Optimizing tactics for use of the U.S. antiviral strategic national stockpile for pandemic influenza

In 2009, public health agencies across the globe worked to mitigate the impact of the swine-origin influenza A (pH1N1) virus. These efforts included intensified surveillance, social distancing, hygiene measures, and the targeted use of antiviral medications to prevent infection (prophylaxis). In addition, aggressive antiviral treatment was recommended for certain patient subgroups to reduce the severity and duration of symptoms. To assist States and other localities meet these needs, the U.S. Government distributed a quarter of the antiviral medications in the Strategic National Stockpile within weeks of the pandemic's start. However, there are no quantitative models guiding the geo-temporal distribution of the remainder of the Stockpile in relation to pandemic spread or severity. We present a tactical optimization model for distributing this stockpile for treatment of infected cases during the early stages of a pandemic like 2009 pH1N1, prior to the wide availability of a strain-specific vaccine. Our optimization method efficiently searches large sets of intervention strategies applied to a stochastic network model of pandemic influenza transmission within and among U.S. cities. The resulting optimized strategies depend on the transmissability of the virus and postulated rates of antiviral uptake and wastage (through misallocation or loss). Our results suggest that an aggressive community-based antiviral treatment strategy involving early, widespread, pro-rata distribution of antivirals to States can contribute to slowing the transmission of mildly transmissible strains, like pH1N1. For more highly transmissible strains, outcomes of antiviral use are more heavily impacted by choice of distribution intervals, quantities per shipment, and timing of shipments in relation to pandemic spread. This study supports previous modeling results suggesting that appropriate antiviral treatment may be an effective mitigation strategy during the early stages of future influenza pandemics, increasing the need for systematic efforts to optimize distribution strategies and provide tactical guidance for public health policy-makers.     

Prophylaxis or treatment? Optimal use of an antiviral stockpile during an influenza pandemic

We introduce a novel mathematical model that effectively incorporates contact tracing in a realistic distribution mechanism for antiviral drugs in an influenza pandemic scenario. A strategy focused on targeted provision of post-exposure prophylaxis, rather than treatment, will provide the greatest chance of minimising the impact of an influenza pandemic. Targeted post-exposure prophylaxis delays the onset of the pandemic and for a wide range of parameter values, a delay of the order of 6-18 months may be achievable. This may provide enough time to develop and distribute a vaccine. In contrast, a treatment based strategy typically does not delay the onset of a pandemic by an appreciable amount and, in general, is not capable of significantly reducing the attack rate from baseline.     

Diagnosis and antiviral intervention strategies for mitigating an influenza epidemic

Background

Many countries have amassed antiviral stockpiles for pandemic preparedness. Despite extensive trial data and modelling studies, it remains unclear how to make optimal use of antiviral stockpiles within the constraints of healthcare infrastructure. Modelling studies informed recommendations for liberal antiviral distribution in the pandemic phase, primarily to prevent infection, but failed to account for logistical constraints clearly evident during the 2009 H1N1 outbreaks.Here we identify optimal delivery strategies for antiviral interventions accounting for logistical constraints, and so determine how to improve a strategy''s impact.

Methods and Findings

We extend an existing SEIR model to incorporate finite diagnostic and antiviral distribution capacities. We evaluate the impact of using different diagnostic strategies to decide to whom antivirals are delivered. We then determine what additional capacity is required to achieve optimal impact. We identify the importance of sensitive and specific case ascertainment in the early phase of a pandemic response, when the proportion of false-positive presentations may be high. Once a substantial percentage of ILI presentations are caused by the pandemic strain, identification of cases for treatment on syndromic grounds alone results in a greater potential impact than a laboratory-dependent strategy. Our findings reinforce the need for a decentralised system capable of providing timely prophylaxis.

Conclusions

We address specific real-world issues that must be considered in order to improve pandemic preparedness policy in a practical and methodologically sound way. Provision of antivirals on the scale proposed for an effective response is infeasible using traditional public health outbreak management and contact tracing approaches. The results indicate to change the transmission dynamics of an influenza epidemic with an antiviral intervention, a decentralised system is required for contact identification and prophylaxis delivery, utilising a range of existing services and infrastructure in a “whole of society” response.     

