Author Interviews, CDC, Flu - Influenza, Vaccine Studies / 29.05.2019

[caption id="attachment_49409" align="alignleft" width="200"]Megan C. Lindley, MPHDeputy Associate Director for ScienceImmunization Services DivisionCDC Megan C. Lindley[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Megan C. Lindley, MPH Deputy Associate Director for Science Immunization Services Division CDC MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Despite longstanding recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, healthcare personnel influenza vaccination coverage remains below the Healthy People 2020 target of 90%. Healthcare employers use a variety of strategies to promote influenza vaccination among healthcare personnel, including facility-level mandates for vaccination. Several U.S. states have also enacted laws related to healthcare personnel influenza vaccination, but the effect of these laws on vaccination uptake is unclear. Our study used influenza vaccination coverage data reported by over 4,000 U.S. hospitals to examine three kinds of laws: (1) Assessment laws, which require hospitals to assess healthcare personnel influenza vaccination status; (2) Offer laws, which require hospitals to offer the influenza vaccine to healthcare personnel; and (3) Ensure laws, which require hospitals to require healthcare personnel to demonstrate proof of influenza vaccination.
Author Interviews, Brigham & Women's - Harvard, Flu - Influenza, Heart Disease, JAMA / 27.03.2019

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_48142" align="alignleft" width="150"]Sonja Kytomaa MAResearch AssociateBrigham and Women’s Hospital Sonja Kytomaa[/caption] Sonja Kytomaa MA Research Associate Brigham and Women’s Hospital [caption id="attachment_48143" align="alignleft" width="126"]Scott D. Solomon, MDThe Edward D. Frohlich Distinguished ChairProfessor of MedicineHarvard Medical SchoolSenior PhysicianBrigham and Women’s HospitalInternational Associate Editor, European Heart Journal Dr. Scott Solomon[/caption] Scott D. Solomon, MD The Edward D. Frohlich Distinguished Chair Professor of Medicine Harvard Medical School Senior Physician Brigham and Women’s Hospital International Associate Editor, European Heart Journal   MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?  Response: Influenza is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, yet few studies have explored the temporal association between influenza activity and hospitalizations, especially due to heart failure (HF). Our aim with this study was to explore the temporal association between influenza activity and hospitalizations for HF and myocardial infarction (MI) in the general population. We related the number of MI and HF hospitalizations by month, which were sampled from 4 US communities and adjudicated in the surveillance component of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, to monthly influenza-like illness activity, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We found that a 5% increase in influenza activity was associated with a 24% increase in HF hospitalizations rates, while overall influenza was not significantly associated with MI hospitalizations. Influenza activity in the months before hospitalization was not associated with either outcome.
Author Interviews, CDC, Flu - Influenza, OBGYNE, Pediatrics / 07.02.2019

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_47374" align="alignleft" width="200"]Kim NewsomeCDC Kim Newsome[/caption] Kim Newsome, MPH National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities CDC  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: This study supports data from previous studies that have shown increased risks for infants born to pregnant women who are severely ill with flu. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings? Response: Our study found that severely ill women with 2009 H1N1 influenza during pregnancy were more likely to have adverse birth outcomes (such as their baby being born preterm or of low birth weight) than women without influenza. 
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Infections, PLoS, University of Michigan / 25.01.2019

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_47142" align="alignleft" width="135"]Betsy Foxman PhD Hunein F. and Hilda Maassab Endowed Professor of Epidemiology Director, Center for Molecular and Clinical Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2029 Dr. Foxman[/caption] Betsy Foxman PhD Hunein F. and Hilda Maassab Endowed Professor of Epidemiology Director, Center for Molecular and Clinical Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2029 MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Influenza is a major cause of human illness and death worldwide. Vaccines are the best available means of prevention. However, vaccine effectiveness has been low to moderate in recent years and coverage remains low in many countries. There is increasing evidence suggesting the microbiome plays an important role in shaping host immunity and may be a potential target for reducing disease. In our study, we used a household transmission study to explore whether the respiratory microbiome was associated with influenza susceptibility. 
