Custom Search
Showing posts with label Influenza Virus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Influenza Virus. Show all posts

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Swine flu may have started in laboratory, expert says

The man who helped develop the Tamiflu flu vaccine believes the swine flu epidemic has been caused by human error. Adrian Gibbs says the H1N1 virus may have been man-made and was passed to humans after a handling mistake at a laboratory.

Gibbs, who has studied germ evolution for 40 years, is to publish a paper about his theory, which he developed after studying the swine flu virus’s genetic blueprint. “One of the simplest explanations is that it’s a laboratory escape,” he told reporters from Bloomberg.

Viruses are developed on eggs, and Gibbs believes the new H1N1 strain may have accidentally evolved before being passed to humans. He has discovered that the strain mutates three times faster than the most closely-related viruses found in pigs, which suggests it had evolved outside of swine.


It would not be the first time a virus has ‘escaped’ from a laboratory. Earlier this year the avian flu virus made its way into a consignment of seasonal flu vaccines, which were destined for around 18 countries in Europe.

Some scientists also suspect that the Russian flu outbreak of 1977 was started when a virus was accidentally released from a laboratory.
Read More...

Swine flu, pigflu, H1N1 (as WHO now prefers), whatever-you-call-it

This is fast-breaking story if ever there was one, and it looks impossible from this perch to do any more than sample the coverage randomly. Web sites are updating stories hourly, even minutely. So what the Tracker will focus on in coming days are what might be called the metastories, the sidebars with information that’s a bit more durable.

One alarming sidebar that ought to be its own main story is David Brown’s excellent piece in the Washington Post saying that the outbreak reporting system set up after SARS six years ago didn’t work well this time. Brown says that once the outbreak was first recognized in Mexico City, it took 18 days for the world at large to hear about it. “By the time international authorities became fully aware of the outbreak,” Brown writes, “there were about 800 cases and at least 50 deaths, and the virus was unknowingly being carried into other countries.” It’s a long story and sure to trigger investigations.


Jessica Mintz at the AP has a related story saying that weeks before CDC and WHO issued their warnings a small Seattle startup “already had a hunch something was up.” It’s an Internet-based system that tracks blogs, chat rooms, Twitter feeds and other publicly available Internet forums for signs that people are talking about a disease outbreak. The company, called Veratect, even issued some alerts before the public health agencies did.

Google is trying something similar by compiling search terms it receives from specific locations. Google.org is publishing its findings for Mexico, which appear to have logged a peak of flu-related searches in January and February but at levels below those seen in previous years.

Lost in most of the coverage is any discussion of how bad it is for an individual to get swine…oops, I mean H1N1 flu? After all, ordinary flu kills several hundred thousand people every year, and we live with that. In 1968 the so-called Hong Kong flu killed about a million people. The Tracker, then working at the Detroit Free Press, recalls that pandemic as something we hoped not to catch but didn’t get all that exercised over. Maggie Fox at Reuters makes a good start on explaining these things in the reader-friendly Q&A form. We need more examples of this kind of thing in other outlets.

Tracker fans, if you spot good examples of flu metastories, please send links to the Tracker via the “Suggest Stories” button at the top of this page. Please put only one link in each suggestion because our software is set to reject anything more spamlike.
Read More...

Australian swine-flu cases reach 16

Sydney - Sixteen swine-flu cases have been confirmed in Australia, officials said Sunday.

A 15-year-old Melbourne boy became the third in his school to test positive to the H1N1 influenza virus. Authorities ordered the school to be closed for a week.

In the state of Victoria, where 11 of the cases were reported, Health Minister Daniel Andrews reiterated his view that there was no need for Melbourne residents to be alarmed.

"No one that has tested positive so far is exhibiting symptoms that are any more severe than a normal winter flu," Andrews said.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd apologized to foreign tourists annoyed by the government's response to swine flu. On Saturday a luxury liner visiting Sydney was held for five hours as doctors assessed the condition of its 2,000 passengers and 900 crew.


"I understand people are going to be inconvenienced by a number of these measures, particularly as it relates to schools and certain parts of the tourism industry," he said. "But these are necessary measures ... because we want to prevent a major outbreak and we want to do anything we can to prevent any deaths."
Read More...

Saturday, May 2, 2009

Outbreak of Swine-Origin Influenza A (H1N1) Virus Infection - Mexico, March - April 2009

In March and early April 2009, Mexico experienced outbreaks of respiratory illness and increased reports of patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) in several areas of the country. On April 12, the General Directorate of Epidemiology (DGE) reported an outbreak of ILI in a small community in the state of Veracruz to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) in accordance with International Health Regulations. On April 17, a case of atypical pneumonia in Oaxaca State prompted enhanced surveillance throughout Mexico. On April 23, several cases of severe respiratory illness laboratory confirmed as swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus (S-OIV) infection were communicated to the PAHO. Sequence analysis revealed that the patients were infected with the same S-OIV strain detected in two children residing in California (1). This report describes the initial and ongoing investigation of the S-OIV outbreak in Mexico.


Enhanced Surveillance
On April 17, in response to the increase in reports of respiratory illness, DGE issued a national epidemiologic alert to all influenza-monitoring units and hospitals (Table 1). The alert asked hospitals to report all patients with severe respiratory illness and recommended collection of diagnostic respiratory specimens from these patients within 72 hours of illness onset. On April 18, DGE staff visited 21 hospitals throughout the country to confirm the apparent increase in illness incidence.

After laboratory confirmation of S-OIV infection on April 23, DGE developed case definitions. A suspected case was defined as severe respiratory illness with fever, cough, and difficulty breathing. A probable case was defined as a suspected case in a patient from whom a specimen had been collected and tested positive for influenza A. A confirmed case was defined as a probable case that tested positive for S-OIV by real-time reverse--transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Health-care officials were contacted and asked to provide retrospective and ongoing data for persons having illness consistent with these case definitions and seeking care on or after March 1.

During March 1-April 30, a total of 1,918 suspected* cases were reported, including 286 probable and 97 confirmed cases (Figure). A total of 84 deaths were reported. A majority of case-reports were for hospitalized patients, reflecting the concentration of surveillance efforts within hospitals. However, DGE also received reports from sites conducting routine seasonal influenza surveillance of patients with ILI. Of 1,069 patients with suspected and probable cases for whom information was available, 755 were hospitalized, and the remaining 314 were examined in outpatient settings or emergency departments. Suspected or probable cases were reported from all 31 states and from the Federal District of Mexico. The four areas with the most cases were Federal District (213 cases), Guanajuato (141), Aguascalientes (93), and Durango (77). In other states, the number of suspected or probable cases ranged from two to 46. Suspected and probable cases were identified in all age groups. Mexico routinely monitors seasonal influenza in a network of outpatient facilities throughout the country. Fifty-one influenza A positive specimens from six states were collected during January 4--March 11 in this surveillance network. All of these specimens tested negative for S-OIV at CDC.

Confirmed Cases of S-OIV Infection
As of April 30, DGE surveillance activities, focusing on patients with severe respiratory disease, had identified 97 patients with laboratory-confirmed S-OIV infection, including seven persons who had died. The first of the 97 patients reported onset of illness (any symptom) on March 17, and the most recent patients reported onset on April 26. Laboratory confirmation of S-OIV infection for the most recent 73 of these 97 cases was reported on the evening of April 29. Collection of additional information on these 73 cases is ongoing. Of the 24 patients for whom demographic and clinical information is available, 20 (83%) were hospitalized, three were examined in outpatient settings, and one had illness that was not medically attended. Patients ranged in age from <1 style="font-weight: bold;">Reported by: General Directorate of Epidemiology, Ministry of Health, Mexico; Pan American Health Organization; World Health Organization; Public Health Agency of Canada; CDC (United States).

Editorial Note:
Understanding the epidemiology and clinical profiles of recent cases of S-OIV infection in Mexico can help inform regional, national, and global control measures in response to the emergence of S-OIV infection. Important areas for investigation worldwide include evidence of person-to-person transmission, the geographic distribution of disease, the clinical spectrum of disease, and the effectiveness of mitigation strategies.

Previous instances of human-to-human transmission of other swine viruses have been reported to result in small clusters of disease and limited generations of disease transmission (2,3). Several findings indicate that transmission in Mexico involves person-to-person spread with multiple generations of transmission. Patients with probable and laboratory-confirmed disease have presented over a period of 4 weeks. Limited contact tracing of patients with laboratory-confirmed disease also has identified secondary cases of ILI.

The clinical spectrum of S-OIV illness is not yet well characterized in Mexico. However, evidence suggests that S-OIV transmission is widespread and that less severe (uncomplicated) illness is common. Patients with confirmed disease have been identified in several states, and suspected cases have been identified in all states, which suggests that S-OIV transmission is widespread. In addition, several countries are reporting S-OIV infection among persons who have travel histories involving different parts of Mexico in the 7 days before illness onset. To date, case-finding in Mexico has focused on patients seeking care in hospitals, and the selection of cases for laboratory testing has focused on patients with more severe disease. Therefore, a large number of undetected cases of illness might exist in persons seeking care in primary-care settings or not seeking care at all. Additional investigations are needed urgently to evaluate the full clinical spectrum of disease in Mexico, the proportion of patients who have severe illness, and the extent of disease transmission.

