Search

In 2003, infection with low pathogenic avian influenza A (H7N2) virus was identified in an immunocompromised man with fever and community-acquired pneumonia in New York, USA. The patient recovered. Although the source of the virus was not identified, this case indicates the usefulness of virus culture for detecting novel influenza A viruses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials in patients with influenza suggest a lack of evidence about the effects of antiviral therapy on several patient-important outcomes of influenza.Purpose: To systematically review observational studies for benefits and harms of oseltamivir, zanamivir, amantadine, or rimantadine in the treatment of influenza.Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, SIGLE, the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Panteleimon, and LILACS up to November 2010; contact with pharmaceutical companies; and reference lists.Study Selection: Observational studies in any language that compared single antiviral therapy with no therapy or other antiviral therapy, or that had no comparator, for influenza or influenza-like illness.Data Extraction: Two independent investigators extracted data. Confidence in the estimates of the obtained effects (quality of evidence) was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.Data Synthesis: 74 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses of the few studies providing effects with adjustment for confounders suggest that, in high-risk populations, oral oseltamivir may reduce mortality (odds ratio, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.43]; low-quality evidence), hospitalization (odds ratio, 0.75 [CI, 0.66 to 0.89]; low-quality evidence), and duration of symptoms (33 hours [CI, 21 to 45 hours]; very low-quality evidence) compared with no treatment. Earlier treatment with oseltamivir was generally associated with better outcomes. Inhaled zanamivir may lead to shorter symptom duration (23 hours [CI, 17 to 28 hours]; moderate-quality evidence) and fewer hospitalizations (odds ratio, 0.66 [CI, 0.37 to 1.18]) but more complications than no treatment. Direct comparison of oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir suggests no important differences in key outcomes. Data from 1 study suggest that oral amantadine may reduce mortality and pneumonia associated with influenza A. No included study evaluated rimantadine.Limitations: Mortality was assessed in high-risk patients, and generalizability is limited. The overall body of evidence is limited by risk for confounding and selection, reporting, and publication bias.Conclusion: Therapy with oral oseltamivir and inhaled zanamivir may provide a net benefit over no treatment of influenza. However, as with the randomized trials, the confidence in the estimates of the effects for decision making is low to very low. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCES: World Health Organization and McMaster University. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(See the editorial commentary by McCullers and Hayden, on pages 870-2.) Background. Influenza B virus infection causes rates of hospitalization and influenza-associated pneumonia similar to seasonal influenza A virus infection and accounts for a substantial percentage of all influenza-related hospitalizations and deaths among those aged <18 years; however, the pathogenesis of fatal influenza B virus infection is poorly described. Methods. Tissue samples obtained at autopsy from 45 case patients with fatal influenza B virus infection were evaluated by light microscopy and immunohistochemical assays for influenza B virus, various bacterial pathogens, and complement components C4d and C9, to identify the cellular tropism of influenza B virus, characterize concomitant bacterial pneumonia, and describe the spectrum of cardiopulmonary injury. Results. Viral antigens were localized to ciliated respiratory epithelium and cells of submucosal glands and ducts. Concomitant bacterial pneumonia, caused predominantly by Staphylococcus aureus, was identified in 38% of case patients and occurred with significantly greater frequency in those aged >18 years. Pathologic evidence of myocardial injury was identified in 69% of case patients for whom cardiac tissue samples were available for examination, predominantly in case patients aged <18 years. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that bacterial pneumonia and cardiac injury contribute to fatal outcomes after infection with influenza B virus and that the frequency of these manifestations may be age related. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few data are available about the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical interventions for preventing influenza virus transmission.Objective: To investigate whether hand hygiene and use of facemasks prevents household transmission of influenza.Design: Cluster randomized, controlled trial. Randomization was computer generated; allocation was concealed from treating physicians and clinics and implemented by study nurses at the time of the initial household visit. Participants and personnel administering the interventions were not blinded to group assignment. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00425893)Setting: Households in Hong Kong.Patients: 407 people presenting to outpatient clinics with influenza-like illness who were positive for influenza A or B virus by rapid testing (index patients) and 794 household members (contacts) in 259 households.Intervention: Lifestyle education (control) (134 households), hand hygiene (136 households), or surgical facemasks plus hand hygiene (137 households) for all household members.Measurements: Influenza virus infection in contacts, as confirmed by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or diagnosed clinically after 7 days.Results: Sixty (8%) contacts in the 259 households had RT-PCR-confirmed influenza virus infection in the 7 days after intervention. Hand hygiene with or without facemasks seemed to reduce influenza transmission, but the differences compared with the control group were not significant. In 154 households in which interventions were implemented within 36 hours of symptom onset in the index patient, transmission of RT-PCR-confirmed infection seemed reduced, an effect attributable to fewer infections among participants using facemasks plus hand hygiene (adjusted odds ratio, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.13 to 0.87]). Adherence to interventions varied.Limitation: The