Low Dose Oral Combination Chemoprophylaxis with Oseltamivir and Amantadine for Influenza a Virus Infections in Mice

Antiviral options and therapeutics against influenza: history, latest developments and future prospects

Drugs and chemotherapeutics have helped to manage devastating impacts of infectious diseases since the concept of 'magic bullet'. The World Health Organization estimates about 650,000 deaths due to respiratory diseases linked to seasonal influenza each year. Pandemic influenza, on the other hand, is the most feared health disaster and probably would have greater and immediate impact on humanity than climate change. While countermeasures, biosecurity and vaccination remain the most effective preventive strategies against this highly infectious and communicable disease, antivirals are nonetheless essential to mitigate clinical manifestations following infection and to reduce devastating complications and mortality. Continuous emergence of the novel strains of rapidly evolving influenza viruses, some of which are intractable, require new approaches towards influenza chemotherapeutics including optimization of existing anti-infectives and search for novel therapies. Effective management of influenza infections depend on the safety and efficacy of selected anti-infective in-vitro studies and their clinical applications. The outcomes of therapies are also dependent on understanding diversity in patient groups, co-morbidities, co-infections and combination therapies. In this extensive review, we have discussed the challenges of influenza epidemics and pandemics and discoursed the options for anti-viral chemotherapies for effective management of influenza virus infections.

The Hypothiocyanite and Amantadine Combination Treatment Prevents Lethal Influenza A Virus Infection in Mice

The influenza virus has a large clinical burden and is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. The development of effective drugs for the treatment or prevention of influenza is important in order to reduce its impact. Adamantanes and neuraminidase inhibitors are two classes of anti-influenza drugs in which resistance has developed; thus, there is an urgent need to explore new therapeutic options. Boosting antiviral innate immune mechanisms in the airways represents an attractive approach. Hypothiocyanite (OSCN-) is produced by the airway epithelium and is effective in reducing the replication of several influenza A virus strains in vitro. It remains, however, largely unexplored whether OSCN- has such an antiviral effect in vivo. Here we determined the therapeutic potential of OSCN-, alone or in combination with amantadine (AMT), in preventing lethal influenza A virus replication in mice and in vitro. Mice intranasally infected with a lethal dose of A/Puerto Rico/8/1934 (H1N1) or A/Hong Kong/8/1968 (H3N2) were cured by the combination treatment of OSCN- and AMT. Monotherapy with OSCN- or AMT alone did not substantially improve survival outcomes. However, AMT+OSCN- treatment significantly inhibited viral replication, and in vitro treatment inhibited viral entry and nuclear transport of different influenza A virus strains (H1N1 and H3N2) including the AMT-resistant strain A/WSN/33 (H1N1). A triple combination treatment consisting of AMT, oseltamivir, and OSCN- was also tested and further inhibited in vitro viral replication of the AMT-resistant A/WSN/33 strain. These results suggest that OSCN- is a promising anti-influenza treatment option when combined with other antiviral drugs.

Synergistic PA and HA mutations confer mouse adaptation of a contemporary A/H3N2 influenza virus

The mouse is the most widely used animal model for influenza virus research. However, the susceptibility of mice to seasonal influenza virus depends on the strain of mouse and on the strain of the influenza virus. Seasonal A/H3N2 influenza viruses do not replicate well in mice and therefore they need to be adapted to this animal model. In this study, we generated a mouse-adapted A/H3N2 virus (A/Switzerland/9715293/2013 [MA-H3N2]) by serial passaging in mouse lungs that exhibited greater virulence compared to the wild-type virus (P0-H3N2). Seven mutations were found in the genome of MA-H3N2: PA(K615E), NP(G384R), NA(G320E) and HA(N122D, N144E, N246K, and A304T). Using reverse genetics, two synergistically acting genes were found as determinants of the pathogenicity in mice. First, the HA substitutions were shown to enhanced viral replication in vitro and, second, the PA-K615E substitution increased polymerase activity, although did not alter virus replication in vitro or in mice. Notably, single mutations had only limited effects on virulence in vitro. In conclusion, a co-contribution of HA and PA mutations resulted in a lethal mouse model of seasonal A/H3N2 virus. Such adapted virus is an excellent tool for evaluation of novel drugs or vaccines and for study of influenza pathogenesis.