To expedite confirmation of disease in additional patients, the World Health Organization (WHO) Influenza Collaborating Center in Atlanta, Georgia, has placed the genetic sequence of S-OIV from California in GenBank.† Specific primers for S-OIV have been developed and will be distributed through the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance Network to reference laboratories throughout the world. As of April 26, the National Laboratory for Public Health in Mexico has capacity to perform PCR for S-OIV.

The epidemiologic characteristics of this outbreak underscore the importance of monitoring the effectiveness of community mitigation efforts, nonpharmaceutical interventions, and clinical management practices in anticipation of a possible pandemic.
Read More...

Influenza A(H1NI) - (Mexican swine influenza)

Information about Influenza A(H1NI) will be added to this page as it becomes available:

Influenza A(H1NI) bulletin - 1 May 2009
The University is closely monitoring the possible epidemic of Influenza A(H1NI) - (Mexican Swine Influenza). While there is as yet no cause for alarm nor any evidence that the University will be affected, we are reviewing the detailed pandemic planning carried in response to the threat of avian flu. Faculties and service divisions have been instructed to take planned precautionary steps appropriate for their area (Halls of Residence for example).

Influenza viruses are transmitted by aerosol droplets being sneezed or coughed directly over other people. Or touching contaminated surfaces and then touching their eyes, mouth or nose. Therefore the University reminds everyone to ensure they follow the very basic hygiene precautions of good sneeze and cough etiquette to prevent the spread of germs. Simply cover your mouth and nose with a tissue if coughing or sneezing, dispose of the soiled tissue in a lined bin and thoroughly wash and dry your hands or use a alcohol base hand gel (sanitiser).


Travel
The University has issued an instruction that no staff are to undertake University business travel to Mexico forthwith. This also applies to any student whose travel is paid for, or funded by or through the University. The University is not to pay for or fund or arrange or permit a student for whom it is therefore responsible to travel to Mexico.

Symptoms
If you have returned from the US or Mexico within the last ten days and think you are suffering influenza symptom it is important that you seek medical attention immediately and contact the following Healthline number (0800 611 116). The Influenza A(H1NI) symptoms are similar to seasonal influenza (flu) which include headache, chills and cough followed by fever, loss of appetite, muscle aches and fatigue, runny nose, sneezing, watery eyes and throat irritation. Nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea may occur in adults as well as in children.

Prior to visiting your doctor please inform them that you have recently returned from these countries so they can prepare their clinics. Please do not re-enter the workplace if you have symptoms.
Read More...

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Key Facts about Swine Influenza (Swine Flu)

Swine Flu
What is Swine Influenza?
Swine Influenza (swine flu) is a respiratory disease of pigs caused by type A influenza virus that regularly causes outbreaks of influenza in pigs. Swine flu viruses cause high levels of illness and low death rates in pigs. Swine influenza viruses may circulate among swine throughout the year, but most outbreaks occur during the late fall and winter months similar to outbreaks in humans. The classical swine flu virus (an influenza type A H1N1 virus) was first isolated from a pig in 1930.

How many swine flu viruses are there?
Like all influenza viruses, swine flu viruses change constantly. Pigs can be infected by avian influenza and human influenza viruses as well as swine influenza viruses. When influenza viruses from different species infect pigs, the viruses can reassort (i.e. swap genes) and new viruses that are a mix of swine, human and/or avian influenza viruses can emerge. Over the years, different variations of swine flu viruses have emerged. At this time, there are four main influenza type A virus subtypes that have been isolated in pigs: H1N1, H1N2, H3N2, and H3N1. However, most of the recently isolated influenza viruses from pigs have been H1N1 viruses.

Swine Flu in Humans

Can humans catch swine flu?
Swine flu viruses do not normally infect humans. However, sporadic human infections with swine flu have occurred. Most commonly, these cases occur in persons with direct exposure to pigs (e.g. children near pigs at a fair or workers in the swine industry). In addition, there have been documented cases of one person spreading swine flu to others. For example, an outbreak of apparent swine flu infection in pigs in Wisconsin in 1988 resulted in multiple human infections, and, although no community outbreak resulted, there was antibody evidence of virus transmission from the patient to health care workers who had close contact with the patient.

How common is swine flu infection in humans?
In the past, CDC received reports of approximately one human swine influenza virus infection every one to two years in the U.S., but from December 2005 through February 2009, 12 cases of human infection with swine influenza have been reported.

What are the symptoms of swine flu in humans?
The symptoms of swine flu in people are expected to be similar to the symptoms of regular human seasonal influenza and include fever, lethargy, lack of appetite and coughing. Some people with swine flu also have reported runny nose, sore throat, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea.

Can people catch swine flu from eating pork?
No. Swine influenza viruses are not transmitted by food. You can not get swine influenza from eating pork or pork products. Eating properly handled and cooked pork and pork products is safe. Cooking pork to an internal temperature of 160°F kills the swine flu virus as it does other bacteria and viruses.

How does swine flu spread?
Influenza viruses can be directly transmitted from pigs to people and from people to pigs. Human infection with flu viruses from pigs are most likely to occur when people are in close proximity to infected pigs, such as in pig barns and livestock exhibits housing pigs at fairs. Human-to-human transmission of swine flu can also occur. This is thought to occur in the same way as seasonal flu occurs in people, which is mainly person-to-person transmission through coughing or sneezing of people infected with the influenza virus. People may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose.

What do we know about human-to-human spread of swine flu?
In September 1988, a previously healthy 32-year-old pregnant woman was hospitalized for pneumonia and died 8 days later. A swine H1N1 flu virus was detected. Four days before getting sick, the patient visited a county fair swine exhibition where there was widespread influenza-like illness among the swine.

In follow-up studies, 76% of swine exhibitors tested had antibody evidence of swine flu infection but no serious illnesses were detected among this group. Additional studies suggest that one to three health care personnel who had contact with the patient developed mild influenza-like illnesses with antibody evidence of swine flu infection.

How can human infections with swine influenza be diagnosed?
To diagnose swine influenza A infection, a respiratory specimen would generally need to be collected within the first 4 to 5 days of illness (when an infected person is most likely to be shedding virus). However, some persons, especially children, may shed virus for 10 days or longer. Identification as a swine flu influenza A virus requires sending the specimen to CDC for laboratory testing.

What medications are available to treat swine flu infections in humans?
There are four different antiviral drugs that are licensed for use in the US for the treatment of influenza: amantadine, rimantadine, oseltamivir and zanamivir. While most swine influenza viruses have been susceptible to all four drugs, the most recent swine influenza viruses isolated from humans are resistant to amantadine and rimantadine. At this time, CDC recommends the use of oseltamivir or zanamivir for the treatment and/or prevention of infection with swine influenza viruses.

What other examples of swine flu outbreaks are there?
Probably the most well known is an outbreak of swine flu among soldiers in Fort Dix, New Jersey in 1976. The virus caused disease with x-ray evidence of pneumonia in at least 4 soldiers and 1 death; all of these patients had previously been healthy. The virus was transmitted to close contacts in a basic training environment, with limited transmission outside the basic training group. The virus is thought to have circulated for a month and disappeared. The source of the virus, the exact time of its introduction into Fort Dix, and factors limiting its spread and duration are unknown. The Fort Dix outbreak may have been caused by introduction of an animal virus into a stressed human population in close contact in crowded facilities during the winter. The swine influenza A virus collected from a Fort Dix soldier was named A/New Jersey/76 (Hsw1N1).

Is the H1N1 swine flu virus the same as human H1N1 viruses?
No. The H1N1 swine flu viruses are antigenically very different from human H1N1 viruses and, therefore, vaccines for human seasonal flu would not provide protection from H1N1 swine flu viruses.

Swine Flu in Pigs
How does swine flu spread among pigs?
Swine flu viruses are thought to be spread mostly through close contact among pigs and possibly from contaminated objects moving between infected and uninfected pigs. Herds with continuous swine flu infections and herds that are vaccinated against swine flu may have sporadic disease, or may show only mild or no symptoms of infection.

What are signs of swine flu in pigs?
Signs of swine flu in pigs can include sudden onset of fever, depression, coughing (barking), discharge from the nose or eyes, sneezing, breathing difficulties, eye redness or inflammation, and going off feed.

How common is swine flu among pigs?
H1N1 and H3N2 swine flu viruses are endemic among pig populations in the United States and something that the industry deals with routinely. Outbreaks among pigs normally occur in colder weather months (late fall and winter) and sometimes with the introduction of new pigs into susceptible herds. Studies have shown that the swine flu H1N1 is common throughout pig populations worldwide, with 25 percent of animals showing antibody evidence of infection. In the U.S. studies have shown that 30 percent of the pig population has antibody evidence of having had H1N1 infection. More specifically, 51 percent of pigs in the north-central U.S. have been shown to have antibody evidence of infection with swine H1N1. Human infections with swine flu H1N1 viruses are rare. There is currently no way to differentiate antibody produced in response to flu vaccination in pigs from antibody made in response to pig infections with swine H1N1 influenza.

While H1N1 swine viruses have been known to circulate among pig populations since at least 1930, H3N2 influenza viruses did not begin circulating among US pigs until 1998. The H3N2 viruses initially were introduced into the pig population from humans. The current swine flu H3N2 viruses are closely related to human H3N2 viruses.