delay from index patient symptom onset to intervention and variable adherence may have mitigated intervention effectiveness.Conclusion: Hand hygiene and facemasks seemed to prevent household transmission of influenza virus when implemented within 36 hours of index patient symptom onset. These findings suggest that nonpharmaceutical interventions are important for mitigation of pandemic and interpandemic influenza.Primary Funding Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: We conducted investigations in 2 villages in Cambodia where outbreaks of influenza H5N1 occurred among humans and poultry to determine the frequency of and risk factors for H5N1 virus transmission. METHODS: During May 2006, approximately 7 weeks after outbreaks of influenza H5N1 among poultry occurred, villagers living near households of 2 patients with influenza H5N1 were interviewed about potential H5N1 exposures and had blood samples obtained for H5N1 serological testing by microneutralization assay. A seropositive result was defined as an influenza H5N1 neutralizing antibody titer of 1:80, with confirmation by Western blot assay. A case-control study was conducted to identify risk factors for influenza H5N1 virus infection. Control subjects, who had seronegative results of tests, were matched with H5N1-seropositive persons by village residence, households with an influenza H5N1-infected poultry flock, sex, and age. RESULTS: Seven (1.0%) of 674 villagers tested seropositive for influenza H5N1 antibodies and did not report severe illness; 6 (85.7%) were male. The 7 H5N1-seropositive persons, all of whom were aged

This report updates the 2005 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2005;54[No. RR-8]:1--44). The 2006 recommendations include new and updated information. Principal changes include 1) recommending vaccination of children aged 24--59 months and their household contacts and out-of-home caregivers against influenza; 2) highlighting the importance of administering 2 doses of influenza vaccine for children aged 6 months--<9 years who were previously unvaccinated; 3) advising health-care providers, those planning organized campaigns, and state and local public health agencies to a) develop plans for expanding outreach and infrastructure to vaccinate more persons than the previous year and b) develop contingency plans for the timing and prioritization of administering influenza vaccine, if the supply of vaccine is delayed and/or reduced; 4) reminding providers that they should routinely offer influenza vaccine to patients throughout the influenza season; 5) recommending that neither amantadine nor rimantadine be used for the treatment or chemoprophylaxis of influenza A in the United States until evidence of susceptibility to these antiviral medications has been re-established among circulating influenza A viruses; and 6) using the 2006--07 trivalent influenza vaccine virus strains: A/New Caledonia/20/1999 (H1N1)-like, A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2)-like, and B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like antigens. For the A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2)-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent A/Hiroshima/52/2005 virus; for the B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent B/Ohio/1/2005 virus. A link to this report and other information can be accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/flu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report updates the 2004 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2004;53[No. RR-6]:1-40). The 2005 recommendations include new or updated information regarding 1) vaccination of persons with conditions leading to compromise of the respiratory system; 2) vaccination of health-care workers; 3) clarification of the role of live, attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in vaccine shortage situations; 4) the 2005-06 trivalent vaccine virus strains: A/California/7/2004 (H3N2)-like, A/New Caledonia/20/99 (HINI)-like, and B/Shanghai/361 /2002-like antigens (for the A/California/7/2004 [H3N2J-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent A/New York/55/2004 virus, and for the B/Shanghai/361/2002-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent B/Jilin/20/2003 virus or B/Jiangsu/10/2003 virus); and 5) the assessment of vaccine supply, timing of influenza vaccination, and prioritization of inactivated vaccine in shortage situations. A link to this report and other information can be accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/flu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report updates the 2003 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2003;52[No. RR-8]:1--34). The 2004 recommendations include new or updated information regarding 1) influenza vaccine for children aged 6--23 months; 2) vaccination of health-care workers with live, attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV); 3) personnel who may administer LAIV; 4) the 2004--05 trivalent inactivated vaccine virus strains: A/Fujian/411/2002 (H3N2)-like, A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1)-like, and B/Shanghai/361/2002-like antigens (for the A/Fujian/411/2002 (H3N2)-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent A/Wyoming/3/2003 [H3N2] virus, and for the B/Shanghai/361/2002-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent B/Jilin/20/2003 virus or B/Jiangsu/10/2003 virus); and 5) the assessment of vaccine supply and timing of influenza vaccination. A link to this report and other information regarding influenza can be accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/flu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report updates the 2002 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and Control of Influenza: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2002;51[No. RR-3]:1-31). The 2003 recommendations include new or updated information regarding 1) the timing of influenza vaccination by age and risk group; 2) influenza vaccine for children aged 6-23 months; 3) the 2003-2004 trivalent inactivated vaccine virus strains: A/Moscow/10/99 (H3N2)-like, A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1)-like, and B/Hong Kong/330/2001-like antigens (for the A/Moscow/10/99 [H3N2]-like antigen, manufacturers will use the antigenically equivalent A/Panama/2007/99 [H3N2] virus, and for the B/Hong Kong/330/2001-like antigen, manufacturers will use either B/Hong Kong/330/2001 or the antigenically equivalent B/Hong Kong/1434/2002); 4) availability