Novel Viral Vectored Vaccines for the Prevention of Influenza

Influenza represents a substantial global healthcare burden, with annual epidemics resulting in 3–5 million cases of severe illness with a significant associated mortality. In addition, the risk of a virulent and lethal influenza pandemic has generated widespread and warranted concern. Currently licensed influenza vaccines are limited in their ability to induce efficacious and long-lasting herd immunity. In addition, and as evidenced by the H1N1 pandemic in 2009, there can be a significant delay between the emergence of a pandemic influenza and an effective, antibody-inducing vaccine. There is, therefore, a continued need for new, efficacious vaccines conferring cross-clade protection—obviating the need for biannual reformulation of seasonal influenza vaccines. Development of such a vaccine would yield enormous health benefits to society and also greatly reduce the associated global healthcare burden. There are a number of alternative influenza vaccine technologies being assessed both preclinically and clinically. In this review we discuss viral vectored vaccines, either recombinant live-attenuated or replication-deficient viruses, which are current lead candidates for inducing efficacious and long-lasting immunity toward influenza viruses. These alternate influenza vaccines offer real promise to deliver viable alternatives to currently deployed vaccines and more importantly may confer long-lasting and universal protection against influenza viral infection.     

Emergence of drug resistance: implications for antiviral control of pandemic influenza

Given the danger of an unprecedented spread of the highly pathogenic avian influenza strain H5N1 in humans, and great challenges to the development of an effective influenza vaccine, antiviral drugs will probably play a pivotal role in combating a novel pandemic strain. A critical limitation to the use of these drugs is the evolution of highly transmissible drug-resistant viral mutants. Here, we develop a mathematical model to evaluate the potential impact of an antiviral treatment strategy on the emergence of drug resistance and containment of a pandemic. The results show that elimination of the wild-type strain depends crucially on both the early onset of treatment in indexed cases and population-level treatment. Given the probable delay of 0.5-1 day in seeking healthcare and therefore initiating therapy, the findings indicate that a single strategy of antiviral treatment will be unsuccessful at controlling the spread of disease if the reproduction number of the wild-type strain (R0s) exceeds 1.4. We demonstrate the possible occurrence of a self-sustaining epidemic of resistant strain, in terms of its transmission fitness relative to the wild-type, and the reproduction number R0s. Considering reproduction numbers estimated for the past three pandemics, the findings suggest that an uncontrollable pandemic is likely to occur if resistant viruses with relative transmission fitness above 0.4 emerge. While an antiviral strategy is crucial for containing a pandemic, its effectiveness depends critically on timely and strategic use of drugs.     

Antiviral resistance and the control of pandemic influenza: the roles of stochasticity, evolution and model details

Antiviral drugs, most notably the neuraminidase inhibitors, are an important component of control strategies aimed to prevent or limit any future influenza pandemic. The potential large-scale use of antiviral drugs brings with it the danger of drug resistance evolution. A number of recent studies have shown that the emergence of drug-resistant influenza could undermine the usefulness of antiviral drugs for the control of an epidemic or pandemic outbreak. While these studies have provided important insights, the inherently stochastic nature of resistance generation and spread, as well as the potential for ongoing evolution of the resistant strain have not been fully addressed. Here, we study a stochastic model of drug resistance emergence and consecutive evolution of the resistant strain in response to antiviral control during an influenza pandemic. We find that taking into consideration the ongoing evolution of the resistant strain does not increase the probability of resistance emergence; however, it increases the total number of infecteds if a resistant outbreak occurs. Our study further shows that taking stochasticity into account leads to results that can differ from deterministic models. Specifically, we find that rapid and strong control cannot only contain a drug sensitive outbreak, it can also prevent a resistant outbreak from occurring. We find that the best control strategy is early intervention heavily based on prophylaxis at a level that leads to outbreak containment. If containment is not possible, mitigation works best at intermediate levels of antiviral control. Finally, we show that the results are not very sensitive to the way resistance generation is modeled.     

Effective, robust design of community mitigation for pandemic influenza: a systematic examination of proposed US guidance

Background

The US government proposes pandemic influenza mitigation guidance that includes isolation and antiviral treatment of ill persons, voluntary household member quarantine and antiviral prophylaxis, social distancing of individuals, school closure, reduction of contacts at work, and prioritized vaccination. Is this the best strategy combination? Is choice of this strategy robust to pandemic uncertainties? What are critical enablers of community resilience?