Is there a vaccine for swine flu?
Vaccines are available to be given to pigs to prevent swine influenza. There is no vaccine to protect humans from swine flu. The seasonal influenza vaccine will likely help provide partial protection against swine H3N2, but not swine H1N1 viruses.
Read More...

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Influenza-associated Deaths in Tropical Singapore

We used a regression model to examine the impact of influenza on death rates in tropical Singapore for the period 1996–2003. Influenza A (H3N2) was the predominant circulating influenza virus subtype, with consistently significant and robust effect on mortality rates. Influenza was associated with an annual death rate from all causes, from underlying pneumonia and influenza, and from underlying circulatory and respiratory conditions of 14.8 (95% confidence interval 9.8–19.8), 2.9 (1.0–5.0), and 11.9 (8.3–15.7) per 100,000 person-years, respectively. An estimated 6.5% of underlying pneumonia and influenza deaths were attributable to influenza. The proportion of influenza-associated deaths was 11.3 times higher in persons age >65 years than in the general population. Our findings support the need for influenza surveillance and annual influenza vaccination for at-risk populations in tropical countries.

Influenza virus infections cause excess illness and deaths in temperate countries. In the United States, influenza is responsible for 50 million illnesses and up to 47,200 deaths annually.


However, little is known about the impact of influenza on death rates in tropical regions, where the effect of influenza is thought to be less. In subtropical Hong Kong, deaths from underlying pneumonia and influenza attributable to influenza were estimated to be 4.1/100,000 population per year, higher than the rate (3.1/100,000) reported in the United States.

In tropical Singapore, influenza viruses circulate year round, with a bimodal increase in influenza incidence observed in April–July and November–January. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is also associated with excess deaths. Methods
National Influenza Viral Surveillance

Influenza virus surveillance is carried out throughout the year and has been instituted in Singapore since 1973. We obtained monthly data on influenza A and B viruses and RSV from the WHO-designated National Influenza Centre in Singapore from January 1996 to December 2003. RSV was detected by immunofluorescence tests and virus isolation. Influenza viruses were identified by direct antigen detection with immunofluorescence techniques, serologic tests with complement fixation, and virus isolation. The National Influenza Center provided aggregated data for this study, i.e., monthly numbers of total respiratory specimens tested for influenza virus, positive influenza test results, and influenza virus isolates by subtype, as well as monthly RSV data.

Mortality Data
Three death outcomes were analyzed: underlying pneumonia and influenza (P&I) deaths (ICD-9: 480–487), underlying circulatory and respiratory (C&R) deaths (ICD-9: 390–519), and all-cause deaths (ICD-9: 000–999).
We first applied 6 negative binomial regression models to the monthly number of deaths and monthly proportions of positive influenza virus and RSV tests, to examine the relationships between mortality and the respiratory viruses (namely, models. We also attempted to estimate the excess number of deaths from the viruses.

We estimated the influenza-associated mortality fraction by dividing the number of excess deaths (the difference between observed and expected deaths) by the number of observed deaths, when the proportion of positive influenza results was set to 0 in model 6. The number of excess deaths attributable to influenza was then derived by multiplying the total number of deaths in each mortality category by the respective influenza-associated mortality fraction.

Results
From January 1996 to December 2003, 57,060 specimens were tested for influenza virus, and 51,370 were tested for RSV. There were 9,103 positive results for RSV and 3,829 positive results for influenza. The annual mean number of tests positive for influenza A was 5.8% (range 2.6%–9.5%) and for influenza B, 0.9% (range 0.4%–1.6%). Annually, influenza A (H3N2) was the predominant influenza virus subtype in circulation. During the 8-year period, an annual mean of 15,616 deaths (range 15,301–16,024) occurred in Singapore. An average of 1,798 (range 1,545–2,340) underlying P&I deaths and 8,237 (range 7,833–8,715) underlying C&R deaths occurred each year.

The Figure shows the temporal trends for death outcomes as well as influenza virus and RSV activities. Peaks in monthly influenza A viruses corresponded very well with peaks in monthly all-cause deaths, underlying P&I deaths, and underlying C&R deaths.

We tested the Spearman rank correlations between influenza and RSV, and meteorologic variables. Influenza A positivity (Spearman correlation [r] = 0.25) was weakly correlated with relative humidity. The influenza A (H3N2) subtype had a high correlation with influenza A (r = 0.75) (data not shown).

The relationship between deaths and each respiratory virus (influenza A, influenza B, and RSV) was examined by using a stepwise sequential approach, i.e., first fitting each of the viruses into separate models, then adjusting for 1 of the other 2 viruses (models 4, 5), and finally, adjusting for all viruses in a single model (model 6). Influenza A had significant and robust effects on monthly all-cause deaths (RR 1.05 for each 10% change in positive test results, without adjusting for influenza B virus, RSV, and other potential confounding factors; vs. RR 1.05, after adjusting for influenza B, RSV, and other confounding factors), underlying P&I (RR 1.12 vs. RR 1.13), and underlying C&R (1.08 vs. 1.09) deaths.

In Table 4, we used model 6 (as described in Table 3) to further explore the association between influenza A virus subtypes and the 3 death outcomes. We replaced influenza A variable with influenza A subtypes and adjusted for influenza B virus, RSV, and other confounding factors. Only influenza A (H3N2) had significant (all p values <0.001) effects on all-cause deaths (RR 1.04 for each 10% change in positive test results, 95% CI 1.02–1.05), underlying C&R deaths (1.05, 1.04–1.07), and underlying P&I deaths (1.08, 1.04–1.12).

Influenza B also had a significant effect on underlying C&R deaths (RR 1.01 for each 1% change in positive test results, 95% CI 1.00–1.03, p = 0.037) and all-cause deaths (1.01, 1.00–1.02, p = 0.008), but not on underlying P&I deaths (p = 0.878). Next, we used the full model to quantify the excess deaths attributable to influenza throughout the year. For deaths from all causes, we estimated an annual mean of 588 influenza-associated deaths, representing 3.8% of total deaths. The mean annual estimates of deaths from underlying P&I and C&R associated with influenza were 116 and 475, respectively, representing 6.5% and 5.8% of such deaths.

We observed that the proportion of influenza-associated deaths was higher among the elderly. The annual influenza-associated proportion of deaths from all causes was 11.3 times higher in persons age >65 years (167.8/100,000 person-years) than in the general population (14.8/100,000). For influenza-associated underlying P&I deaths, the annual death rate in those >65 years (46.9/100,000) was 16.2 times higher than those in the general population (2.9/100,000).

Table 6 compares the excess deaths observed in our study with that derived from studies in a subtropical and temperate country. Our estimates of annual influenza-associated all-cause deaths, underlying P&I deaths, and underlying C&R deaths in Singapore were 14.8, 2.9, and 11.9 per 100,000 person-years, respectively. This finding would translate to an estimated 588 deaths (3.8% of total deaths) due to influenza annually, which is comparable to the proportion of deaths observed in subtropical Hong Kong and in the United States, a temperate country.

This figure far exceeds our estimate of 6.5% of underlying P&I deaths attributable to influenza. In Hong Kong and the United States, influenza-associated deaths represented 7.4% and 9.8% of underlying P&I deaths, respectively.

In Singapore, we observed that the influenza-associated proportion of deaths was highest in persons >65 years. Again, this finding is consistent with those in the United States where 90% of influenza-associated deaths occurred among the elderly. In this population, we estimated an annual number of excess deaths per 100,000 population of 167.8 of all-cause deaths, 46.9 deaths from underlying P&I, and 155.4 deaths from underlying C&R attributable to influenza.

In fact, our estimates for influenza-associated deaths in persons age >65 years were consistently higher than those in Hong Kong and United States, for all 3 mortality outcomes. Annual influenza vaccination for persons age >65 years has been recommended since September 2003 in Singapore by the National Expert Committee on Immunization. Influenza vaccine efficacy for preventing death among people >65 years was estimated to be 68%. We recommend a follow-up study to estimate the impact of vaccination on influenza-associated deaths in this age group in Singapore.

With regard to influenza subtypes, we note that most seasons in the United States were dominated by influenza A (H3N2) virus; the greatest number of influenza-associated deaths were associated with influenza A (H3N2), followed by RSV, influenza B, and influenza A (H1N1) virus. Influenza A (H3N2) virus accounted for 60% and 77% of positive influenza isolates in the United States and Hong Kong, respectively. Influenza A (H3N2) was the predominant virus subtype during our study period and had a consistently significant impact on all 3 categories of deaths. Although influenza B was noted to have significant effects on all-cause deaths and underlying C&R deaths, the magnitudes of RRs were relatively small (RR 1.00–1.01, for each 1% change in positive test results). In addition, influenza B virus did not have any significant and observable impact on underlying P&I deaths. We did not observe any significant impact from influenza A (H1N1) virus and RSV on all 3 outcomes.

The prevalence of influenza in Singapore illustrates the importance of improving worldwide coverage and quality of virologic and epidemiologic surveillance for influenza, as described in WHO's Global Agenda for Influenza Surveillance and Control.