of certain influenza vaccine doses with reduced thimerosal content, including single 0.25 mL-dose syringes; and 5) manufacturers of influenza vaccine for the U.S. market. Although the optimal time to vaccinate against influenza is October and November, vaccination in December and later continues to be strongly recommended. A link to this report and other information regarding influenza can be accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/flu/fluvirus.htm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report updates the 2001 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (MMWR 2001;50[No. RR-4]:1--44). The 2002 recommendations include new or updated information regarding 1) the timing of influenza vaccination by risk group; 2) influenza vaccine for children aged 6--23 months; 3) the 2002--2003 trivalent vaccine virus strains: A/Moscow/10/99 (H3N2)-like, A/New Caledonia/20/99 (H1N1)-like, and B/Hong Kong/330/2001-like strains; and 4) availability of certain influenza vaccine doses with reduced thimerosal content. A link to this report and other information related to influenza can be accessed at the website for the Influenza Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, National Center for Infectious Diseases, CDC, at http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/flu/fluvirus.htm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Annually, tens of thousands of U.S. children and adolescents are hospitalized with seasonal influenza virus infection. Both influenza vaccination and early initiation of antiviral treatment can reduce complications of influenza. Using data from two U.S. influenza surveillance networks for children and adolescents aged <18 years with medically attended, laboratory-confirmed influenza for whom antiviral treatment is recommended, the percentage who received treatment was calculated. Trends in antiviral treatment of children and adolescents hospitalized with influenza from the 2017-18 to the 2023-2024 influenza seasons were also examined. Since 2017-18, when 70%-86% of hospitalized children and adolescents with influenza received antiviral treatment, the proportion receiving treatment notably declined. Among children and adolescents with influenza during the 2023-24 season, 52%-59% of those hospitalized received antiviral treatment. During the 2023-24 season, 31% of those at higher risk for influenza complications seen in the outpatient setting in one network were prescribed antiviral treatment. These findings demonstrate that influenza antiviral treatment is underutilized among children and adolescents who could benefit from treatment. All hospitalized children and adolescents, and those at higher risk for influenza complications in the outpatient setting, should receive antiviral treatment as soon as possible for suspected or confirmed influenza., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Janet A. Englund reports institutional support from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, and GlaxoSmithKline; receipt of consulting fees from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Meissa Vaccines, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi Pasteur; and receipt of honoraria from Pfizer. Natasha B. Halasa reports institutional support from Merck, and receipt of an honorarium from CSL Seqirus for service on an advisory board. Sue Kim reports grants from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. Ruth Lynfield reports receipt of a fee for serving as an Associate Editor for the American Academy of Pediatrics Redbook, which was then donated to the Minnesota Department of Health. Leila C. Sahni reports travel support from the Gates Foundation. Elizabeth P. Schlaudecker reports institutional support from Pfizer; receipt of an honorarium from Sanofi Pasteur for service on an advisory board; and travel support for meeting attendance from the World Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases, the European Society for Paediatric Infectious Diseases, and Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society; uncompensated membership of a National Institutes of Health Data Safety Monitoring Board; and membership on the board of the World Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases. Jennifer E. Schuster reports institutional support from the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and the State of Missouri; receipt of a consulting fee from the Association of Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology and a speaking honorarium from the Missouri Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics; membership on the Association of American medical Colleges advisory board. Rangaraj Selvarangan reports institutional support from Abbot, Cepheid, Biomerieux, Hologic, BioRad, Qiagen, Diasorin, and Merck; receipt of payment from GlaxoSmithKline, Baebies Biomerieux and Abbot; and travel support from Biomerieux and Hologic. Mary A. Staat reports institutional support from the National Institutes of Health, Cepheid, and Merck; royalties from UpToDate; and consulting fees from Merck. Dawud Ujamaa reports consulting fees from Goldbelt, Inc. Geoffrey A. Weinberg reports institutional support from the New York State Department of Health; consulting fees from the New York State Department of Health, Inhalon Biopharma, and ReViral; honorarium from Merck; and participation on an Emory University Data Safety Monitoring Board. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Congregate homeless shelters are disproportionately affected by infectious disease outbreaks. We describe enterovirus epidemiology across 23 adult and family shelters in King County, Washington, USA, during October 2019-May 2021, by using repeated cross-sectional respiratory illness and environmental surveillance and viral genome sequencing. Among 3,281 participants >3 months of age, we identified coxsackievirus A21 (CVA21) in 39 adult residents (3.0% [95% CI 1.9%-4.8%] detection) across 7 shelters during October 2019-February 2020. We identified enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) in 5 adult residents in 2 shelters during October-November 2019. Of 812 environmental samples, 1 was EV-D68-positive and 5 were CVA21-positive. Other enteroviruses detected among residents, but not in environmental samples, included coxsackievirus A6/A4 in 3 children. No enteroviruses were detected during April 2020-May 2021. Phylogenetically clustered CVA21 and EV-D68 cases occurred in some shelters. Some shelters also hosted multiple CVA21 lineages.