Investigating Different Mechanisms of Action in Combination Therapy for Influenza

Combination therapy for influenza can have several benefits, from reducing the emergence of drug resistant virus strains to decreasing the cost of antivirals. However, there are currently only two classes of antivirals approved for use against influenza, limiting the possible combinations that can be considered for treatment. However, new antivirals are being developed that target different parts of the viral replication cycle, and their potential for use in combination therapy should be considered. The role of antiviral mechanism of action in the effectiveness of combination therapy has not yet been systematically investigated to determine whether certain antiviral mechanisms of action pair well in combination. Here, we use a mathematical model of influenza to model combination treatment with antivirals having different mechanisms of action to measure peak viral load, infection duration, and synergy of different drug combinations. We find that antivirals that lower the infection rate and antivirals that increase the duration of the eclipse phase perform poorly in combination with other antivirals.

Efficacy of combined therapy with amantadine, oseltamivir, and ribavirin in vivo against susceptible and amantadine-resistant influenza A viruses

The limited efficacy of existing antiviral therapies for influenza – coupled with widespread baseline antiviral resistance – highlights the urgent need for more effective therapy. We describe a triple combination antiviral drug (TCAD) regimen composed of amantadine, oseltamivir, and ribavirin that is highly efficacious at reducing mortality and weight loss in mouse models of influenza infection. TCAD therapy was superior to dual and single drug regimens in mice infected with drug-susceptible, low pathogenic A/H5N1 (A/Duck/MN/1525/81) and amantadine-resistant 2009 A/H1N1 influenza (A/California/04/09). Treatment with TCAD afforded >90% survival in mice infected with both viruses, whereas treatment with dual and single drug regimens resulted in 0% to 60% survival. Importantly, amantadine had no activity as monotherapy against the amantadine-resistant virus, but demonstrated dose-dependent protection in combination with oseltamivir and ribavirin, indicative that amantadine's activity had been restored in the context of TCAD therapy. Furthermore, TCAD therapy provided survival benefit when treatment was delayed until 72 hours post-infection, whereas oseltamivir monotherapy was not protective after 24 hours post-infection. These findings demonstrate in vivo efficacy of TCAD therapy and confirm previous reports of the synergy and broad spectrum activity of TCAD therapy against susceptible and resistant influenza strains in vitro.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of coadministered oseltamivir and rimantadine in healthy volunteers: an open-label, multiple-dose, randomized, crossover study

Preclinical data suggest increased antiviral activity and less viral resistance when neuraminidase inhibitors and adamantanes are used in combination to harness the complementary effects of their different mechanisms of action. Healthy volunteers were randomized to 5-day oral treatment with oseltamivir 75 mg or rimantadine 100 mg twice daily as monotherapy or to combination treatment. Each participant received all 3 regimens in 1 of 6 treatment sequences, with a minimum of 7 days' washout between periods. Final follow-up was 10 to 14 days after the final dose. Drug exposure, elimination, safety, and tolerability were assessed. There were no clinically relevant differences in 12-hour areas under the concentration-time curves of drug in plasma or peak plasma drug concentrations with combination versus monotherapy. Elimination half-life was unaffected by coadministration. There were no safety/tolerability concerns. One case of vomiting and 1 of paresthesia were considered remotely related to combination treatment, and 1 episode of toothache and 1 of acne were considered unrelated. There were no serious adverse events and no deaths. Combination therapy with oseltamivir and rimantadine at recommended dosages in adults had no discernible effect on the pharmacokinetics of either drug and raised no tolerability issues.

Characterization of a fully human monoclonal antibody against extracellular domain of matrix protein 2 of influenza A virus

The extra-cellular domain of the influenza virus matrix protein 2 (M2e) is highly conserved between influenza A virus strains compared to hemagglutinin and neuraminidase, and has long been viewed as a potential and universal vaccine target. M2e induces no or only weak and transient immune responses following infection, making it difficult to detect M2e-specific antibodies producing B-cells in human peripheral blood lymphocytes. Recently, using a single-cell manipulation method, immunospot array assay on a chip (ISAAC), we obtained an M2e-specific human antibody (Ab1-10) from the peripheral blood of a healthy volunteer. In this report, we have demonstrate that Ab1-10 reacted not only to seasonal influenza A viruses, but also to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus (2009 H1N1) and highly pathogenic avian influenza A virus, and that the antibody-bound M2e of 2009 H1N1 inactivated the virus with high affinity (∼10(-10)M). More importantly, it inhibited 2009 H1N1 viral propagation in vitro. These results suggest that Ab1-10 might be a potential candidate for antibody therapeutics for a wide range of influenza A viruses.