Second, the finding that influenza infections account for substantial disease supports our continued investment in strengthening influenza surveillance in our country. An influenza pandemic can be expected to result in far higher attack and death rates than currently observed. Influenza, in contrast, has caused an average of 588 excess deaths in Singapore annually. Influenza continues to cause an increasing amount of disease in Singapore, particularly in our rapidly aging population. Our study is the first to show unequivocally that influenza has a significant impact on proportion of deaths in a tropical country like Singapore.
Read More...

Friday, April 10, 2009

CYTOKINE STORM and the INFLUENZA PANDEMIC

Angela L. Petrosino, MPH, CHES (Northwest Ohio Consortium for Public Health)

A cytokine storm is the systemic expression of a healthy and vigorous immune system resulting in the release of more than 150 inflammatory mediators (cytokines, oxygen free radicals, and coagulation factors). Both pro-inflammatory cytokines (such as Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, InterLeukin-1, and InterLeukin-6) and anti-inflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin 10, and interleukin 1 receptor antagonist) are elevated in the serum, and the fierce and often lethal interplay of these cytokines is referred to as a "Cytokine Storm". The primary contributors to the cytokine storm are TNF-a (Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha) and IL-6 (Interleukin-6). The cytokine storm is an inappropriate (exaggerated) immune response that is caused by rapidly proliferating and highly activated T-cells or natural killer (NK) cells. These cells are themselves activated by infected macrophages. The cytokine storm must be treated and suppressed or lethality can result.

Treating the Cytokine Storm of Avian Influenza, the Premise of this Website:
1. Bird flu patients die from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) caused by the cytokine storm, and not directly from the virus. Historic survival in ARDS is 60%-85%; with bird flu-associated ARDS it is 43%.
2. Neuraminidase inhibitors (i.e. Tamiflu, Relenza) are not clinically proven effective for bird flu patients and cannot address the lethal cytokine storm associated with the infection.
3. The treatment to prevent or stop the autoimmune reaction (cytokine storm) is commercially available by prescription, but is not currently being recommended by the World Health Organization to treat these patients.

Acute respiratory viral infection (especially from the H5N1 subtype influenza virus) results in a cytokine storm effecting the lungs, and subsequent damage to alveoli and lung tissue results in the lethality seen in more severe flu viral infections, especially those fatalities among young healthy adults.
H5N1 Virus

In the absence of prompt medical intervention to stop the "cytokine storm", the lung will suffer permanent damage. Many of these patients will develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), i.e. will present with pulmonary edema that is not caused by volume overload, or a depressed left ventricular function. Deaths will usually result from multisystem organ failure, and not from lung failure.




Proposed Mechanism of the Cytokine Storm Evoked by Influenza virus.
Osterholm. New England Journal of Medicine, 352 (18): 1839, Figure 3. May 5, 2005
Animation of chart above on NEJM.org

Sepsis and cytokine storm
Sepsis is a severe systemic inflammatory response and is one example of a pathologic condition associated with "cytokine storm". Sepsis is an often lethal hemodynamic collapse which is usually the result of a super infection by gram-negative bacterial endotoxins. Sepsis is also classified as septic shock syndrome (SSS).

Cytokine storm can also result from viral infections such as influenza, and an exaggerated systemic immune response to that particular viral infection (designated a type A, subtype "H1N1" virus) may have been the cause of high lethality seen in the influenza pandemic of 1918 to 1919. The great influenza pandemic was the most destructive pandemic in recorded world history, and killed more people (estimated between 20 to 50 million) than all casualties resulting from the first World War. Although the Spanish Flu pandemic affected an enormous percentage of the world wide population (up to 20% of the world population according to some sources), and killed between 20 and 50 million persons, no more than 5% of the people who contracted the Spanish Flu died (Brown et. al reported the highest death rate in India at 50 deaths per 1000 persons contracting the disease, or a five percent fatality rate). After 218 human cases of bird flu have been confirmed world-wide (as of May, 2006) the lethality rate stands at 57%. Should this strain develop into a pandemic, and should it keep its current mortality rate, it has the potential to be 10 times more lethal than the 1918 pandemic.

Influenza A, The most lethal influenza and the precursor of all Pandemic Viruses

Influenza viruses responsible for causing pandemics are influenza type A viruses which emerge as a result of a process called "antigenic shift”. Antigenic shift causes an abrupt or sudden, major change in certain proteins on the surface of the influenza A virus (specifically the hemagglutinin or “HA” protein and the neuraminidase or the “NA” protein).Certain antigenic shifts may allow the virus to become more easily transmissible, more "contagious". Once this type of shift occurs, wide-spread infection usually follows quickly. Antigenic shift is most dangerous when it occurs in a virus that has demonstrated high lethality, such as the H5N1 bird flu.

Electron Micrograph of the H5N1 Bird Flu Virus

History has recorded 10 pandemics of influenza A in the past 300 years. The sudden appearance of new influenza A virus subtypes during the 20th century has caused three pandemics, all of which spread world-wide within 1 year of first being detected.

Tamiflu and Relenza have not been effective in patients with cytokine storm, and have not been tested in patients with bird flu. Prescription Angiotension Blockers may be beneficial in treating Bird Flu, and the cytokine storm which has proven lethal in over half of the patients who have contracted the avian flu to date. This book is a must read for those wanting to be prepared to treat a patient with avian influenza: Prescription Angiotension Blockers and their use in treating Bird Flu.

1918-19, "Spanish flu," [Type A, subtype (H1N1)], caused the highest number of known influenza deaths: more than one-half million people died within the United States (nearly half of the deaths were young healthy adults aged 20-40), and between 50 and 100 million people may have died worldwide. Most deaths occurred within the first few days after infection, some deaths within hours of symptom onset, and other deaths occurred later as a result of complications. Influenza A (H1N1) viruses still circulate today after having been reintroduced in the 1970s. Although called the "Spanish Flu" because the first widely reported deaths were in Spain, it probably originated in China.

1957-58, "Asian flu," [Type A, subtype (H2N2)], caused about 70,000 deaths in the United States. The "asian flu" was initially identified in China in late February 1957. Three months later, it spread to the United States with early reports of infection as early as June 1957.
1968-69, " Hong Kong flu," [Type A subtype (H3N2)], was responsible for about 34,000 deaths in the United States. The "Hong Kong flu" virus was first detected in Hong Kong in early 1968 and spread to the United States within a few months. Influenza A (H3N2) viruses still circulate today.

The Bird Flu
Both the 1957-58 and 1968-69 pandemics were caused by viruses containing a combination of genes from a human influenza virus and an avian influenza virus. The origin of the 1918-19 pandemic virus is not clear, but if its origin was in China as suspected, it could have similarly been caused by a genetic recombination of human and avian influenza viruses. This can more easily occur if humans are in close proximity to both live birds and pigs, as can occur in public markets in Asia. Osterholm reports the last influenza pandemic (1968) occurred 37 years ago, emerging in China. At that time China's human population was 790 million, its pig population was 5.2 million, and its poultry population was 12.3 million. Today, these populations number 1.3 billion, 508 million, and 13 billion, respectively. The human and animal populations of other Asian countries have similarly increased exponentially, which has increased the chances for close contact between birds, pigs and humans in these countries, creating optimal conditions for the emergence of new viruses, such as the H5N1 subtype.

On August 12, 2004, the Vietnamese Ministry of Health reported three confirmed human deaths to the World Health Organization (WHO) from confirmed avian influenza H5 infection. If the virus is confirmed to belong to the same H5N1 strain that caused 22 cases (15 deaths) in Vietnam and 12 cases (8 deaths) in Thailand earlier this year, and human-to-human contact versus human to bird or human-to-swine contact is suspected, this may indicate that H5N1 has adapted to the point that it is transmissible and has the potential to cause the next pandemic.

How do physicians rate our preparedness to handle the potential H5N1 pandemic? This MDLinx survey is telling.

SYMPTOMS OF BIRD FLU (H5N1):
Initial Presentaion of Influenza A (H5N1) Avian Influenza:
* Pulmonary: Radiographically confirmed pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or other severe respiratory illness for which an alternate diagnosis cannot be established
* One or more of the following: cough and/or sore throat and/or shortness of breath, AND a history of contact with poultry (e.g., visited a poultry farm, a household raising poultry, or a bird market) or contact with a known or suspected human case of influenza A (H5N1) in an H5N1-affected country within 10 days of symptom onset.
* Dyspnea
* Fever (temperature of >38°C or >100.4°F)

SYMPTOMS OF THE CYTOKINE STORM:
The end stage, or final result, of cytokine storm (SIRS) or sepsis is multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS). The end-stage symptoms of the bird flu, or other infection precipitating the cytokine storm may include:

* hypotension
* tachycardia
* dyspnea
* fever (temperature of >38°C or >100.4°F)
* Ischemia, or insufficient tissue perfusion (especially involving the major organs)
* uncontrollable hemorrhage
* and multisystem organ failure (caused primarily by hypoxia, tissue acidosis, and severe metabolism dysregulation

Oxygen free radicals, histamine, complement factor C5a, Beta-endorphin, thromboxane B2, and platelet activating factor are implicated in SSS. The major pro-inflammatory cytokines which are implicated in SSS are TNF-alpha, IL1, IL6 and IL8. Serum TNF alpha concentrations in excess of 1 ng/mL are frequently predictive of a lethal outcome, however serum concentrations of other inflammatory cytokines involved in the pathophysiology of Septic shock are usually not reliable predictors of the severity of the shock state or clinical outcome. These cytokines are released by macrophages following activation by bacterial endotoxins.