Methods and Findings

We systematically simulate a broad range of pandemic scenarios and mitigation strategies using a networked, agent-based model of a community of explicit, multiply-overlapping social contact networks. We evaluate illness and societal burden for alterations in social networks, illness parameters, or intervention implementation. For a 1918-like pandemic, the best strategy minimizes illness to <1% of the population and combines network-based (e.g. school closure, social distancing of all with adults'' contacts at work reduced), and case-based measures (e.g. antiviral treatment of the ill and prophylaxis of household members). We find choice of this best strategy robust to removal of enhanced transmission by the young, additional complexity in contact networks, and altered influenza natural history including extended viral shedding. Administration of age-group or randomly targeted 50% effective pre-pandemic vaccine with 7% population coverage (current US H5N1 vaccine stockpile) had minimal effect on outcomes. In order, mitigation success depends on rapid strategy implementation, high compliance, regional mitigation, and rigorous rescinding criteria; these are the critical enablers for community resilience.

Conclusions

Systematic evaluation of feasible, recommended pandemic influenza interventions generally confirms the US community mitigation guidance yields best strategy choices for pandemic planning that are robust to a wide range of uncertainty. The best strategy combines network- and case-based interventions; network-based interventions are paramount. Because strategies must be applied rapidly, regionally, and stringently for greatest benefit, preparation and public education is required for long-lasting, high community compliance during a pandemic.     

The anticipated severity of a "1918-like" influenza pandemic in contemporary populations: the contribution of antibacterial interventions

Recent studies have shown that most of deaths in the 1918 influenza pandemic were caused by secondary bacterial infections, primarily pneumococcal pneumonia. Given the availability of antibiotics and pneumococcal vaccination, how will contemporary populations fare when they are next confronted with pandemic influenza due to a virus with the transmissibility and virulence of that of 1918? To address this question we use a mathematical model and computer simulations. Our model considers the epidemiology of both the influenza virus and pneumonia-causing bacteria and allows for co-infection by these two agents as well as antibiotic treatment, prophylaxis and pneumococcal vaccination. For our simulations we use influenza transmission and virulence parameters estimated from 1918 pandemic data. We explore the anticipated rates of secondary pneumococcal pneumonia and death in populations with different prevalence of pneumococcal carriage and contributions of antibiotic prophylaxis, treatment, and vaccination to these rates. Our analysis predicts that in countries with lower prevalence of pneumococcal carriage and access to antibiotics and pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, there would substantially fewer deaths due to pneumonia in contemporary populations confronted with a 1918-like virus than that observed in the 1918. Our results also predict that if the pneumococcal carriage prevalence is less than 40%, the positive effects of antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment would be manifest primarily at of level of individuals. These antibiotic interventions would have little effect on the incidence of pneumonia in the population at large. We conclude with the recommendation that pandemic preparedness plans should consider co-infection with and the prevalence of carriage of pneumococci and other bacteria responsible for pneumonia. While antibiotics and vaccines will certainly reduce the rate of individual mortality, the factor contributing most to the relatively lower anticipated lethality of a pandemic with a 1918-like influenza virus in contemporary population is the lower prevalence of pneumococcal carriage.     

Moral Principles for Allocating Scarce Medical Resources in an Influenza Pandemic

One of the societal problems in a new influenza pandemic will be how to use the scarce medical resources that are available for prevention and treatment, and what medical, epidemiological and ethical justifications can be given for the choices that have to be made. Many things may become scarce: personal protective equipment, antiviral drugs, hospital beds, mechanical ventilation, vaccination, etc. In this paper I discuss two general ethical principles for priority setting (utility and equity) and explain how these principles will often point in diverging directions. Moreover, each of these principles can be understood in different, again often competing, ways. Notwithstanding these controversies and conflicts, in the context of pandemic response there are at least some points of convergence: several policies can be justified by appeal to different ethical principles and theories. Convergence may be found with respect to a focus on saving the most lives (instead of other aggregative accounts); giving priority antiviral prophylaxis and therapy for life-saving pandemic responders; and, partly depending on epidemiology of the pandemic, to prioritise vaccination of children. Although decision-making about access to intensive care will involve choices with immediate tragic implications, the ethical complexity of these choices is relatively modest (although decisions will not be easy): there are persuasive moral reasons for giving priority to patients who are expected to benefit most within the shortest time. Finally, in the last section I tentatively argue that constraints on people’s freedom, as necessary for an effective public health approach, may support giving somewhat more weight to saving the most lives, than to concerns of equity.