Overview/reflections on the 2009 H1N1 pandemic

The Influenza A H1N1 2009 pandemic was a test of the global public health response. Strategies that worked included mass vaccine production and antivirals while quarantine and isolation proved futile. Among the lessons learned was the importance of severity in the definition of a pandemic.

Drugs in development for influenza

The emergence and global spread of the 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza virus reminds us that we are limited in the strategies available to control influenza infection. Vaccines are the best option for the prophylaxis and control of a pandemic; however, the lag time between virus identification and vaccine distribution exceeds 6 months and concerns regarding vaccine safety are a growing issue leading to vaccination refusal. In the short-term, antiviral therapy is vital to control the spread of influenza. However, we are currently limited to four licensed anti-influenza drugs: the neuraminidase inhibitors oseltamivir and zanamivir, and the M2 ion-channel inhibitors amantadine and rimantadine. The value of neuraminidase inhibitors was clearly established during the initial phases of the 2009 pandemic when vaccines were not available, i.e. stockpiles of antivirals are valuable. Unfortunately, as drug-resistant variants continue to emerge naturally and through selective pressure applied by use of antiviral drugs, the efficacy of these drugs declines. Because we cannot predict the strain of influenza virus that will cause the next epidemic or pandemic, it is important that we develop novel anti-influenza drugs with broad reactivity against all strains and subtypes, and consider moving to multiple drug therapy in the future. In this article we review the experimental data on investigational antiviral agents undergoing clinical trials (parenteral zanamivir and peramivir, long-acting neuraminidase inhibitors and the polymerase inhibitor favipiravir [T-705]) and experimental antiviral agents that target either the virus (the haemagglutinin inhibitor cyanovirin-N and thiazolides) or the host (fusion protein inhibitors [DAS181], cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor agonists).

Combination chemotherapy for influenza

The emergence of pandemic H1N1 influenza viruses in April 2009 and the continuous evolution of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza viruses underscore the urgency of novel approaches to chemotherapy for human influenza infection. Anti-influenza drugs are currently limited to the neuraminidase inhibitors (oseltamivir and zanamivir) and to M2 ion channel blockers (amantadine and rimantadine), although resistance to the latter class develops rapidly. Potential targets for the development of new anti-influenza agents include the viral polymerase (and endonuclease), the hemagglutinin, and the non-structural protein NS1. The limitations of monotherapy and the emergence of drug-resistant variants make combination chemotherapy the logical therapeutic option. Here we review the experimental data on combination chemotherapy with currently available agents and the development of new agents and therapy targets.

In vitro system for modeling influenza A virus resistance under drug pressure

One of the biggest challenges in the effort to treat and contain influenza A virus infections is the emergence of resistance during treatment. It is well documented that resistance to amantadine arises rapidly during the course of treatment due to mutations in the gene coding for the M2 protein. To address this problem, it is critical to develop experimental systems that can accurately model the selection of resistance under drug pressure as seen in humans. We used the hollow-fiber infection model (HFIM) system to examine the effect of amantadine on the replication of influenza virus, A/Albany/1/98 (H3N2), grown in MDCK cells. At 24 and 48 h postinfection, virus replication was inhibited in a dose-dependent fashion. At 72 and 96 h postinfection, virus replication was no longer inhibited, suggesting the emergence of amantadine-resistant virus. Sequencing of the M2 gene revealed that mutations appeared at between 48 and 72 h of drug treatment and that the mutations were identical to those identified in the clinic for amantadine-resistant viruses (e.g., V27A, A30T, and S31N). Interestingly, we found that the type of mutation was strongly affected by the dose of the drug. The data suggest that the HFIM is a good model for influenza virus infection and resistance generation in humans. The HFIM has the advantage of being a highly controlled system where multiplicity parameters can be directly and accurately controlled and measured.

Oseltamivir in human avian influenza infection

Avian influenza A viruses continue to cause disease outbreaks in humans, and extrapulmonary infection is characteristic. In vitro studies demonstrate the activity of oseltamivir against avian viruses of the H5, H7 and H9 subtypes. In animal models of lethal infection, oseltamivir treatment and prophylaxis limit viral replication and improve survival. Outcomes are influenced by the virulence of the viral strain, dosage regimen and treatment delay; it is also critical for the compound to act systemically. Observational data on oseltamivir treatment in the early stages of disease suggest it is useful for improving survival in patients infected with H5 viruses, and drug-selected resistance has only rarely been reported. The WHO strongly recommends oseltamivir for the treatment of confirmed or suspected cases of human H5 infection and prophylaxis of those at high risk of infection. In addition to oral dosing, nasogastric administration appears to be a viable option for the management of severely ill patients, as is the use of higher doses and prolonged schedules. F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, the manufacturer of oseltamivir, is developing a mathematical model to allow rapid prediction of appropriate dosage regimens for any future pandemic. Roche is also funding the Avian Influenza Registry, an online database that aims to collect information from clinicians worldwide on the course of avian influenza in humans.