Preventing and/or treating the cytokine storm associated with influenza with antiviral medications, prescription medications and vaccines that are approved (or may soon be approved) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA):

* Acambis Biotechnology Vaccine: Acambis announced on August 4, 2005 that it has entered into collaboration with a Belgian research centre to develop a single-dose flu vaccine that could offer permanent protection against all strains of both influenza A and influenza B, potentially offering protection against future influenza pandemics.
* ACE inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARBs) have proven to be beneficial in treating the cytokine storm (the major cause of lethality in Bird Flu). PUBMED: The cytomine storm and the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. More information is found on ACE inhibitors and the Bird Flu in this e-book.
* Amantadine (Brand name Symmetrel: Treatment of influenza type A-2, but not type B). This drug cannot treat the cytokine storm associated with avian influenza, and has not been tested in patients with the bird flu.
* Aventis Vaccine: Preliminary research suggests the influenza A vaccine developed by Sanofi-Aventis is effective against H5N1 avian flu virus. The NIH (US National Institutes of Health) reported on August 5, 2005 (New York Times) that preliminary tests have confirmed that an experimental vaccine in development by Sanofi-Aventis Pharmaceutical Company appears to be effective in preventing infection with the bird flu (avian influenza virus). Researchers believe that the avian influenza virus, an influenza type-A, subtype H5N1, could trigger the next worldwide flu pandemic.
* Oseltamivir (Brand name Tamiflu: a neuraminidase inhibitor for treatment or prevention of both influenza type A and B, indicated for use within 2 days of symptoms). This drug cannot treat the cytokine storm associated with avian influenza, and has not been tested in patients with the bird flu. Most of the avian flu victims in SE Asia and Turkey received Tamiflu, and still suffered mortality rates exceeding 50%. Tamiflu has been declared "ineffective" against the bird flu by a physician who has personally used the drug to treat 41 bird flu patients (19% of all reported cases to date).
* Prednisone and corticosteroids: Treatment of active disease may involve the use of corticosteroids .
* Rimantadine (Brand name Flumadine: Treatment of influenza type A, but not B). This drug cannot treat the cytokine storm associated with avian influenza, and has not been tested in patients with the bird flu.
*Zanamivir (Brand name Relenza: a neuraminidase inhibitor for treatment of both influenza type A and type B, indicated for use within 2 days of symptoms). This drug cannot treat the cytokine storm associated with avian influenza, and has not been tested in patients with the bird flu. Most of the avian flu victims in SE Asia and Turkey received Tamiflu (a drug similar to Relenza), and still suffered mortality rates exceeding 50%.

Drug-resistance may occur in about one-third of patients taking amantadine or rimantadine. Additionally influenza A and B viruses could develop resistance to zanamivir and oseltamivir based on laboratory studies of the drugs.

Read More...

Influenza A virus subtype H5N1


Influenza A virus subtype H5N1, also known as "bird flu," A(H5N1) or simply H5N1, is a subtype of the Influenza A virus which can cause illness in humans and many other animal species. A bird-adapted strain of H5N1, called HPAI A(H5N1) for "highly pathogenic avian influenza virus of type A of subtype H5N1", is the causative agent of H5N1 flu, commonly known as "avian influenza" or "bird flu". It is enzootic in many bird populations, especially in Southeast Asia. One strain of HPAI A(H5N1) is spreading globally after first appearing in Asia. It is epizootic (an epidemic in nonhumans) and panzootic (affecting animals of many species, especially over a wide area), killing tens of millions of birds and spurring the culling of hundreds of millions of others to stem its spread. Most references to "bird flu" and H5N1 in the popular media refer to this strain.

According to the FAO Avian Influenza Disease Emergency Situation Update, H5N1 pathogenicity is continuing to gradually rise in wild birds in endemic areas but the avian influenza disease situation in farmed birds is being held in check by vaccination. Eleven outbreaks of H5N1 were reported worldwide in June 2008 in five countries (China, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan and Vietnam) compared to 65 outbreaks in June 2006 and 55 in June 2007. The "global HPAI situation can be said to have improved markedly in the first half of 2008 cases of HPAI are still underestimated and underreported in many countries because of limitations in country disease surveillance systems".

Overview
HPAI A(H5N1) is an avian disease. There is some evidence of limited human-to-human transmission of the virus. A risk factor for contracting the virus is handling of infected poultry, but transmission of the virus from infected birds to humans is inefficient. Still, around 60% of humans known to have been infected with the current Asian strain of HPAI A(H5N1) have died from it, and H5N1 may mutate or reassort into a strain capable of efficient human-to-human transmission. In 2003, world-renowned virologist Robert Webster published an article titled "The world is teetering on the edge of a pandemic that could kill a large fraction of the human population" in American Scientist. He called for adequate resources to fight what he sees as a major world threat to possibly billions of lives. On September 29, 2005, David Nabarro, the newly-appointed Senior United Nations System Coordinator for Avian and Human Influenza, warned the world that an outbreak of avian influenza could kill anywhere between 5 million and 150 million people. Experts have identified key events (creating new clades, infecting new species, spreading to new areas) marking the progression of an avian flu virus towards becoming pandemic, and many of those key events have occurred more rapidly than expected.

Due to the high lethality and virulence of HPAI A(H5N1), its endemic presence, its increasingly large host reservoir, and its significant ongoing mutations, the H5N1 virus is the world's largest current pandemic threat, and billions of dollars are being spent researching H5N1 and preparing for a potential influenza pandemic. At least 12 companies and 17 governments are developing pre-pandemic influenza vaccines in 28 different clinical trials that, if successful, could turn a deadly pandemic infection into a nondeadly one. Full-scale production of a vaccine that could prevent any illness at all from the strain would require at least three months after the virus's emergence to begin, but it is hoped that vaccine production could increase until one billion doses were produced by one year after the initial identification of the virus.

H5N1 may cause more than one influenza pandemic as it is expected to continue mutating in birds regardless of whether humans develop herd immunity to a future pandemic strain. Influenza pandemics from its genetic offspring may include influenza A virus subtypes other than H5N1. While genetic analysis of the H5N1 virus shows that influenza pandemics from its genetic offspring can easily be far more lethal than the Spanish Flu pandemic, planning for a future influenza pandemic is based on what can be done and there is no higher Pandemic Severity Index level than a Category 5 pandemic which, roughly speaking, is any pandemic as bad as the Spanish flu or worse; and for which all intervention measures are to be used.



Genetics
The first known strain of HPAI A(H5N1) (called A/chicken/Scotland/59) killed two flocks of chickens in Scotland in 1959; but that strain was very different from the current highly pathogenic strain of H5N1. The dominant strain of HPAI A(H5N1) in 2004 evolved from 1999 to 2002 creating the Z genotype. It has also been called "Asian lineage HPAI A(H5N1)".

Asian lineage HPAI A(H5N1) is divided into two antigenic clades. "Clade 1 includes human and bird isolates from Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia and bird isolates from Laos and Malaysia. Clade 2 viruses were first identified in bird isolates from China, Indonesia, Japan, and South Korea before spreading westward to the Middle East, Europe, and Africa. The clade 2 viruses have been primarily responsible for human H5N1 infections that have occurred during late 2005 and 2006, according to WHO. Genetic analysis has identified six subclades of clade 2, three of which have a distinct geographic distribution and have been implicated in human infections:

* Subclade 1, Indonesia
* Subclade 2, Europe, Middle East, and Africa (called EMA)
* Subclade 3, China"

A 2007 study focused on the EMA subclade has shed further light on the EMA mutations. "The 36 new isolates reported here greatly expand the amount of whole-genome sequence data available from recent avian influenza (H5N1) isolates. Before our project, GenBank contained only 5 other complete genomes from Europe for the 2004–2006 period, and it contained no whole genomes from the Middle East or northern Africa. Our analysis showed several new findings. First, all European, Middle Eastern, and African samples fall into a clade that is distinct from other contemporary Asian clades, all of which share common ancestry with the original 1997 Hong Kong strain. Phylogenetic trees built on each of the 8 segments show a consistent picture of 3 lineages, as illustrated by the HA tree shown in Figure 1. Two of the clades contain exclusively Vietnamese isolates; the smaller of these, with 5 isolates, we label V1; the larger clade, with 9 isolates, is V2. The remaining 22 isolates all fall into a third, clearly distinct clade, labeled EMA, which comprises samples from Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Trees for the other 7 segments display a similar topology, with clades V1, V2, and EMA clearly separated in each case. Analyses of all available complete influenza (H5N1) genomes and of 589 HA sequences placed the EMA clade as distinct from the major clades circulating in People's Republic of China, Indonesia, and Southeast Asia.

Terminology
H5N1 isolates are identified like this actual HPAI A(H5N1) example, A/chicken/Nakorn-Patom/Thailand/CU-K2/04(H5N1):

* A stands for the species of influenza (A, B or C).
* chicken is the species the isolate was found in
* Nakorn-Patom/Thailand is the place this specific virus was isolated
* CU-K2 identifies it from other influenza viruses isolated at the same place
* 04 represents the year 2004
* H5 stands for the fifth of several known types of the protein hemagglutinin.
* N1 stands for the first of several known types of the protein neuraminidase.