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Genentech / 30.10.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_45220" align="alignleft" width="200"]Mark D. Eisner, MD, MPH Vice President, Product Development Immunology Infectious Disease and Ophthalmology Genentech  Dr. Mark Eisner[/caption] Mark D. Eisner, MD, MPH Vice PresidentProduct Development Immunology, Infectious Disease and Ophthalmology Genentech Dr. Eisner discusses the announcement that the FDA has approved XOFLUZA™ (baloxavir marboxil) for the treatment of acute, uncomplicated influenza. MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this announcement? Response: Each year, an estimated 3-11 percent of the U.S. population gets the flu, and it can be very serious, resulting in hospitalization or even death. Since 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that the flu has resulted annually in 9.2 to 35.6 million illnesses, 140,000 to 900,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 to 80,000 deaths. The severity of last year’s flu season underscores the need for new medical options beyond currently available antivirals. XOFLUZA was granted Priority Review in June 2018 based on results from the Phase III CAPSTONE-1 study of a single dose of XOFLUZA compared with placebo or oseltamivir 75 mg, twice daily for five days, in otherwise healthy people with the flu, as well as results from a placebo-controlled Phase II study in otherwise healthy people with the flu.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Roche / 11.10.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_45220" align="alignleft" width="200"]Mark D. Eisner, MD, MPH Vice President, Product Development Immunology Infectious Disease and Ophthalmology Genentech  Dr. Eisner[/caption] Mark D. Eisner, MD, MPH Vice President, Product Development Immunology Infectious Disease and Ophthalmology Genentech  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: CAPSTONE-2 is a Phase III multicenter, randomized, double-blind study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of a single dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo and oseltamivir in people 12 years and older who are at a high risk of complications from the flu. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines people at high risk for serious flu complications to include adults 65 years of age or older, or those who have conditions such as asthma, chronic lung disease, morbid obesity or heart disease. A total of 2,184 participants enrolled in the study and were randomly assigned to receive a single, oral dose of 40 mg or 80 mg of baloxavir marboxil (according to body weight), placebo or 75 mg of oseltamivir twice daily for five days. The primary objective of the study evaluated the efficacy of a single dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo by measuring the time to improvement of influenza symptoms. Key secondary endpoints compared outcomes in baloxavir marboxil versus placebo or oseltamivir – these included time to resolution of fever, time to cessation of viral shedding, infectious virus detection in swabs of the nose and throat, prescription of antibiotics and influenza-related complications. Genentech announced initial results from the study on July 16, 2018 but the full data was presented for the first time during a late-breaking oral presentation at the annual IDWeek meeting in San Francisco, CA on October 6, 2018. Baloxavir marboxil is a first-in-class, single-dose investigational oral medicine with a novel proposed mechanism of action designed to target the influenza A and B viruses, including oseltamivir-resistant strains and avian strains (e.g. H7N9, H5N1). Baloxavir marboxil is the first potential influenza treatment to demonstrate a clinically meaningful benefit for people highly vulnerable to serious influenza complications in clinical trials. The FDA accepted a New Drug Application (NDA) and granted Priority Review to baloxavir marboxil as a single-dose, oral treatment for acute, uncomplicated influenza in people 12 years and older. The NDA was based on results from the Phase III CAPSTONE-1 study of a single dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo or oseltamivir 75 mg, twice daily for five days, in otherwise healthy people with the flu. Results from a placebo-controlled Phase II study in otherwise healthy people with the flu were included as supporting data in the NDA. The FDA is expected to make a decision on approval by December 24, 2018.
Abbott, Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza / 08.10.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_45115" align="alignleft" width="200"]Abbott’s molecular point-of-care flu test, ID NOW Abbott’s molecular point-of-care flu test, ID NOW[/caption] Dr. Norman Moore PhD Abbott’s Director of Scientific Affairs for Infectious Diseases  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this test? How does ID NOW differ from other tests for influenza? Response: This test was developed to give providers – and their patients – lab-accurate results more quickly than ever, right at the point of care. It was designed for ease of use, as well as to be portable and small enough that it can be used in a broad range of healthcare settings, including walk-in clinics, urgent care centers, doctors’ offices and emergency rooms. Prior to ID NOW, traditional molecular tests offered great performance, but took too long to impact treatment decisions. ID NOW is able to deliver the performance and accuracy of lab-based tests in a timeframe that offers the best chance of improving treatment decisions. 