Since 2013, a total of 167 human infections with swine-origin (variant) influenza A viruses of A(H1N1)v, A(H1N2)v, and A(H3N2)v subtypes have been reported in the United States. Analysis of 147 genome sequences revealed that nearly all had S31N substitution, an M2 channel blocker-resistance marker, whereas neuraminidase inhibitor-resistance markers were not found. Two viruses had a polymerase acidic substitution (I38M or E199G) associated with decreased susceptibility to baloxavir, an inhibitor of viral cap-dependent endonuclease (CEN). Using phenotypic assays, we established subtype-specific susceptibility baselines for neuraminidase and CEN inhibitors. When compared with either baseline or CEN-sequence-matched controls, only the I38M substitution decreased baloxavir susceptibility, by 27-fold. Human monoclonal antibodies FI6v3 and CR9114 targeting the hemagglutinin's stem showed variable (0.03 to >10 µg/mL) neutralizing activity toward variant viruses, even within the same clade. Methodology and interpretation of laboratory data described in this study provide information for risk assessment and decision-making on therapeutic control measures.

Since the resurgence of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) A(H5N1) virus, clade 2.3.4.4b, during 2021, these viruses have spread widely among birds worldwide, causing poultry outbreaks and infections of a wide range of terrestrial and marine mammal species. During 2024, HPAI A(H5N1) virus, clade 2.3.4.4b, was detected in dairy cattle for the first time and caused an ongoing multistate outbreak, with high levels of virus documented in raw cow milk. Human infections with clade 2.3.4.4b viruses from exposures to infected poultry or dairy cattle have resulted in a wide spectrum of illness severity, from conjunctivitis or mild respiratory illness to severe and fatal pneumonia in different countries. Vigilance, and stronger global virologic surveillance among birds, poultry, terrestrial and marine mammals, and humans, with virus characterization and rapid data sharing, is needed to inform the threat of clade 2.3.4.4b viruses, as they continue to evolve, to public health., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. Both authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Background: Although antivirals remain important for the treatment COVID-19, methods to assess treatment efficacy are lacking. Here, we investigated the impact of remdesivir on viral dynamics and their contribution to understanding antiviral efficacy in the multicenter Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial 1, which randomized patients to remdesivir or placebo., Methods: Longitudinal specimens collected during hospitalization from a substudy of 642 patients with COVID-19 were measured for viral RNA (upper respiratory tract and plasma), viral nucleocapsid antigen (serum), and host immunologic markers. Associations with clinical outcomes and response to therapy were assessed., Results: Higher baseline plasma viral loads were associated with poorer clinical outcomes, and decreases in viral RNA and antigen in blood but not the upper respiratory tract correlated with enhanced benefit from remdesivir. The treatment effect of remdesivir was most pronounced in patients with elevated baseline nucleocapsid antigen levels: the recovery rate ratio was 1.95 (95% CI, 1.40-2.71) for levels >245 pg/mL vs 1.04 (95% CI, .76-1.42) for levels <245 pg/mL. Remdesivir also accelerated the rate of viral RNA and antigen clearance in blood, and patients whose blood levels decreased were more likely to recover and survive., Conclusions: Reductions in SARS-CoV-2 RNA and antigen levels in blood correlated with clinical benefit from antiviral therapy., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04280705 (ClinicalTrials.gov)., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest . A. L. G. reports contract testing to his institution from Abbott, Cepheid, Novavax, Pfizer, Janssen, and Hologic and research support to his institution from Gilead Sciences, Inc, and Merck outside of the described work. D. P. is an employee and shareholder of Gilead Sciences, Inc. K. J. is a shareholder of and was employed by Gilead Sciences, Inc, at the time of manuscript development. C. A. B. has received grants/contracts to her institution from Gilead Sciences, Inc, and consultant fees from NDA Partners, LLC, related to drug development. C. A. B. served as the president of the CROI Foundation Board of Directors, vice president of the Zimbabwe AIDS Treatment Assistance Project Board of Directors, and secretary/treasurer of the IAS-USA Board of Directors (all nonprofit organizations). C. A. B. recently served as deputy editor for Clinical Infectious Diseases for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. N. J. reports salary support by Sagent Pharmaceuticals to his institution. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Background: The optimal antiviral drug for treatment of severe influenza remains unclear. To support updated WHO influenza clinical guidelines, this systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated antivirals for treatment of patients with severe influenza., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, Epistemonikos, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials published up to Sept 20, 2023, that enrolled hospitalised patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza and compared direct-acting influenza antivirals against placebo, standard care, or another antiviral. Pairs of coauthors independently extracted data on study characteristics, patient characteristics, antiviral characteristics, and outcomes, with discrepancies resolved by discussion or by a third coauthor. Key outcomes of interest were time to alleviation of symptoms, duration of hospitalisation, admission to intensive care unit, progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality, hospital discharge destination, emergence of antiviral resistance, adverse events, adverse events related to treatments, and serious adverse events. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023456650., Findings: Of 11 878 records identified by our search, eight trials with 1424 participants (mean age 36-60 years for trials that reported mean or median age; 43-78% male patients) were included in this systematic review, of which six were included in the network meta-analysis. The effects of oseltamivir, peramivir, or zanamivir on mortality compared with placebo or standard care without placebo for seasonal and zoonotic influenza were of very low certainty. Compared with placebo or standard care, we found low certainty evidence that duration of hospitalisation for seasonal influenza was reduced with oseltamivir (mean difference -1·63 days, 95% CI -2·81 to -0·45) and peramivir (-1·73 days, -3·33 to -0·13). Compared with standard care, there was little or no difference in time to alleviation of symptoms with oseltamivir (0·34 days, -0·86 to 1·54; low certainty evidence) or peramivir (-0·05 days, -0·69 to 0·59; low certainty evidence). There were no differences in adverse events or serious adverse events with oseltamivir, peramivir, and zanamivir (very low certainty evidence). Uncertainty remains about the effects of antivirals on other outcomes for patients with severe influenza. Due to the small number of eligible trials, we could not test for publication bias., Interpretation: In hospitalised patients with severe influenza, oseltamivir and peramivir might reduce duration of hospitalisation compared with standard care or placebo, although the certainty of evidence is low. The effects of all antivirals on mortality and other important patient outcomes are very uncertain due to scarce data from randomised controlled trials., Funding: World Health Organization., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Antiviral post-exposure prophylaxis with neuraminidase inhibitors can reduce the incidence of influenza and the risk of symptomatic influenza, but the efficacy of the other classes of antiviral remains unclear. To support an update of WHO influenza guidelines, this systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated antiviral drugs for post-exposure prophylaxis of influenza., Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, Epistemonikos, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials published up to Sept 20, 2023 that evaluated the efficacy and safety of antivirals compared with another antiviral or placebo or standard care for prevention of influenza. Pairs of reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed network meta-analyses with frequentist random effects model and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. The outcomes of interest were symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, admission to hospital, all-cause mortality, adverse events related to antivirals, and serious adverse events. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023466450., Findings: Of 11 845 records identified by our search, 33 trials of six antivirals (zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, baloxavir, amantadine, and rimantadine) that enrolled 19 096 individuals (mean age 6·75-81·15 years) were included in this systematic review and network meta-analysis. Most of the studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. Zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir probably achieve important reductions in symptomatic influenza in individuals at high risk of severe disease (zanamivir: risk ratio 0·35, 95% CI 0·25-0·50; oseltamivir: 0·40, 0·26-0·62; laninamivir: 0·43, 0·30-0·63; baloxavir: 0·43, 0·23-0·79; moderate certainty) when given promptly (eg, within 48 h) after exposure to seasonal influenza. These antivirals probably do not achieve important reductions in symptomatic influenza in individuals at low risk of severe disease when given promptly after exposure to seasonal influenza (moderate certainty). Zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir might achieve important reductions in symptomatic zoonotic influenza in individuals exposed to novel influenza A viruses associated with severe disease in infected humans when given promptly after exposure (low certainty). Oseltamivir, laninamivir, baloxavir, and amantadine probably decrease the risk of all influenza (symptomatic and asymptomatic infection; moderate certainty). Zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir probably have little or no effect on prevention of asymptomatic influenza virus infection or all-cause mortality (high or moderate certainty). Oseltamivir probably has little or no effect on admission to hospital (moderate certainty). All six antivirals do not significantly increase the incidence of drug-related adverse events or serious adverse events, although the certainty of evidence varies., Interpretation: Post-exposure prophylaxis with zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, or baloxavir probably decreases the risk of symptomatic seasonal influenza in individuals at high risk for severe disease after exposure to seasonal influenza viruses. Post-exposure prophylaxis with zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, or baloxavir might reduce the risk of symptomatic zoonotic influenza after exposure to novel influenza A viruses associated with severe disease in infected humans., Funding: World Health Organization., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pneumonia is common in adults hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed influenza, but the association between timeliness of influenza antiviral treatment and severe clinical outcomes in patients with influenza-associated pneumonia is not well characterized., Methods: We included adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed influenza and a discharge diagnosis of pneumonia over 7 influenza seasons (2012-2019) sampled from a multi-state population-based surveillance network. We evaluated 3 treatment groups based on timing of influenza antiviral initiation relative to admission date (day 0, day 1, days 2-5). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared across groups using unweighted counts and weighted percentages accounting for the complex survey design. Logistic regression models were generated to evaluate the association between delayed treatment and 30-day all-cause mortality., Results: 26,233 adults were sampled in the analysis. Median age was 71 years and most (92.2%) had ≥1 non-immunocompromising condition. Overall, 60.9% started antiviral treatment on day 0, 29.5% on day 1, and 9.7% on days 2-5 (median 2 days). Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. Thirty-day mortality occurred in 7.5%, 8.5%, and 10.2% of patients who started treatment on day 0, day 1, and days 2-5, respectively. Compared to those treated on day 0, adjusted OR for death was 1.14 (95%CI: 1.01-1.27) in those starting treatment on day 1 and 1.40 (95%CI: 1.17-1.66) in those starting on days 2-5., Discussion: Delayed initiation of antiviral treatment in patients hospitalized with influenza-associated pneumonia was associated with higher risk of death, highlighting the importance of timely initiation of antiviral treatment at admission., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Background: SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDTs) have become widely utilized but longitudinal characterization of their community-based performance remains incompletely understood., Methods: This prospective longitudinal study at a large public university in Seattle, WA utilized remote enrollment, online surveys, and self-collected nasal swab specimens to evaluate Ag-RDT performance against real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) in the context of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron. Ag-RDT sensitivity and specificity within 1 day of rRT-PCR were evaluated by symptom status throughout the illness episode and Orf1b cycle threshold (Ct)., Results: From February to December 2022, 5757 participants reported 17 572 Ag-RDT results and completed 12 674 rRT-PCR tests, of which 995 (7.9%) were rRT-PCR positive. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 53.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.6%-56.4%) and 98.8% (95% CI, 98.5%-99.0%), respectively. Sensitivity was comparatively higher for Ag-RDTs used 1 day after rRT-PCR (69.0%), 4-7 days after symptom onset (70.1%), and Orf1b Ct ≤20 (82.7%). Serial Ag-RDT sensitivity increased with repeat testing ≥2 (68.5%) and ≥4 (75.8%) days after an initial Ag-RDT-negative result., Conclusions: Ag-RDT performance varied by clinical characteristics and temporal testing patterns. Our findings support recommendations for serial testing following an initial Ag-RDT-negative result, especially among recently symptomatic persons or those at high risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. H. Y. C. reports consulting for Ellume, Pfizer, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Glaxo Smith Kline, and Merck; research funding from Gates Ventures, Sanofi Pasteur; and support and reagents from Ellume and Cepheid, outside of the submitted work. J. A. E. reports research support from Gates Ventures, AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Pfizer; and consulting for Sanofi Pasteur, AstraZeneca, Teva Pharmaceuticals, and Meissa Vaccines, outside of the submitted work. M. B. reports research support from Vir Biotechnology, GSK, Regeneron, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutica, Ridgeback, Merck, and Gates Ventures; and consulting for Vir Biotechnology, Moderna, Helocyte, and Merck, outside of the submitted work. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Importance: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has evolved through multiple phases in the United States, with significant differences in patient centered outcomes with improvements in hospital strain, medical countermeasures, and overall understanding of the disease. We describe how patient characteristics changed and care progressed over the various pandemic phases; we also emphasize the need for an ongoing clinical network to improve the understanding of known and novel respiratory viral diseases., Objectives: To describe how patient characteristics and care evolved across the various COVID-19 pandemic periods in those hospitalized with viral severe acute respiratory infection (SARI)., Design: Severe Acute Respiratory Infection-Preparedness (SARI-PREP) is a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Foundation-funded, Society of Critical Care Medicine Discovery-housed, longitudinal multicenter cohort study of viral pneumonia. We defined SARI patients as those hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection and an acute syndrome of fever, cough, and radiographic infiltrates or hypoxemia. We collected patient-level data including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, acute physiologic measures, serum and respiratory specimens, therapeutics, and outcomes. Outcomes were described across four pandemic variant periods based on a SARS-CoV-2 sequenced subsample: pre-Delta, Delta, Omicron BA.1, and Omicron post-BA.1., Setting: Multicenter cohort of adult patients admitted to an acute care ward or ICU from seven hospitals representing diverse geographic regions across the United States., Participants: Patients with SARI caused by infection with respiratory viruses., Main Outcomes and Results: Eight hundred seventy-four adult patients with SARI were enrolled at seven study hospitals between March 2020 and April 2023. Most patients (780, 89%) had SARS-CoV-2 infection. Across the COVID-19 cohort, median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 48.0-71.0 yr) and 66% were male. Almost half (430, 49%) of the study population belonged to underserved communities. Most patients (76.5%) were admitted to the ICU, 52.5% received mechanical ventilation, and observed hospital mortality was 25.5%. As the pandemic progressed, we observed decreases in ICU utilization (94% to 58%), hospital length of stay (median, 26.0 to 8.5 d), and hospital mortality (32% to 12%), while the number of comorbid conditions increased., Conclusions and Relevance: We describe increasing comorbidities but improved outcomes across pandemic variant periods, in the setting of multiple factors, including evolving care delivery, countermeasures, and viral variants. An understanding of patient-level factors may inform treatment options for subsequent variants and future novel pathogens., Competing Interests: The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Introduction: Mounting evidence indicates that an individual's humoral adaptive immune response plays a critical role in the setting of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the efficiency of the response correlates with disease severity. The relationship between the adaptive immune dynamics in