Triple combination of amantadine, ribavirin, and oseltamivir is highly active and synergistic against drug resistant influenza virus strains in vitro

The rapid emergence and subsequent spread of the novel 2009 Influenza A/H1N1 virus (2009 H1N1) has prompted the World Health Organization to declare the first pandemic of the 21^st century, highlighting the threat of influenza to public health and healthcare systems. Widespread resistance to both classes of influenza antivirals (adamantanes and neuraminidase inhibitors) occurs in both pandemic and seasonal viruses, rendering these drugs to be of marginal utility in the treatment modality. Worldwide, virtually all 2009 H1N1 and seasonal H3N2 strains are resistant to the adamantanes (rimantadine and amantadine), and the majority of seasonal H1N1 strains are resistant to oseltamivir, the most widely prescribed neuraminidase inhibitor (NAI). To address the need for more effective therapy, we evaluated the in vitro activity of a triple combination antiviral drug (TCAD) regimen composed of drugs with different mechanisms of action against drug-resistant seasonal and 2009 H1N1 influenza viruses. Amantadine, ribavirin, and oseltamivir, alone and in combination, were tested against amantadine- and oseltamivir-resistant influenza A viruses using an in vitro infection model in MDCK cells. Our data show that the triple combination was highly synergistic against drug-resistant viruses, and the synergy of the triple combination was significantly greater than the synergy of any double combination tested (P<0.05), including the combination of two NAIs. Surprisingly, amantadine and oseltamivir contributed to the antiviral activity of the TCAD regimen against amantadine- and oseltamivir-resistant viruses, respectively, at concentrations where they had no activity as single agents, and at concentrations that were clinically achievable. Our data demonstrate that the TCAD regimen composed of amantadine, ribavirin, and oseltamivir is highly synergistic against resistant viruses, including 2009 H1N1. The TCAD regimen overcomes baseline drug resistance to both classes of approved influenza antivirals, and thus may represent a highly active antiviral therapy for seasonal and pandemic influenza.

Effects of the combination of favipiravir (T-705) and oseltamivir on influenza A virus infections in mice

Favipiravir (T-705 [6-fluoro-3-hydroxy-2-pyrazinecarboxamide]) and oseltamivir were combined to treat influenza virus A/NWS/33 (H1N1), A/Victoria/3/75 (H3N2), and A/Duck/MN/1525/81 (H5N1) infections. T-705 alone inhibited viruses in cell culture at 1.4 to 4.3 microM. Oseltamivir inhibited these three viruses in cells at 3.7, 0.02, and 0.16 microM and in neuraminidase assays at 0.94, 0.46, and 2.31 nM, respectively. Oral treatments were given twice daily to mice for 5 to 7 days starting, generally, 24 h after infection. Survival resulting from 5 days of oseltamivir treatment (0.1 and 0.3 mg/kg/day) was significantly better in combination with 20 mg/kg of body weight/day of T-705 against the H1N1 infection. Treatment of the H3N2 infection required 50 mg/kg/day of oseltamivir for 7 days to achieve 60% protection; 25 mg/kg/day was ineffective. T-705 was >or=70% protective at 50 to 100 mg/kg/day but inactive at 25 mg/kg/day. The combination of inhibitors (25 mg/kg/day each) increased survival to 90%. The H5N1 infection was not benefited by treatment with oseltamivir (<or=100 mg/kg/day for 7 days). T-705 was 30 to 70% protective at 25 to 100 mg/kg/day. Survival improved slightly with combination treatments. Increased activity was seen against H5N1 infection by starting treatments 2 h before infection. Oseltamivir was ineffective at <or=40 mg/kg/day. T-705 was 100% protective at 40 and 80 mg/kg/day and inactive at 20 mg/kg/day. Combining ineffective doses (20 mg/kg/day of T-705 and 10 to 40 mg/kg/day of oseltamivir) afforded 60 to 80% protection and improved body weights during infection. Thus, synergistic responses were achieved with low doses of T-705 combined with oseltamivir. These compounds may be viable candidates for combination treatment of human influenza infections.

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.