(Other examples: A/duck/Hong Kong/308/78(H5N3), A/avian/NY/01(H5N2), A/chicken/Mexico/31381-3/94(H5N2), and A/shoveler/Egypt/03(H5N2)).

As with other avian flu viruses, H5N1 has strains called "highly pathogenic" (HP) and "low-pathogenic" (LP). Avian influenza viruses that cause HPAI are highly virulent, and mortality rates in infected flocks often approach 100%. LPAI viruses have negligible virulence, but these viruses can serve as progenitors to HPAI viruses. The current strain of H5N1 responsible for the deaths of birds across the world is an HPAI strain; all other current strains of H5N1, including a North American strain that causes no disease at all in any species, are LPAI strains. All HPAI strains identified to date have involved H5 and H7 subtypes. The distinction concerns pathogenicity in poultry, not humans. Normally a highly pathogenic avian virus is not highly pathogenic to either humans or non-poultry birds. This current deadly strain of H5N1 is unusual in being deadly to so many species, including some, like domestic cats, never previously susceptible to any influenza virus.

Genetic structure and related subtypes

H5N1 is a subtype of the species Influenza A virus of the Influenzavirus A genus of the Orthomyxoviridae family. Like all other influenza A subtypes, the H5N1 subtype is an RNA virus. It has a segmented genome of eight negative sense, single-strands of RNA, abbreviated as PB2, PB1, PA, HA, NP, NA, MP and NS.

HA codes for hemagglutinin, an antigenic glycoprotein found on the surface of the influenza viruses and is responsible for binding the virus to the cell that is being infected. NA codes for neuraminidase, an antigenic glycosylated enzyme found on the surface of the influenza viruses. It facilitates the release of progeny viruses from infected cells. The hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) RNA strands specify the structure of proteins that are most medically relevant as targets for antiviral drugs and antibodies. HA and NA are also used as the basis for the naming of the different subtypes of influenza A viruses. This is where the H and N come from in H5N1.

Influenza A viruses are significant for their potential for disease and death in humans and other animals. Influenza A virus subtypes that have been confirmed in humans, in order of the number of known human pandemic deaths that they have caused, include:

* H1N1, which caused "Spanish flu" and currently causes seasonal human flu
* H2N2, which caused "Asian flu"
* H3N2, which caused "Hong Kong flu" and currently causes seasonal human flu
* H5N1, the world's major current pandemic threat
* H7N7, which has unusual zoonotic potential and killed one person
* H1N2, which is currently endemic in humans and pigs and causes seasonal human flu
* H9N2, which has infected three people
* H7N2, which has infected two people
* H7N3, which has infected two people
* H10N7, which has infected two people

Low pathogenic H5N1
Low pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 (LPAI H5N1) also called "North American" H5N1 commonly occurs in wild birds. In most cases, it causes minor sickness or no noticeable signs of disease in birds. It is not known to affect humans at all. The only concern about it is that it is possible for it to be transmitted to poultry and in poultry mutate into a highly pathogenic strain.

* 1975 – LPAI H5N1 was detected in a wild mallard duck and a wild blue goose in Wisconsin.
* 1981 and 1985 – LPAI H5N1 was detected in ducks by the University of Minnesota conducting a sampling procedure in which sentinel ducks were monitored in cages placed in the wild for a short period of time.
* 1983 – LPAI H5N1 was detected in ring-billed gulls in Pennsylvania.
* 1986 - LPAI H5N1 was detected in a wild mallard duck in Ohio.
* 2005 - LPAI H5N1 was detected in ducks in Manitoba, Canada.
* 2008 - LPAI H5N1 was detected in ducks in New Zealand.
* 2009 - LPAI H5N1 was detected in commercial poultry in British Columbia.

"In the past, there was no requirement for reporting or tracking LPAI H5 or H7 detections in wild birds so states and universities tested wild bird samples independently of USDA. Because of this, the above list of previous detections might not be all inclusive of past LPAI H5N1 detections. However, the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) recently changed its requirement of reporting detections of avian influenza. Effective in 2006, all confirmed LPAI H5 and H7 AI subtypes must be reported to the OIE because of their potential to mutate into highly pathogenic strains. Therefore, USDA now tracks these detections in wild birds, backyard flocks, commercial flocks and live bird markets.

Properties of H5N1
Infectivity
H5N1 is easily transmissible between birds facilitating a potential global spread of H5N1. While H5N1 undergoes mutation and reassortment, creating variations which can infect species not previously known to carry the virus, not all of these variant forms can infect humans. H5N1 as an avian virus preferentially binds to a type of galactose receptors that populate the avian respiratory tract from the nose to the lungs and are virtually absent in humans, occurring only in and around the alveoli, structures deep in the lungs where oxygen is passed to the blood. Therefore, the virus is not easily expelled by coughing and sneezing, the usual route of transmission.

H5N1 is mainly spread by domestic poultry, both through the movements of infected birds and poultry products and through the use of infected poultry manure as fertilizer or feed. Humans with H5N1 have typically caught it from chickens, which were in turn infected by other poultry or waterfowl. Migrating waterfowl (wild ducks, geese and swans) carry H5N1, often without becoming sick. Many species of birds and mammals can be infected with HPAI A(H5N1), but the role of animals other than poultry and waterfowl as disease-spreading hosts is unknown.

According to a report by the World Health Organization, H5N1 may be spread indirectly. The report stated that the virus may sometimes stick to surfaces or get kicked up in fertilizer dust to infect people.

Virulence
H5N1 has mutated into a variety of strains with differing pathogenic profiles, some pathogenic to one species but not others, some pathogenic to multiple species. Each specific known genetic variation is traceable to a virus isolate of a specific case of infection. Through antigenic drift, H5N1 has mutated into dozens of highly pathogenic varieties divided into genetic clades which are known from specific isolates, but all currently belonging to genotype Z of avian influenza virus H5N1, now the dominant genotype. H5N1 isolates found in Hong Kong in 1997 and 2001 were not consistently transmitted efficiently among birds and did not cause significant disease in these animals. In 2002 new isolates of H5N1 were appearing within the bird population of Hong Kong. These new isolates caused acute disease, including severe neurological dysfunction and death in ducks. This was the first reported case of lethal influenza virus infection in wild aquatic birds since 1961. Genotype Z emerged in 2002 through reassortment from earlier highly pathogenic genotypes of H5N1 that first infected birds in China in 1996, and first infected humans in Hong Kong in 1997. Genotype Z is endemic in birds in Southeast Asia, has created at least two clades that can infect humans, and is spreading across the globe in bird populations. Mutations are occurring within this genotype that are increasing their pathogenicity. Birds are also able to shed the virus for longer periods of time before their death, increasing the transmissibility of the virus.

Transmission and host range

Infected birds transmit H5N1 through their saliva, nasal secretions, feces and blood. Other animals may become infected with the virus through direct contact with these bodily fluids or through contact with surfaces contaminated with them. H5N1 remains infectious after over 30 days at 0 °C ( 32.0 °F) (over one month at freezing temperature) or 6 days at 37 °C ( 98.6 °F) (one week at human body temperature) so at ordinary temperatures it lasts in the environment for weeks. In Arctic temperatures, it doesn't degrade at all.

Because migratory birds are among the carriers of the highly pathogenic H5N1 virus, it is spreading to all parts of the world. H5N1 is different from all previously known highly pathogenic avian flu viruses in its ability to be spread by animals other than poultry.

In October 2004, researchers discovered that H5N1 is far more dangerous than was previously believed. Waterfowl were revealed to be directly spreading the highly pathogenic strain of H5N1 to chickens, crows, pigeons, and other birds, and the virus was increasing its ability to infect mammals as well. From this point on, avian flu experts increasingly referred to containment as a strategy that can delay, but not ultimately prevent, a future avian flu pandemic.

"Since 1997, studies of influenza A (H5N1) indicate that these viruses continue to evolve, with changes in antigenicity and internal gene constellations; an expanded host range in avian species and the ability to infect felids; enhanced pathogenicity in experimentally infected mice and ferrets, in which they cause systemic infections; and increased environmental stability."

The New York Times, in an article on transmission of H5N1 through smuggled birds, reports Wade Hagemeijer of Wetlands International stating, "We believe it is spread by both bird migration and trade, but that trade, particularly illegal trade, is more important".

The H5N1 bird flu virus can also pass through a pregnant woman's placenta to infect the fetus, researchers reported on Thursday 27 September 2007. They also found evidence of what doctors had long suspected that the virus not only affects the lungs, but also passes throughout the body into the gastrointestinal tract, the brain, liver, and blood cells.

High mutation rate
Influenza viruses have a relatively high mutation rate that is characteristic of RNA viruses. The segmentation of its genome facilitates genetic recombination by segment reassortment in hosts infected with two different influenza viruses at the same time. A previously uncontagious strain may then be able to pass between humans, one of several possible paths to a pandemic.

