuroimaging was normal for the other three, but interval MRI showed increased signal in bilateral periventricular distribution in one and significant cerebral volume loss in the other. Clinical outcomes varied: two recovered fully while three had residual seizures and/or significant cognitive deficits. Conclusion An analysis of our patients along with all reported cases reveal that seizures and encephalopathy were common neurological presentations associated with pandemic 2009 H1N1 influenza virus infection in children requiring hospital admission. Neuroimaging suggestive of ANE, basal ganglia involvement and volume loss appears to be associated with worse neurological outcome.

Antiviral drug susceptibilities of seasonal human influenza viruses in Lebanon, 2008-09 season

The emergence of antiviral drug-resistant strains of the influenza virus in addition to the rapid spread of the recent pandemic A(H1N1) 2009 virus highlight the importance of surveillance of influenza in identifying new variants as they appear. In this study, genetic characteristics and antiviral susceptibility patterns of influenza samples collected in Lebanon during the 2008-09 season were investigated. Forty influenza virus samples were isolated from 89 nasopharyngeal swabs obtained from patients with influenza-like illness. Of these samples, 33 (82.5%) were A(H3N2), 3 (7.5%) were A(H1N1), and 4 (10%) were B. All the H3N2 viruses were resistant to amantadine but were sensitive to oseltamivir and zanamivir; while all the H1N1 viruses were resistant to oseltamivir (possessed H275Y mutation, N1 numbering, in their NA) but were sensitive to amantadine and zanamivir. In the case of influenza B, both Victoria and Yamagata lineages were identified (three and one isolates each, respectively) and they showed decreased susceptibility to oseltamivir and zanamivir when compared to influenza A viruses. Influenza circulation patterns in Lebanon were very similar to those in Europe during the same season. Continued surveillance is important to fully elucidate influenza patterns in Lebanon and the Middle East in general, especially in light of the current influenza pandemic.

Successful treatment of influenza A virus by oseltamivir in bone marrow transplant recipients

INFVA is an important cause of pulmonary infections in patients receiving BMT, and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality for a readily preventable and treatable infection. Few studies have addressed the impact of the new neuraminidase inhibitors in the prognosis of influenza after BMT. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of oseltamivir on the control of INFVA infection in BMT recipients. INFVA was screened in NPA and/or bronchoalveolar lavage using IF in all BMT recipients having respiratory symptoms. Three URTI and one associated upper and LRTI were diagnosed in three BMT recipients out of six patients admitted to the BMT unit, during eight-wk period (March and April 2008). All patients having INFVA respiratory infection were treated by oral oseltamivir 60 mg/day, begun more than 48 h after symptom onset. Respiratory symptoms disappeared within a mean of 60 h (48-96 h) of treatment. However, viral tests had remained positive for 8-39 days. Outside the initial associated URTI and LRTI, no further viral pneumonia occurred. No patient died of INFVA. Oseltamivir was well tolerated outside vomiting during the first three days of treatment in one patient. Oseltamivir appears to play an important role in the outcome of INFVA infection as well in URTI as in severe LRTI in patients receiving BMT.

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.

Clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir for influenza A(H1N1) virus with H274Y neuraminidase mutation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir therapy started within 48h of the onset for influenza A(H1N1) virus with H274Y neuraminidase (NA) mutation.

METHODS

Virus was isolated before and four to six days after starting oseltamivir treatment from 73 outpatients with influenza A(H1N1) virus in the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 seasons. NA inhibition assays (IC(50)) and sequence analyses were done using influenza viruses isolated from these patients. Body temperature was evaluated before and on the second, third, and fourth days after starting treatment.

RESULTS

H274Y mutation was not shown in the 2007-2008 season (44 patients) and shown in all 29 patients in the 2008-2009 season by NA sequence analyses. The mean IC(50) before oseltamivir treatment was significantly higher in 2008-2009 (319.3+/-185.4 nM) than in 2007-2008 (1.5+/-0.8 nM; p<.001). Patients < or =15 years with oseltamivir-resistant virus infection had a higher ratio of patients persisted virus after oseltamivir treatment than patients >15 years (50% and 11.8%, respectively, p=0.038), and a significant higher body temperature during oseltamivir treatment, compared to patients < or =15 years treated for oseltamivir-sensitive virus infection.

CONCLUSION

The clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir for the A(H1N1) virus was reduced in the 2008-2009 season compared with the previous season, especially in children, probably due to the H274Y mutation. Oseltamivir seems to be not recommended for children and patients with high-risk underlying diseases infected with H274Y mutated A(H1N1) virus.