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Genentech / 26.07.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_43512" align="alignleft" width="200"]Mark Eisner MD MPH Vice President and Global Head of Respiratory Actemra, ID, and Metabolism Clinical Development at Genentech Professor of Clinical Medicine University of California, San Francisco Dr. Mark Eisner[/caption] Mark Eisner MD MPH Mark D. Eisner, MD, MPH Vice President, Product Development Immunology, Infectious Disease, and Ophthalmology Genentech   MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Would you briefly explain how baloxavir marboxil differs from other flu treatments?  Response: CAPSTONE-2 is a Phase III multicenter, randomized, double-blind study that evaluated a single dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo and oseltamivir in people 12 years and older who are at a high risk of complications from the flu. The high risk inclusion criteria in CAPSTONE-2 were aligned with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which defines people at high risk for serious flu complications to include adults 65 years of age or older, or those who have conditions such as asthma, chronic lung disease, diabetes or heart disease. For these people, flu can lead to hospitalization or even death. Participants enrolled in the study were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of 40 mg or 80 mg of baloxavir marboxil (according to body weight), placebo or 75 mg of oseltamivir twice a day for five days. The FDA recently accepted a New Drug Application (NDA) and granted Priority Review to baloxavir marboxil as a single-dose, oral treatment for acute, uncomplicated influenza in people 12 years and older. The NDA was based on results from the Phase III CAPSTONE-1 study of a single dose of baloxavir marboxil compared with placebo or oseltamivir 75 mg, twice daily for five days, in otherwise healthy people with the flu. Results from a placebo-controlled Phase II study in otherwise healthy people with the flu were included as supporting data in the NDA. The FDA is expected to make a decision on approval by December 24, 2018. Baloxavir marboxil is a first-in-class, single-dose investigational oral medicine with a novel proposed mechanism of action designed to target the influenza A and B viruses, including oseltamivir-resistant strains and avian strains (H7N9, H5N1). Unlike other currently available antiviral treatments, baloxavir marboxil is the first in a new class of antivirals designed to inhibit the cap-dependent endonuclease protein within the flu virus, which is essential for viral replication. By inhibiting this protein, baloxavir marboxil prevents viral replication earlier in the flu virus life cycle.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Infections, Mental Health Research, Primary Care, Roche / 14.03.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_40568" align="alignleft" width="150"]James W. Antoon, MD, PhD, FAAP Assistant Professor of Clinical Pediatrics University of Illinois at Chicago Associate Medical Director, Pediatric Inpatient Unit Children's Hospital, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System Chicago, IL 60612  Dr. Antoon[/caption] James W. Antoon, MD, PhD, FAAP Assistant Professor of Clinical Pediatrics University of Illinois at Chicago Associate Medical Director, Pediatric Inpatient Unit Children's Hospital, University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences System Chicago, IL 60612  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Oseltamivir, commonly known as Tamiflu, is the only commercially available medication FDA approved to treat the flu.  Since the 2009 H1N1 flu epidemic pediatric prescriptions for Tamiflu have soared.  In the United States, about 40% of Tamiflu prescriptions are given to children less than 16 years of age.  Following reports of abnormal behavior, such as hallucinations, self-injury and suicide attempts in adolescents on Tamiflu, the FDA placed a new warning about these neuropsychiatric symptoms on the drug label.  Whenever the FDA puts out label warning about a drug, doctors and the public take notice. Whether Tamiflu truly causes these side effects is unclear.  For this study we chose to focus on the most consequential of those reports: suicide. The potential link between a drug and suicide is a particularly difficult topic to study for a number of reasons. There are things that happen together or at the same time that can influence someone to attempt suicide and it is very difficult to know which thing is actually having an affect. In our study, other things that can influence suicide are socioeconomic status, mental health, trauma, abuse, among others.  Separating the effects of these confounders can be difficult. It is also possible that the disease itself, which in this case is the flu, causes the effect of suicide. Finally, and luckily, suicide is rare. Our database had 12 million children per year and over five year 21,000 attempted suicide. Of those, only 251 were taking Tamiflu. To get past these issues, we took advantage of a growing drug safety research collaboration between the Departments of Pediatrics and Pharmacy at our institution.  Previous studies have compared those on Tamiflu to those not on Tamiflu to see if there are more side effects in the Tamiflu group.  Our team utilized a novel study method called a case-crossover design. What’s different about this study is that we used each patient as their own comparison.  