Optimal control for pandemic influenza: The role of limited antiviral treatment and isolation

The implementation of optimal control strategies involving antiviral treatment and/or isolation measures can reduce significantly the number of clinical cases of influenza. Pandemic-level control measures must be carefully assessed specially in resource-limited situations. A model for the transmission dynamics of influenza is used to evaluate the impact of isolation and/or antiviral drug delivery measures during an influenza pandemic. Five pre-selected control strategies involving antiviral treatment and isolation are tested under the “unlimited” resource assumption followed by an exploration of the impact of these “optimal” policies when resources are limited in the context of a 1918-type influenza pandemic scenario. The implementation of antiviral treatment at the start of a pandemic tends to reduce the magnitude of epidemic peaks, spreading the maximal impact of an outbreak over an extended window in time. Hence, the controls’ timing and intensity can reduce the pressures placed on the health care infrastructure by a pandemic reducing the stress put on the system during epidemic peaks. The role of isolation strategies is highlighted in this study particularly when access to antiviral resources is limited.     

To Test or to Treat? An Analysis of Influenza Testing and Antiviral Treatment Strategies Using Economic Computer Modeling

Background

Due to the unpredictable burden of pandemic influenza, the best strategy to manage testing, such as rapid or polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and antiviral medications for patients who present with influenza-like illness (ILI) is unknown.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We developed a set of computer simulation models to evaluate the potential economic value of seven strategies under seasonal and pandemic influenza conditions: (1) using clinical judgment alone to guide antiviral use, (2) using PCR to determine whether to initiate antivirals, (3) using a rapid (point-of-care) test to determine antiviral use, (4) using a combination of a point-of-care test and clinical judgment, (5) using clinical judgment and confirming the diagnosis with PCR testing, (6) treating all with antivirals, and (7) not treating anyone with antivirals. For healthy younger adults (<65 years old) presenting with ILI in a seasonal influenza scenario, strategies were only cost-effective from the societal perspective. Clinical judgment, followed by PCR and point-of-care testing, was found to be cost-effective given a high influenza probability. Doubling hospitalization risk and mortality (representing either higher risk individuals or more virulent strains) made using clinical judgment to guide antiviral decision-making cost-effective, as well as PCR testing, point-of-care testing, and point-of-care testing used in conjunction with clinical judgment. For older adults (≥65 years old), in both seasonal and pandemic influenza scenarios, employing PCR was the most cost-effective option, with the closest competitor being clinical judgment (when judgment accuracy ≥50%). Point-of-care testing plus clinical judgment was cost-effective with higher probabilities of influenza. Treating all symptomatic ILI patients with antivirals was cost-effective only in older adults.

Conclusions/Significance

Our study delineated the conditions under which different testing and antiviral strategies may be cost-effective, showing the importance of accuracy, as seen with PCR or highly sensitive clinical judgment.     

What about the ducks? An alternative vaccination strategy.

Like most emerging disease threats, avian influenza is a zoonotic disease maintained in nature by wildlife. In this case, the reservoir of infection is migratory waterfowl, primarily ducks. Rather than trying to vaccinate most of the world's human population in response to the threat of an avian influenza pandemic, it might be more prudent to vaccinate key reservoir wildlife species from which pandemic strains evolve. This strategy would require a much more intensive research effort to understand the evolution of avian influenza viruses in nature, but it would be far less costly than any of the alternatives. Research priorities for emerging zoonoses, such as new strains of avian influenza viruses, should be re-evaluated with an emphasis on ways to intervene at their source, the natural reservoir hosts from which they originate, rather than focusing up on human-based interventions, which are too often too late.     

The Cost Effectiveness of Pandemic Influenza Interventions: A Pandemic Severity Based Analysis

Background

The impact of a newly emerged influenza pandemic will depend on its transmissibility and severity. Understanding how these pandemic features impact on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of alternative intervention strategies is important for pandemic planning.

Methods

A cost effectiveness analysis of a comprehensive range of social distancing and antiviral drug strategies intended to mitigate a future pandemic was conducted using a simulation model of a community of ∼30,000 in Australia. Six pandemic severity categories were defined based on case fatality ratio (CFR), using data from the 2009/2010 pandemic to relate hospitalisation rates to CFR.

