Search

Background. We compared the clinical effectiveness of oseltamivir and zanamivir in children with influenza A (H1N1) virus, influenza A (H3N2) virus, and influenza B virus infections. Methods. Total febrile period and the duration of fever after the start of treatment were compared between an oseltamivir-treated group (mean age, 8.9 years; range, 4.0-15.9 years) and a zanamivir-treated group (mean age, 10.0 years; range, 4.0-15.7 years) in the pediatric outpatient clinics of our hospitals. Oseltamivir was used to treat 91 children with influenza A (H3N2) infection and 24 children with influenza A (H1N1) infection. Zanamivir was used to treat 35 children with influenza A (H3N2) infection and 12 children with influenza A (H1N1) infection. Oseltamivir was also used to treat 128 children with influenza B virus infection, and zanamivir was used to treat 59 with influenza B virus infection. Results. There was no statistically significant difference in total febrile period or duration of fever after the start of treatment between the oseltamivir-treated group and the zanamivir-treated group of children with influenza A (H3N2) infection (mean duration of febrile period, 2.40 days vs. 2.39 days; mean duration of fever after the start of treatment, 1.35 days vs. 1.40 days), influenza A (H1N1) (mean duration of febrile period, 2.60 days vs. 2.46 days; mean duration of fever after the start of treatment, 1.79 days vs, 1.54 days), or influenza B (mean duration of febrile period, 2.95 days vs. 2.84 days; mean duration of fever after the start of treatment, 1.86 days vs. 1.67 days). Oseltamivir was more effective against influenza A (H3N2) than against influenza A (H1N1) or influenza B. Conclusions. Oseltamivir and zanamivir were equally effective in reducing the febrile period of children with influenza A (H1N1), influenza A (H3N2), and influenza B virus infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Effective vaccination strategies for infectious diseases take into account the induction, long-term maintenance and recall of memory T-cell populations. To understand the immunological cross-talk within the mucosal compartments, we compared intranasal to vaginal immunization and demonstrated that vaginal infection of BALB/c mice with influenza A virus provides protective mucosal immunity against both homosubtypic and heterosubtypic virus challenge in the respiratory tract. We found that, prior to the viral challenge, in vaginally primed mice, antigen-specific CD8+ T cells were not detected in the lung airways and levels of serum antibodies were lower than those observed in intranasally immunized mice. However, following pulmonary challenge, NP147-specific CD8+ T cells were recruited and amplified in vaginally primed mice to the same extent as those in intranasally primed mice. Thus, the long-term memory immune response elicited by vaginal immunization with influenza virus is efficiently recalled and offers reasonable protection against infection in the respiratory tract. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]