In other words, we compared each patient to themselves rather than a different group of people.  We essentially studied how patients behaved when the Tamiflu was in their system compared to other l periods where they were not on Tamiflu.  This allowed use to account for the personal differences noted above like mental health and socioeconomic status.   We also compared those children with flu who got Tamiflu and those with flu who did not get Tamiflu to see if the infection itself could be associated with increased suicide. After accounting for all these variables, we did not find any an association between Tamiflu exposure and suicide. Our findings suggest that Tamiflu does NOT increase the risk of suicide in children or teenagers.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza / 02.03.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_40325" align="alignleft" width="128"]Ishanu Chattopadhyay, PhD Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine Section of Hospital Medicine Institute for Genomics and Systems Biology University of Chicago Dr. Chattopadhyay[/caption] Ishanu Chattopadhyay, PhD Assistant Professor, Department of Medicine Section of Hospital Medicine Institute for Genomics and Systems Biology University of Chicago MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: It is estimated that flu kills thousands every year in US, some estimates put the yearly death toll to around 30,000 -- that is just in US, and that is irrespective of whether a new virus emerges. But why do waves of the disease sweep the globe every year, as if on a schedule? It had been suggested before that the trigger is a specific change in weather conditions, specifically, when normally humid air turns dry. In this new study, we explore this question in much greater detail than was possible before, bringing to bear massive amounts data, such as 150 million individual medical histories recorded over the last decade, along with massive climate datasets. What we found was both fascinating, and consequential -- no single factor is responsible wholly, and it requires a complex, yet precise, mix of weather conditions, demographic makeup, socio-economic variables, vaccination coverage, antigenic drift states of the virus, and human traveling habits, among others, to trigger the seasonal epidemic waves. Quite surprisingly, long range air-travel is far less important compared to short range ground travel. This work attempts to finally settle the lack of consensus in the scientific community on which factors are responsible, as well as each factor’s relative importance.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Vaccine Studies / 12.02.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: “#influenza” by J.S. Zolliker is licensed under CC BY 2.0Dr. Vittorio Demicheli Servizio Regionale di Riferimento per l'Epidemiologia SSEpi-SeREMI, Azienda Sanitaria Locale ASL AL Alessandria, Piemonte, Italy MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?  Response: The consequences of influenza in adults are mainly time off work. Only vaccination of pregnant women is recommended internationally, while mass vaccination of healthy adults is still matter of debate. The aim of this Cochrane Review is to assist informed decision making summarizing research that looks at the effects of immunizing healthy adults with influenza vaccines during influenza seasons. The review process found 52 clinical trials of over 80,000 adults. Only around 15% of the included studies were well designed and conducted. We focused on reporting of results from 25 studies that looked at inactivated vaccines. Injected influenza vaccines probably have a small protective effect against influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI_ (moderate-certainty evidence), as 71 people would need to be vaccinated to avoid one influenza case, and 29 would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI. Vaccination may have little or no appreciable effect on hospitalizations (low-certainty evidence) or number of working days lost.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Nature, Vaccine Studies / 26.01.2018

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: “Syringe and Vaccine” by NIAID is licensed under CC BY 2.0Dr. Lei Deng PhD Postdoctoral researcher Institute for Biomedical Sciences at Georgia State University MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Influenza A viruses evade human herd immunity by genetic hypervariation. Annual influenza epidemics are estimated to cause about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290,000 to 650,000 deaths. Vaccination is still the most effective way to prevent diseases, but current influenza vaccines provide limited protections against mismatched circulating virus strains. This drives scientists to develop universal influenza vaccines that can induce broad immune responses against all influenza A virus infections. We used biochemistry and nanotechnology to generate a double-layered protein nanoparticle universal influenza vaccine. The layered nanoparticle contains genetically modified influenza virus components without irrelevant carry/structural proteins and chemicals and confers strong and long-lasting immunity in laboratory mice against H1N1, H3N2, H5N1 and H7N9 infections. We also explain the protection mechanism of antibody dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) and antibody dependent cell-mediated phagocytosis (ADCP) play the main role in the immune protection. 