Results

Intervention strategies combining school closure with antiviral treatment and prophylaxis are the most cost effective strategies in terms of cost per life year saved (LYS) for all severity categories. The cost component in the cost per LYS ratio varies depending on pandemic severity: for a severe pandemic (CFR of 2.5%) the cost is ∼$9 k per LYS; for a low severity pandemic (CFR of 0.1%) this strategy costs ∼$58 k per LYS; for a pandemic with very low severity similar to the 2009 pandemic (CFR of 0.03%) the cost is ∼$155 per LYS. With high severity pandemics (CFR >0.75%) the most effective attack rate reduction strategies are also the most cost effective. During low severity pandemics costs are dominated by productivity losses due to illness and social distancing interventions, while for high severity pandemics costs are dominated by hospitalisation costs and productivity losses due to death.

Conclusions

The most cost effective strategies for mitigating an influenza pandemic involve combining sustained social distancing with the use of antiviral agents. For low severity pandemics the most cost effective strategies involve antiviral treatment, prophylaxis and short durations of school closure; while these are cost effective they are less effective than other strategies in reducing the infection rate.     

The NF‐κB inhibitor SC75741 efficiently blocks influenza virus propagation and confers a high barrier for development of viral resistance

Ongoing human infections with highly pathogenic avian H5N1 viruses and the emergence of the pandemic swine‐origin influenza viruses (IV) highlight the permanent threat elicited by these pathogens. Occurrence of resistant seasonal and pandemic strains against the currently licensed antiviral medications points to the urgent need for new and amply available anti‐influenza drugs. The recently identified virus‐supportive function of the cellular IKK/NF‐κB signalling pathway suggests this signalling module as a potential target for antiviral intervention. We characterized the NF‐κB inhibitor SC75741 as a broad and efficient blocker of IV replication in non‐toxic concentrations. The underlying molecular mechanism of SC75741 action involves impaired DNA binding of the NF‐κB subunit p65, resulting in reduced expression of cytokines, chemokines, and pro‐apoptotic factors, subsequent inhibition of caspase activation and block of caspase‐mediated nuclear export of viralribonucleoproteins. SC75741 reduces viral replication and H5N1‐induced IL‐6 and IP‐10 expression in the lung of infected mice. Besides its virustatic effect the drug suppresses virus‐induced overproduction of cytokines and chemokines, suggesting that it might prevent hypercytokinemia that is discussed to be an important pathogenicity determinant of highly pathogenic IV. Importantly the drug exhibits a high barrier for development of resistant virus variants. Thus, SC75741‐derived drugs may serve as broadly non‐toxic anti‐influenza agents.     

Perspectives on antiviral use during pandemic influenza.

Antiviral agents could potentially play a major role in the initial response to pandemic influenza, particularly with the likelihood that an effective vaccine is unavailable, by reducing morbidity and mortality. The M2 inhibitors are partially effective for chemoprophylaxis of pandemic influenza and evidence from studies of interpandemic influenza indicate that the neuraminidase inhibitors would be effective in prevention. In addition to the symptom benefit observed with M2 inhibitor treatment, early therapeutic use of neuraminidase inhibitors has been shown to reduce the risk of lower respiratory complications. Clinical pharmacology and adverse drug effect profiles indicate that the neuraminidase inhibitors and rimantadine are preferable to amantadine with regard to the need for individual prescribing and tolerance monitoring. Transmission of drug-resistant virus could substantially limit the effectiveness of M2 inhibitors and the possibility exists for primary M2 inhibitor resistance in a pandemic strain. The frequency of resistance emergence is lower with neuraminidase inhibitors and mathematical modelling studies indicate that the reduced transmissibility of drug-resistant virus observed with neuraminidase inhibitor-resistant variants would lead to negligible community spread of such variants. Thus, there are antiviral drugs currently available that hold considerable promise for response to pandemic influenza before a vaccine is available, although considerable work remains in realizing this potential. Markedly increasing the quantity of available antiviral agents through mechanisms such as stockpiling, educating health care providers and the public and developing effective means of rapid distribution to those in need are essential in developing an effective response, but remain currently unresolved problems.     