the lower airways with those in the systemic circulation, and how these relate to an individual's clinical response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, are less understood and are the focus of this study., Material and Methods: We investigated the adaptive immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in paired samples from the lower airways and blood from 27 critically ill patients during the first wave of the pandemic (median time from symptom onset to intubation 11 days). Measurements included clinical outcomes (mortality), bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and blood specimen antibody levels, and BALF viral load., Results: While there was heterogeneity in the levels of the SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, we unexpectedly found that some BALF specimens displayed higher levels than the paired concurrent plasma samples, despite the known dilutional effects common in BALF samples. We found that survivors had higher levels of anti-spike, anti-spike-N-terminal domain and anti-spike-receptor-binding domain IgG antibodies in their BALF (p<0.05), while there was no such association with antibody levels in the systemic circulation., Discussion: Our data highlight the critical role of local adaptive immunity in the airways as a key defence mechanism against primary SARS-CoV-2 infection., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Other than the funding disclosed in the Support Statement, there are no further conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright ©The authors 2024.)

Introduction: Longitudinal data on how acute respiratory illness (ARI) affects behavior, namely school or work participation, and nonpharmaceutical intervention (NPI) usage before and during the COVID-19 pandemic is limited. The authors assessed how ARIs and specific symptoms affected school, work, and health-related behaviors over time., Methods: From November 2019 to June 2021, participating households with children in King County, Washington, were remotely monitored for ARI symptoms weekly. Following ARIs, participants reported illness-related effects on school, work, and NPI use. Using logistic regression with generalized estimating equations, the authors examined associations between symptoms and behaviors., Results: Of 1,861 participants, 581 (31%) from 293 households reported 884 ARIs and completed one-week follow-up surveys. Compared with the prepandemic period, during the period of the pandemic pre-COVID-19 vaccine, ARI-related school (56% vs 10%, p <0.001) absenteeism decreased and masking increased (3% vs 28%, p <0.001). After vaccine authorization in December 2020, more ARIs resulted in masking (3% vs 48%, p <0.001), avoiding contact with non-household members (26% vs 58%, p <0.001), and staying home (37% vs 69%, p <0.001) compared with the prepandemic period. Constitutional symptoms such as fever were associated with work disruptions (OR=1.91; 95% CI=1.06, 3.43), staying home (OR=1.55; 95% CI=1.06, 2.27), and decreased contact with non-household members (OR=1.58; 95% CI=1.05, 2.36)., Conclusions: This remote household study permitted uninterrupted tracking of behavioral changes in families with children before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, identifying increased use of some NPIs when ill but no additional illness-associated work or school disruptions., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, it was important to better understand transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Household contacts of infected individuals are particularly at risk for infection, but delays in contact tracing, delays in testing contacts, and isolation and quarantine posed challenges to accurately capturing secondary household cases., Methods: In this study, 346 households in the Seattle region were provided with respiratory specimen collection kits and remotely monitored using web-based surveys for respiratory illness symptoms weekly between October 1, 2020, and June 20, 2021. Symptomatic participants collected respiratory specimens at symptom onset and mailed specimens to the central laboratory in Seattle. Specimens were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR with whole genome sequencing attempted when positive. SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals were notified, and their household contacts submitted specimens every 2 days for 14 days., Results: In total, 1371 participants collected 2029 specimens that were tested; 16 individuals (1.2%) within 6 households tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the study period. Full genome sequences were generated from 11 individuals within 4 households. Very little genetic variation was found among SARS-CoV-2 viruses sequenced from different individuals in the same household, supporting transmission within the household., Conclusions: This study indicates web-based surveillance of respiratory symptoms, combined with rapid and longitudinal specimen collection and remote contact tracing, provides a viable strategy to monitor households and detect household transmission of SARS-CoV-2., Trial Registration Identifier: NCT04141930, Date of registration 28/10/2019., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies utilizing the test-negative design are typically conducted in clinical settings, rather than community populations, leading to bias in VE estimates against mild disease and limited information on VE in healthy young adults. In a community-based university population, we utilized data from a large SARS-CoV-2 testing program to estimate relative VE of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine primary series and monovalent booster dose versus primary series only against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection from September 2021 to July 2022. We used the test-negative design and logistic regression implemented via generalized estimating equations adjusted for age, calendar time, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and testing frequency (proxy for test-seeking behavior) to estimate relative VE. Analyses included 2,218 test-positive cases (59 % received monovalent booster dose) and 9,615 test-negative controls (62 %) from 9,066 individuals, with median age of 21 years, mostly students (71 %), White (56 %) or