Author Interviews, Biomarkers, Flu - Influenza, Infections / 01.11.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Ana Falcón Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology National Center for Biotechnology Spanish National Research Council (CNB-CSIC) Madrid, Spain MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Influenza A virus (IAV) infection can be severe or even lethal in toddlers, the elderly and patients with certain medical conditions. Infection of apparently healthy individuals nonetheless accounts for many severe disease cases and deaths, suggesting that viruses with increased pathogenicity co-circulate with pandemic or epidemic viruses. IAV virulence and pathogenesis are dependent on complex, multigenic mechanisms involving the viral genetic characteristics, the host conditions, the virus-host interactions, and the host response to the infection. Influenza virus pathogenicity has been studied in depth for many years, and several amino acid changes have been identified as virulence determinants, however, a general pathogenicity determinant has not been characterized. A proportion of influenza virus particles have defective genome RNAs (Defective Viral Genomes-DVGs) due to internal deletions of viral segments. The DVGs have the 3’ and 5’ ends of the parental RNA segments, and most have a single, large central deletion that generates viral RNAs of 180–1000 nucleotides. The presence of DVGs potentiates the host response in cultured cells and in animal models and leads to attenuated infection, possibly through recognition of double-stranded RNA by receptors that activate antiviral signaling cascades.
Author Interviews, Diabetes, Flu - Influenza, Genetic Research / 19.09.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Paz Lopez-Doriga Ruiz MD, PhD candidate Norwegian Institute of Public Health Department of Non Communicable Diseases OsloPaz Lopez-Doriga Ruiz MD, PhD candidate Norwegian Institute of Public Health Department of Non Communicable Diseases Oslo  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Some case reports have linked pandemic influenza to the development of type 1 diabetes. Other studies have suggested that also respiratory infections may contribute to type 1 diabetes risk.  Our findings supports a suggested role of respiratory infections in the etiology of type 1 diabetes and influenza virus could be a contributing factor to the development of clinical diabetes, due to stress and inflammation in predisposed individuals.
Annals Internal Medicine, Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Merck, Technology / 11.09.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_36888" align="alignleft" width="99"]Jesse Papenburg, MD MSc FRCPC FRQS Clinical Research Scholar Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, McGill University Div. of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Dept. of Microbiology Montreal Children’s Hospital Montreal, QC Dr. Papenburg[/caption] Jesse Papenburg, MD MSc FRCPC FRQS Clinical Research Scholar Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, McGill University Div. of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Dept. of Microbiology Montreal Children’s Hospital Montreal, QC  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Influenza viruses cause yearly epidemics of acute respiratory illness affecting 5 to 30 percent of the population. Diagnosing influenza on the basis of only clinical symptoms is difficult because its manifestations vary and are nonspecific. Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard for flu diagnosis, but these tests must be sent to a laboratory and have turnaround times that extend beyond the clinical encounter. Rapid and accurate diagnosis of influenza has the potential to improve patient outcomes and decrease health care costs. Since 2011, two novel classes of rapid influenza diagnostic assays i.e., with results available in <30 minutes, have been commercialized with claims of improved sensitivities based on technological improvements: 1) automated immunochromatographic antigen detection tests (digital immunoassays, DIAs) and 2) rapid nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs). Our systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized the available evidence and compared the diagnostic accuracy of commercially available rapid tests for the detection of influenza A and B infection:
  • Overall, the rapid tests displayed very high specificities (≥98%). Physicians can therefore diagnose influenza with confidence on the basis of a positive RIDT, DIA, or rapid NAAT result.
  • The pooled sensitivities for DIAs (80.0% for influenza A and 76.8% for influenza B) and rapid NAATs (91.6% for influenza A and 95.4% for influenza B) are markedly higher than those for RIDTs (54.4% for influenza A and 53.2% for influenza B).
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Kaiser Permanente, Merck, NEJM, Vaccine Studies / 10.08.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_36395" align="alignleft" width="139"]Michael Jackson  PhD, MPH Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (KPWHRI) principal investigator for the United States Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network Dr. Jackson[/caption] Michael Jackson  PhD, MPH Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute (KPWHRI) principal investigator for the United States Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
  • Response: Each year, Kaiser Permanente Washington is one of five sites across the country that participate in the United States Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network. The Network reports its early interim results in the MMWRand presents additional interim results to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)This New England Journal of Medicine publication is an update of those interim results.