Hedging against antiviral resistance during the next influenza pandemic using small stockpiles of an alternative chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of single-drug antiviral interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality during the next influenza pandemic will be substantially weakened if transmissible strains emerge which are resistant to the stockpiled antiviral drugs. We developed a mathematical model to test the hypothesis that a small stockpile of a secondary antiviral drug could be used to mitigate the adverse consequences of the emergence of resistant strains.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We used a multistrain stochastic transmission model of influenza to show that the spread of antiviral resistance can be significantly reduced by deploying a small stockpile (1% population coverage) of a secondary drug during the early phase of local epidemics. We considered two strategies for the use of the secondary stockpile: early combination chemotherapy (ECC; individuals are treated with both drugs in combination while both are available); and sequential multidrug chemotherapy (SMC; individuals are treated only with the secondary drug until it is exhausted, then treated with the primary drug). We investigated all potentially important regions of unknown parameter space and found that both ECC and SMC reduced the cumulative attack rate (AR) and the resistant attack rate (RAR) unless the probability of emergence of resistance to the primary drug p(A) was so low (less than 1 in 10,000) that resistance was unlikely to be a problem or so high (more than 1 in 20) that resistance emerged as soon as primary drug monotherapy began. For example, when the basic reproductive number was 1.8 and 40% of symptomatic individuals were treated with antivirals, AR and RAR were 67% and 38% under monotherapy if p(A) = 0.01. If the probability of resistance emergence for the secondary drug was also 0.01, then SMC reduced AR and RAR to 57% and 2%. The effectiveness of ECC was similar if combination chemotherapy reduced the probabilities of resistance emergence by at least ten times. We extended our model using travel data between 105 large cities to investigate the robustness of these resistance-limiting strategies at a global scale. We found that as long as populations that were the main source of resistant strains employed these strategies (SMC or ECC), then those same strategies were also effective for populations far from the source even when some intermediate populations failed to control resistance. In essence, through the existence of many wild-type epidemics, the interconnectedness of the global network dampened the international spread of resistant strains.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the augmentation of existing stockpiles of a single anti-influenza drug with smaller stockpiles of a second drug could be an effective and inexpensive epidemiological hedge against antiviral resistance if either SMC or ECC were used. Choosing between these strategies will require additional empirical studies. Specifically, the choice will depend on the safety of combination therapy and the synergistic effect of one antiviral in suppressing the emergence of resistance to the other antiviral when both are taken in combination.

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.

The potential impact of neuraminidase inhibitor resistant influenza

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neuraminidase inhibitor resistant influenza virus has recently emerged, and circulated, in untreated persons. Influenza virus evolution is causing antiviral susceptibility to change. We review the latest research in this rapidly moving field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Oseltamivir-resistant influenza H1N1 emerged globally, without drug selection pressure, during the 2007-2008 northern hemisphere influenza season. This unexpected event, coupled with reports of reducing susceptibilities of influenza B and H5N1, contradicts our understanding of the properties of neuraminidase inhibitor resistant influenza viruses. Knowledge of the structure of the neuraminidases and impact of mutations on drug binding has now expanded. Surveillance and clinical studies have identified key areas which require focused research such as the incidence of resistance in children and immunocompromised populations and the need for improved methodologies for detecting resistant virus on an individual and population level.

SUMMARY

Neuraminidase inhibitors, oseltamivir in particular, are the drugs of choice against seasonal influenza, zoonotic H5N1 and are stockpiled as the primary mitigating strategy for pandemic influenza containment and control. Further clinical and animal studies are essential to fully understand the capacity of neuraminidase inhibitor resistant influenza to be tolerated in the virus population, whilst retaining virulence and transmissibility. Vigilance, policy review and development of new anti-influenza drugs are essential.

Effectiveness of oseltamivir treatment among children with influenza A or B virus infections during four successive winters in Niigata City, Japan

Oseltamivir has been used for treatment of influenza A and B infections, but recent reports documented that it was less active against the latter. We compared the effectiveness of oseltamivir in children between laboratory confirmed influenza A and B over 4 influenza seasons from 2001 to 2005 in a pediatric clinic in Japan. Among 1,848 patients screened, 299 influenza A and 209 influenza B patients were administered oseltamivir (treated groups), and 28 influenza A and 66 influenza B patients were assigned as non-treated groups. The duration of fever, defined as period when patients had the maximum temperature higher than 37.5 degrees C in three-time measurements in a day after the clinic visit, was evaluated among the four groups. In uni-variate analysis, the duration of fever was shorter for treated group than non-treated for influenza A (1.8 +/- 0.9 days vs 2.6 +/- 1.3 days, p < 0.01), but it was not significant for influenza B (2.4 +/- 1.3 days vs 2.8 +/- 1.2 days, p = 0.9). The fever duration was longer in treated influenza B than A patients (p < 0.01). Multi-variate analysis indicated younger age (< 6 years old) and higher body temperature at the clinic visit prolonged the duration of fever. Adjusted average duration of fever indicated that oseltamivir was effective for both types, but more effective on influenza A, and the benefit increased for younger children. Our data provide evidence that oseltamivir is beneficial for influenza infections, but the effectiveness is differed by type and age.

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.