Asian (28 %), and with few comorbidities (3 %). More cases (23 %) than controls (6 %) had COVID-19-like illness. Estimated adjusted relative VE of primary series and monovalent booster dose versus primary series only against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was 40 % (95 % CI: 33-47 %) during the overall analysis period and 46 % (39-52 %) during the period of Omicron circulation. Relative VE was greater for those without versus those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (41 %, 34-48 % versus 33 %, 9 %-52 %, P < 0.001). Relative VE was also greater in the six months after receiving a booster dose (41 %, 33-47 %) compared to more than six months (27 %, 8-42 %), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.06). In this relatively young and healthy adult population, an mRNA monovalent booster dose provided increased protection against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, overall and with the Omicron variant. University testing programs may be utilized for estimating VE in healthy young adults, a population that is not well-represented by routine VE studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Ellume that includes: consulting or advisory. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Pfizer that includes: consulting or advisory. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that includes: consulting or advisory. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Glaxo Smith Kline Eesti OÜ that includes: consulting or advisory. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Merck & Co Inc that includes: consulting or advisory. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Gates Ventures that includes: funding grants. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Sanofi Pasteur that includes: funding grants. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Ellume that includes: funding grants. Helen Y. Chu reports a relationship with Cepheid that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with US National Institutes of Health that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with University of Washington that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Gilead Sciences that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Alere Technologies that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Merck & Co Inc that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Janssen Pharmaceutica that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Cerus Corporation that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with ViiV Healthcare that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Bristol-Myers Squibb that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Roche Molecular Systems that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Abbott Molecular Diagnostics that includes: funding grants. Geoffrey S. Gottlieb reports a relationship with Theratechnologies Inc that includes: funding grants. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with AstraZeneca that includes: funding grants. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with GlaxoSmithKline that includes: funding grants. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Merck & Co Inc that includes: funding grants. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Pfizer that includes: funding grants. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Abbvie that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with AstraZeneca that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Ark Biopharma that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with GlaxoSmithKline that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Meissa Vaccines that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Moderna that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Pfizer that includes: consulting or advisory. Janet A. Englund reports a relationship with Sanofi Pasteur that includes: consulting or advisory. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The epidemiology of respiratory viral infections is complex. How infection with one respiratory virus affects risk of subsequent infection with the same or another respiratory virus is not well described., Methods: From October 2019 to June 2021, enrolled households completed active surveillance for acute respiratory illness (ARI), and participants with ARI self-collected nasal swab specimens; after April 2020, participants with ARI or laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and their household members self-collected nasal swab specimens. Specimens were tested using multiplex reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction for respiratory viruses. A Cox regression model with a time-dependent covariate examined risk of subsequent detections following a specific primary viral detection., Results: Rhinovirus was the most frequently detected pathogen in study specimens (406 [9.5%]). Among 51 participants with multiple viral detections, rhinovirus to seasonal coronavirus (8 [14.8%]) was the most common viral detection pairing. Relative to no primary detection, there was a 1.03-2.06-fold increase in risk of subsequent virus detection in the 90 days after primary detection; risk varied by primary virus: human parainfluenza virus, rhinovirus, and respiratory syncytial virus were statistically significant., Conclusions: Primary virus detection was associated with higher risk of subsequent virus detection within the first 90 days after primary detection., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest . E. J. C. received honoraria from Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Washington, for presentations on coronavirus disease 2019 and received a travel award from the Infectious Diseases Society of America to attend IDWeek 2022. J. A. E. reports consulting with AstraZeneca, Meissa Vaccines, and Sanofi Pasteur, as well as research support from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Pfizer. H. Y. C. reports consulting with Ellume, Pfizer, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Glaxo Smith Kline, and Merck. She has received research funding from Gates Ventures and Sanofi Pasteur and support and reagents from Ellume and Cepheid, outside the submitted work. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)