Effects of double combinations of amantadine, oseltamivir, and ribavirin on influenza A (H5N1) virus infections in cell culture and in mice

An amantadine-resistant influenza A/Duck/MN/1525/81 (H5N1) virus was developed from the low-pathogenic North American wild-type (amantadine-sensitive) virus for studying treatment of infections in cell culture and in mice. Double combinations of amantadine, oseltamivir (or the cell culture-active form, oseltamivir carboxylate), and ribavirin were used. Amantadine-oseltamivir carboxylate and amantadine-ribavirin combinations showed synergistic interactions over a range of doses against wild-type virus in Madin-Darby canine kidney (MDCK) cell culture, but oseltamivir carboxylate-ribavirin combinations did not. Primarily additive interactions were seen with oseltamivir carboxylate-ribavirin combinations against amantadine-resistant virus. The presence of amantadine in drug combinations against the resistant virus did not improve activity. The wild-type and amantadine-resistant viruses were lethal to mice by intranasal instillation. The resistant virus infection could not be treated with amantadine up to 100 mg/kg body weight/day, whereas the wild-type virus infection was treatable with oral doses of 10 (weakly effective) to 100 mg/kg/day administered twice a day for 5 days starting 4 h prior to virus exposure. Drug combination studies showed that treatment of the amantadine-resistant virus infection with amantadine-oseltamivir or amantadine-ribavirin combinations was not significantly better than using oseltamivir or ribavirin alone. In contrast, the oseltamivir-ribavirin (25- and 75-mg/kg/day combination) treatments produced significant reductions in mortality. The wild-type virus infection was markedly reduced in severity by all three combinations (amantadine, 10 mg/kg/day combined with the other compounds at 20 or 40 mg/kg/day) compared to monotherapy with the three compounds. Results indicate a lack of benefit of amantadine in combinations against amantadine-resistant virus, but positive benefits in combinations against amantadine-sensitive virus.

Antiviral therapy for respiratory tract infections

Viruses are important pathogens causing respiratory tract infections both in the community and health-care facility settings. They are extremely common causes of morbidity in the competent hosts and some are associated with significant mortality in the compromised individuals. With wider application of molecular techniques, novel viruses are being described and old viruses are found to have new significance in different epidemiological and clinical settings. Some of these emerging pathogens may have the potential to cause pandemics or global spread of a severe disease, as exemplified by severe acute respiratory syndrome and avian influenza. Antiviral therapy of viral respiratory infections is often unnecessary in the competent hosts because most of them are selflimiting and effective agents are not always available. In the immunocompromised individuals or for infections caused by highly pathogenic viruses, such as avian influenza viruses (AIV), antiviral treatment is highly desirable, despite the fact that many of the agents may not have undergone stringent clinical trials. In immunocompetent hosts, antiviral therapy can be stopped early because adaptive immune response can usually be mounted within 5-14 days. However, the duration of antiviral therapy in immunosuppressed hosts depends on clinical and radiological resolution, the degree and duration of immunosuppression, and therefore maintenance therapy is sometimes needed after the initial response. Immunotherapy and immunoprophylaxis appear to be promising directions for future research. Appropriate and targeted immunomodulation may play an important adjunctive role in some of these infections by limiting the extent of end-organ damage and multi-organ failure in some fulminant infections.

A new and rapid genotypic assay for the detection of neuraminidase inhibitor resistant influenza A viruses of subtype H1N1, H3N2, and H5N1

The neuraminidase of influenza viruses is the target of the inhibitors oseltamivir and zanamivir. Recent reports on influenza viruses with reduced susceptibility to neuraminidase inhibitors (NAI) are a cause for concern. Several amino acid substitutions, each as a consequence of one single nucleotide mutation, are known to confer resistance to NAI. An increase of NAI-resistant viruses appears to be likely as a result of a wider application of NAI for treatment and prophylaxis of seasonal influenza infections. Monitoring the occurrence and spread of resistant viruses is an important task. Therefore, RT-PCR assays were developed with subsequent pyrosequencing analysis (PSQ-PCR). These assays allow a rapid, high-throughput and cost-effective screening of subtype A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and A/H5N1 viruses. Various specimens such as respiratory swabs, allantoic fluid, or cell-propagated viruses can be used and results are available within hours. Several A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and A/H5N1 viruses isolated from human and avian specimens were tested to evaluate the method. Positive controls encoding resistance-associated mutations were created using site-directed mutagenesis. The results obtained with these controls showed that the assay can discriminate clearly the wild-type virus from a mutant virus. The detection limit of minor virus variants within the viral quasispecies amounts to 10%.