Mitigation measures for pandemic influenza in Italy: an individual based model considering different scenarios

Background

Individual-based models can provide the most reliable estimates of the spread of infectious diseases. In the present study, we evaluated the diffusion of pandemic influenza in Italy and the impact of various control measures, coupling a global SEIR model for importation of cases with an individual based model (IBM) describing the Italian epidemic.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We co-located the Italian population (57 million inhabitants) to households, schools and workplaces and we assigned travel destinations to match the 2001 census data. We considered different R₀ values (1.4; 1.7; 2), evaluating the impact of control measures (vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis -AVP-, international air travel restrictions and increased social distancing). The administration of two vaccine doses was considered, assuming that first dose would be administered 1-6 months after the first world case, and different values for vaccine effectiveness (VE). With no interventions, importation would occur 37–77 days after the first world case. Air travel restrictions would delay the importation of the pandemic by 7–37 days. With an R₀ of 1.4 or 1.7, the use of combined measures would reduce clinical attack rates (AR) from 21–31% to 0.3–4%. Assuming an R₀ of 2, the AR would decrease from 38% to 8%, yet only if vaccination were started within 2 months of the first world case, in combination with a 90% reduction in international air traffic, closure of schools/workplaces for 4 weeks and AVP of household and school/work close contacts of clinical cases. Varying VE would not substantially affect the results.

Conclusions

This IBM, which is based on country-specific demographic data, could be suitable for the real-time evaluation of measures to be undertaken in the event of the emergence of a new pandemic influenza virus. All preventive measures considered should be implemented to mitigate the pandemic.     

The role of health care workers and antiviral drugs in the control of pandemic influenza

Until a vaccine against the new strain becomes available, the response to newly emerged pandemic influenza will consist of the use of antiviral drugs and measures that limit exposure to infectious individuals. These first-line defence measures include isolating cases upon diagnosis, reducing close contacts, the use of personal protective equipment and hygiene, and using antiviral drugs for treatment and prophylaxis. There are significant 'costs' associated with control measures, so to justify such interventions it is important to assess their potential to reduce transmission. In this paper, we determine the effect that a number of different antiviral interventions have on the reproduction number of infectives and the probability that an imported infection fades out, and determine parameter scenarios for which these interventions are able to eliminate an emerging pandemic of influenza. We also assess the role that health care workers play in transmission and the extent to which providing them with antiviral prophylaxis and personal protective equipment modifies this role. Our results indicate that this class requires protection to avoid a greatly disproportionate contribution to early infective numbers, and for the maintenance of a stable health care system. Further, we show that the role children play in increasing transmission is moderate, in spite of closer mixing with other children.     

Mitigation strategies for pandemic influenza A: balancing conflicting policy objectives

Mitigation of a severe influenza pandemic can be achieved using a range of interventions to reduce transmission. Interventions can reduce the impact of an outbreak and buy time until vaccines are developed, but they may have high social and economic costs. The non-linear effect on the epidemic dynamics means that suitable strategies crucially depend on the precise aim of the intervention. National pandemic influenza plans rarely contain clear statements of policy objectives or prioritization of potentially conflicting aims, such as minimizing mortality (depending on the severity of a pandemic) or peak prevalence or limiting the socio-economic burden of contact-reducing interventions. We use epidemiological models of influenza A to investigate how contact-reducing interventions and availability of antiviral drugs or pre-pandemic vaccines contribute to achieving particular policy objectives. Our analyses show that the ideal strategy depends on the aim of an intervention and that the achievement of one policy objective may preclude success with others, e.g., constraining peak demand for public health resources may lengthen the duration of the epidemic and hence its economic and social impact. Constraining total case numbers can be achieved by a range of strategies, whereas strategies which additionally constrain peak demand for services require a more sophisticated intervention. If, for example, there are multiple objectives which must be achieved prior to the availability of a pandemic vaccine (i.e., a time-limited intervention), our analysis shows that interventions should be implemented several weeks into the epidemic, not at the very start. This observation is shown to be robust across a range of constraints and for uncertainty in estimates of both R(0) and the timing of vaccine availability. These analyses highlight the need for more precise statements of policy objectives and their assumed consequences when planning and implementing strategies to mitigate the impact of an influenza pandemic.     

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.     

What hospitals should do to prepare for an influenza pandemic

This article offers recommendations on what hospitals should do to prepare for an influenza pandemic and proposes specific actions and priorities for the purpose of making the discussion of hospital pandemic preparedness issues more operationally useful.