The ability of various influenza strains to show species-selectivity is largely due to variation in the hemagglutinin genes. Genetic mutations in the hemagglutinin gene that cause single amino acid substitutions can significantly alter the ability of viral hemagglutinin proteins to bind to receptors on the surface of host cells. Such mutations in avian H5N1 viruses can change virus strains from being inefficient at infecting human cells to being as efficient in causing human infections as more common human influenza virus types. This doesn't mean that one amino acid substitution can cause a pandemic, but it does mean that one amino acid substitution can cause an avian flu virus that is not pathogenic in humans to become pathogenic in humans.

H3N2 ("swine flu") is endemic in pigs in China, and has been detected in pigs in Vietnam, increasing fears of the emergence of new variant strains. The dominant strain of annual flu virus in January 2006 was H3N2, which is now resistant to the standard antiviral drugs amantadine and rimantadine. The possibility of H5N1 and H3N2 exchanging genes through reassortment is a major concern. If a reassortment in H5N1 occurs, it might remain an H5N1 subtype, or it could shift subtypes, as H2N2 did when it evolved into the Hong Kong Flu strain of H3N2.

Both the H2N2 and H3N2 pandemic strains contained avian influenza virus RNA segments. "While the pandemic human influenza viruses of 1957 (H2N2) and 1968 (H3N2) clearly arose through reassortment between human and avian viruses, the influenza virus causing the 'Spanish flu' in 1918 appears to be entirely derived from an avian source".

Symptoms in humans
Avian influenza hemagglutinin bind alpha 2-3 sialic acid receptors while human influenza hemagglutinin bind alpha 2-6 sialic acid receptors. Usually other differences also exist. There is as yet no human form of H5N1, so all humans who have caught it so far have caught avian H5N1.

In general, humans who catch a humanized Influenza A virus (a human flu virus of type A) usually have symptoms that include fever, cough, sore throat, muscle aches, conjunctivitis, and, in severe cases, breathing problems and pneumonia that may be fatal. The severity of the infection depends to a large part on the state of the infected person's immune system and whether the victim has been exposed to the strain before (in which case they would be partially immune). No one knows if these or other symptoms will be the symptoms of a humanized H5N1 flu.

The reported mortality rate of highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza in a human is high; WHO data indicates that 60% of cases classified as H5N1 resulted in death. However, there is some evidence that the actual mortality rate of avian flu could be much lower, as there may be many people with a milder symptoms who do not seek treatment and are not counted.

In one case, a boy with H5N1 experienced diarrhea followed rapidly by a coma without developing respiratory or flu-like symptoms. There have been studies of the levels of cytokines in humans infected by the H5N1 flu virus. Of particular concern is elevated levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha, a protein that is associated with tissue destruction at sites of infection and increased production of other cytokines. Flu virus-induced increases in the level of cytokines is also associated with flu symptoms including fever, chills, vomiting and headache. Tissue damage associated with pathogenic flu virus infection can ultimately result in death. The inflammatory cascade triggered by H5N1 has been called a 'cytokine storm' by some, because of what seems to be a positive feedback process of damage to the body resulting from immune system stimulation. H5N1 induces higher levels of cytokines than the more common flu virus types.

Treatment and prevention for humans
There is no highly effective treatment for H5N1 flu, but oseltamivir (commercially marketed by Roche as Tamiflu), can sometimes inhibit the influenza virus from spreading inside the user's body. This drug has become a focus for some governments and organizations trying to prepare for a possible H5N1 pandemic. On April 20, 2006, Roche AG announced that a stockpile of three million treatment courses of Tamiflu is waiting at the disposal of the World Health Organization to be used in case of a flu pandemic; separately Roche donated two million courses to the WHO for use in developing nations that may be affected by such a pandemic but lack the ability to purchase large quantities of the drug.

However, WHO expert Hassan al-Bushra has said:

"Even now, we remain unsure about Tamiflu's real effectiveness. As for a vaccine, work cannot start on it until the emergence of a new virus, and we predict it would take six to nine months to develop it. For the moment, we cannot by any means count on a potential vaccine to prevent the spread of a contagious influenza virus, whose various precedents in the past 90 years have been highly pathogenic".

There are several H5N1 vaccines for several of the avian H5N1 varieties, but the continual mutation of H5N1 renders them of limited use to date: while vaccines can sometimes provide cross-protection against related flu strains, the best protection would be from a vaccine specifically produced for any future pandemic flu virus strain. Dr. Daniel Lucey, co-director of the Biohazardous Threats and Emerging Diseases graduate program at Georgetown University has made this point, "There is no H5N1 pandemic so there can be no pandemic vaccine". However, "pre-pandemic vaccines" have been created; are being refined and tested; and do have some promise both in furthering research and preparedness for the next pandemic. Vaccine manufacturing companies are being encouraged to increase capacity so that if a pandemic vaccine is needed, facilities will be available for rapid production of large amounts of a vaccine specific to a new pandemic strain.

Animal and lab studies suggest that Relenza (zanamivir), which is in the same class of drugs as Tamiflu, may also be effective against H5N1. In a study performed on mice in 2000, "zanamivir was shown to be efficacious in treating avian influenza viruses H9N2, H6N1, and H5N1 transmissible to mammals".[49] While no one knows if zanamivir will be useful or not on a yet to exist pandemic strain of H5N1, it might be useful to stockpile zanamivir as well as oseltamivir in the event of an H5N1 influenza pandemic. Neither oseltamivir nor zanamivir can currently be manufactured in quantities that would be meaningful once efficient human transmission starts.

In September, 2006, a WHO scientist announced that studies had confirmed cases of H5N1 strains resistant to Tamiflu and Amantadine. Tamiflu-resistant strains have also appeared in the EU, which remain sensitive to Relenza.

wikipedia
Read More...

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Pandemic Flu


The 1918 Spanish flu epidemic was caused by an influenza A (H1N1) virus, killing more than 500,000 people in the United States, and up to 50 million worldwide. The possible source was a newly emerged virus from a swine or an avian host of a mutated H1N1 virus. Many people died within the first few days after infection, and others died of complications later. Nearly half of those who died were young, healthy adults. Photo courtesy of the National Museum of Health and Medicine, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, D.C., Image NCP 1603

Pandemic Flu
Pandemic flu is a global outbreak of disease that occurs when a new influenza A virus appears or “emerges” in the human population, causes serious illness and then spreads easily from person to person worldwide. Past influenza pandemics have led to high levels of illness, death, social disruptions and economic loss.



For a flu pandemic to occur, three conditions must be met:

1. An new influenza A virus appears or “emerges” in the human population
2. The new virus must cause serious illness in people
3. The new virus is spread easily from person to person worldwide

Many scientists believe that avian influenza will develop into the next pandemic. Currently, avian influenza meets the first two criteria for being a pandemic. Avian influenza does not spread easily from person to person.

However, with every new case of avian influenza in humans it becomes more likely that avian influenza will change into a virus that is easily spread between humans and would then be considered a pandemic.

source:vaccine4me.com
Read More...

Infections With Oseltamivir-Resistant Influenza A(H1N1) Virus in the United States

Nila J. Dharan, MD; Larisa V. Gubareva, PhD; John J. Meyer, MPH; Margaret Okomo-Adhiambo, PhD; Reginald C. McClinton, MPH; Steven A. Marshall, MS; Kirsten St. George, MAppSc, PhD; Scott Epperson, MPH; Lynnette Brammer, MPH; Alexander I. Klimov, PhD; Joseph S. Bresee, MD; Alicia M. Fry, MD, MPH; for the Oseltamivir-Resistance Working Group.

Context During the 2007-2008 influenza season, oseltamivir resistance among influenza A(H1N1) viruses increased significantly for the first time worldwide. Early surveillance data suggest that the prevalence of oseltamivir resistance among A(H1N1) viruses will most likely be higher during the 2008-2009 season.

Objectives To describe patients infected with oseltamivir-resistant influenza A(H1N1) virus and to determine whether there were any differences between these patients and patients infected with oseltamivir-susceptible A(H1N1) virus in demographic or epidemiological characteristics, clinical symptoms, severity of illness, or clinical outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Patients Influenza A(H1N1) viruses that were identified and submitted to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention by US public health laboratories between September 30, 2007, and May 17, 2008, and between September 28, 2008, and February 19, 2009, were tested as part of ongoing surveillance. Oseltamivir resistance was determined by neuraminidase inhibition assay and pyrosequencing analysis. Information was collected using a standardized case form from patients with oseltamivir-resistant A(H1N1) infections and a comparison group of patients with oseltamivir-susceptible A(H1N1) infections during 2007-2008.



Main Outcome Measures Demographic and epidemiological information as well as clinical information, including symptoms, severity of illness, and clinical outcomes.

Results During the 2007-2008 season, influenza A(H1N1) accounted for an estimated 19% of circulating influenza viruses in the United States. Among 1155 influenza A(H1N1) viruses tested from 45 states, 142 (12.3%) from 24 states were resistant to oseltamivir. Data were available for 99 oseltamivir-resistant cases and 182 oseltamivir-susceptible cases from this period. Among resistant cases, median age was 19 years (range, 1 month to 62 years), 5 patients (5%) were hospitalized, and 4 patients (4%) died. None reported oseltamivir exposure before influenza diagnostic sample collection. No significant differences were found between cases of oseltamivir-resistant and oseltamivir-susceptible influenza in demographic characteristics, underlying medical illness, or clinical symptoms. Preliminary data from the 2008-2009 influenza season identified resistance to oseltamivir among 264 of 268 influenza A(H1N1) viruses (98.5%) tested.

Conclusions Oseltamivir-resistant A(H1N1) viruses circulated widely in the United States during the 2007-2008 influenza season, appeared to be unrelated to oseltamivir use, and appeared to cause illness similar to oseltamivir-susceptible A(H1N1) viruses. Circulation of oseltamivir-resistant A(H1N1) viruses will continue, with a higher prevalence of resistance, during the 2008-2009 season.

Author Affiliations: Epidemic Intelligence Service, Office of Workforce and Career Development Assigned to Influenza Division (Dr Dharan), and Influenza Division (Drs Gubareva, Okomo-Adhiambo, Klimov, Bresee, and Fry and Ms Brammer and Mr Epperson), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; Arizona Department of Health Services, Phoenix (Mr Meyer); Wyoming Department of Health, Cheyenne (Mr McClinton); Wisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, Madison (Mr Marshall); and Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany (Dr St. George).

source:jama.ama-assn.org
Read More...

H1N1 influenza as Lazarus: Genomic resurrection from the tomb of an unknown


Figure 1 Diagram of an influenza-virus particle. The surface of each influenza virion consists of a lipid envelope in which two major viral surface antigens, the hemagglutinin (HA) and the neuraminidase (NA), are found. Within the particle are the eight negative-sense viral RNA segments encoding the viral proteins. The smallest viral segment, the NS segment, encodes two proteins: the NS1, an antagonist of the cellular type I interferon system, and the nuclear export protein (NEP), which functions in viral assembly.

The 1918–1919 pandemic of H1N1 virus influenza was the greatest acute plague of the 20th century. Incurring over 20 million human fatalities, however, was not a good strategy for sustaining the evolutionary fitness of the virus, because it is no longer extant; whereas, say, measles and chickenpox remain with us with no evidence of remarkable genetic change, although this may become more evident if they were to face total or near eradication through vaccination programs. The folly of flu virulence remains our chagrin, because the threat always looms over us that this family of viruses, endemic in birds, again may generate human-lethal gene reassortments. We had valid scares about that contingency with the appearance of H5N1 variant flu in Hong Kong just 3 years ago. Influenza can be regarded as a zoonosis prevalent in birds, many of them world travelers, with occasional outbreaks in humans and other animals mainly rooted in nature's own experiments in genetic engineering. Special importance is attached to reassortments between bird- and human-adapted strains most likely to occur in habitats with close contact between birds, e.g., ducks, humans, and swine (as a mixing reservoir; ref. 1). For these reasons, high urgency attaches to efforts to resurrect genetic information about the singularities of H1N1–1918. The intact virus is nowhere to be found, but genomic fragments can still be detected sensitively and diagnosed. Exemplifying the latest technical advances in the use of DNA amplification, reverse-transcriptase–PCR (RT-PCR), Jeffery Taubenberger and his associates at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology initiated the tour de force of recovering sequences of flu from paraffin-embedded pathological specimens preserved since 1918 in the AFIP collections (2). These sources then were augmented by samples from frozen remains of an Inuit woman who succumbed to the flu in 1918 and was buried in permafrost at Brevig Mission on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska's western coast, not far from the Bering Strait. This nameless woman has left an indelible mark on world medical history (3). Now, as reported in this issue, the AFIP team has joined forces with teams from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Peter Palese/Adolfo García-Sastre groups at Mt. Sinai Medical School in a further quest for the RNA sequences of H1N1–1918 that might account for its historic human virulence (4).



The flu genome comprises about 13,500 bases of single-stranded RNA, disposed in eight segments varying from approximately 900 to 2,341 each. This genome is only a few millionths of the complexity of the human genome, but it is organized with great efficiency, lacks “junk R/DNA,” and encodes for a short dozen of identified gene products (Fig. 1). Many strains of flu have been sequenced fully; this feat will be achieved for H1N1–1918 with arduous labor, because the RNA, although frozen, is fragmented into snippets no larger than approximately 120 bases each. The practical way now available is to devise probes by using segments from extant flu strains, guessing at possible homologous strings, or synthesizing probes with calculated degeneracy. Until a complete genomic sequence is achieved, and it is hard to see how that will be authenticated, it is possible even that H1N1–1918 contains extraneous inserted sequences quite foreign to the canonical flu strains. Very reasonably, initial efforts focus on flu genes already identified in viruses recovered from recent outbreaks in humans, birds, swine, and other animals.

Previous work has focused on two well studied gene products: hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA), which dominate the surface specificities of the virus and underlie most of its taxonomy (e.g., H1N1 refers to type 1 hemagglutinin, type 1 neuraminidase). These gene products are also the chief determinants of specificity in vaccine prophylaxis for flu strains circulating at any given time. HA variation can account for fluctuations of virulence and host specificity of extant flu viruses. However, nothing remarkable was seen in the HA or the NA of H1N1–1918. The next gene to be scrutinized now is NS1 (nonstructural protein 1), which the Palese/García-Sastre groups have fingered recently as an interferon antagonist and as gene essential for flu virulence in a mouse model. A reasonable conjecture was that the hypervirulence of H1N1–1918 might be lodged in its NS1, and this might be revealed in reinsertions of the 1918-NS1 segment into mouse-adapted flu strains. This challenging construct was generated in the laboratory—one hastens to footnote, under BL-3+ conditions, and under the USDA's stern regulatory scrutiny—and tested in mice. The unexpected and perhaps disappointing result was the mitigation not enhancement of virulence in this species. The incapacitation of the NS1-virulence function in the mouse was ascribed to interaction with its host factors; the other variable would be other elements of the genome of the mouse-adapted flu strain. NS1 singularity for the human virulence of H1N1–1918 is neither falsified nor corroborated by these findings.

There still remain a handful of gene candidates, including the polymerases essential for the replication of the virus. This label does not preclude any of them from also functioning in networks and pathways that are expressed as virulence. It should caution us about the nominalist fallacy to recall that the δ crystallin of the bird's lens does double duty as argininosuccinate lyase, an enzyme in the urea cycle.

In principle, the NS1 hypothesis (and its alternatives) might be tested by using similar gene constructs based on flu viruses adapted to other animal species, including primates, and challenging the corresponding hosts. Negative results would be as inconclusive as those with the mouse. Positive results, namely the association of hypervirulence with a gene sequence borrowed from N1H1–1918, would be a great advance in medical science and would offer constructive models for the development of prophylactic and therapeutic measures. They would also induce great alarm about the potential hazards to human health, if humans were also susceptible, and the virus might escape. Any such experiments should be done with strains for which current vaccines are disseminated widely and have proven effectiveness.

To conduct such experiments with human-adapted strains and challenge to human subjects as the probative step, is well nigh unthinkable. But nature is under no such restraint! The current results are a caution to look closely at the involvement of NS1 (as well as HA and NA) variation in natural outbreaks in many species and to look out for their reassortment into human strains. In addition, it might be well to undertake a special search for close homologues to 1918-NS1 in viruses circulating in avian and other species, in which they may appear to be benign in their current hosts (as in the present mouse experiments). That would be nature's inverse of the current report.

The publication by Basler et al. (4) will attract great admiration for its technical finesse and will serve as an example of the fruits from convergence of natural history, field exploration, clinical insight, and sophisticated molecular wizardry. It also will awaken anxieties about the obvious opportunities for abuse. The really fateful step was taken with the very first cultivation of pathogenic bacteria and viruses a century ago—perhaps most importantly with the discovery of the concepts of germs and communicable diseases. The notion of using ever more sophisticated technology for intentionally constructing or reconstructing ever more pathogenic variants lends further weight to that anxiety. The great debate of the mid-1970s led to sensible measures for the regulation of recombinant DNA research. There has been increasing understanding that some of nature's pathogens deserve equal or greater respect. We should be sure that we continue to devote as much reasoned ingenuity to the design of safeguards and to informed and transparent third-party scrutiny of potential hazards as we do generally to the authentication of scientific claims. We cannot afford to forego the deepest research into the plagues that beset humankind. Nor can we afford to blunder into mistakes that will do primary injury to bystanders and incur incommensurate social sanctions.

My deepest anxieties pertain to the smoldering technology and arms race that attends the power struggles in the Middle East and the economic instabilities of the former Soviet Union. Although the 1975 Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) has demilitarized the main drivers of bioweaponry technical advance, in the U.S. and in the overt activities of other formidable powers, the BWC has not been enforced successfully against Iraq and is more or less openly flouted in a handful of other countries. The United Nations (UN) Security Council is too splintered on other issues to take a firm stand on the defiance by Iraq of the UN-mandated inspections. It would not be child's play for defiant small countries to adopt advanced biotechnology into their weapons programs. But we have seen that the climactic high-science successes in one decade become fodder for high-school projects in the next. Influenza is an unlikely candidate for rational weapons development, because new strains promptly embrace the world. But that logic is insufficient reason to neglect the contingency. More likely similar principles would be applied to more governable bioagents, but any bioagents in warfare are an affront and a threat to the entire human species. Informed professionals throughout the world should be leading campaigns to insist on universal compliance with the BWC as a major bulwark of human health and associating that with the most positive measures to apply advanced biotechnology in a constructive way for dealing with nature's continued scourges.

source:Joshua Lederberg
Read More...