  • The findings in this New England Journal of Medicine are special because prior randomized controlled trials indicated that the nasal spray vaccine (FluMist)—also called live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV)—would work well to protect children and teens from the flu, whereas in actual practice we found that the flu shot worked much better, particularly against the predominant strain, A(H1N1)pdm09.
  • The nasal spray vaccine was first seen to be less effective for young children than the flu shot in 2013-2014 for the A(H1N1)pdm09 virus strain. In response, the A(H1N1)pdm09 virus strain used in the nasal spray vaccine was changed for the 2015-2016 influenza season. The 2016/17 season was the first since 2015-2016 to be dominated by the A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, making this our first opportunity to evaluate the updated nasal spray vaccine.
  • The Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network evaluated the impact of this change as part of our estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in 2015-2016. Preliminary findings from this study were presented to the ACIP in June 2016, which led to the nasal spray vaccine not being recommended in 2016-2017 in the US, although the nasal spray vaccine remains licensed in the US. In 2016-2017, the LAIV A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine strain was unchanged from 2015-2016.
Author Interviews, Emory, Flu - Influenza, Lancet, Technology, Vaccine Studies / 28.06.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Dr Nadine G Rouphael MD Associate Professor of Medicine, Emory University Director of the VTEU and HIPC networks at the Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center Decatur GA 30030, USA MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this new technology and study? What are the main findings? Response: Different groups including a group of researchers at Georgia Tech have been working on the microneedle technology for more than 20 years. The dissolvable microneedle patches are already used in several cosmetic products and drugs. However, vaccination with microneedle patches has been studied mostly in animals. Our phase 1 trial published this week in The Lancet showed that vaccination with the microneedle patches was safe, with no related serious adverse events reported. Local skin reactions to the patches were mostly mild itching and faint redness that lasted two to three days. No new chronic medical illnesses or influenza-like illnesses were reported with either the patch or the injection groups. Antibody responses generated by the vaccine, as measured through analysis of blood samples, were similar in the groups vaccinated using patches and those receiving intramuscular injection, and these immune responses were still present after six months. When asked after immunization, more than 70 percent of patch recipients reported they would prefer patch vaccination over injection or intranasal vaccination for future vaccinations.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, NEJM, Vaccine Studies / 22.06.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_35441" align="alignleft" width="200"]Lisa M. Dunkle, M.D. Chief Medical Officer Protein Sciences Corporation 1000 Research Parkway Meriden, CT  Dr. Dunkle[/caption] Lisa M. Dunkle, M.D. Chief Medical Officer Protein Sciences Corporation 1000 Research Parkway Meriden, CT MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The first and only recombinant protein influenza vaccine (RIV, Flublok) was approved in 2013 as a trivalent formulation for use in adults 18 years of age and older. This approval was based on demonstration of clinical efficacy (full approval) in adults 18-49 years of age and accelerated approval was granted for adults 50 years of age and older. Two clinical trials were conducted in 2014-2015 with RIV4 (Flublok Quadrivalent), of which the trial reported in the current NEJM is one. These studies supported full approval of Flublok in adults 50 years of age and older and approval of Flublok Quadrivalent in all adults 18 years of age and older. The second trial of immunogenicity of Flublok Quadrivalent in adults 18-49 years of age will be the subject of another publication in the near future. The main findings of the current trial are well summarized in the Conclusion of the Abstract: “RIV4 provided better protection than standard-dose IIV4 against confirmed influenza-like illness in older adults.” Additionally, the recombinant vaccine (RIV4, Flublok Quadrivalent) demonstrated significantly less injection site pain and tenderness following vaccination. Based on the characteristics of the study participants, one can conclude that RIV4 is safe and effective in most individuals with underlying chronic diseases
Author Interviews, CDC, Flu - Influenza, OBGYNE, Vaccine Studies / 31.05.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_34939" align="alignleft" width="112"]Dr. Elyse Olshen Kharbanda, MD MPH HealthPartners Institute Minneapolis, MN Dr. Kharbanda[/caption] Dr. Elyse Olshen Kharbanda, MD MPH HealthPartners Institute Minneapolis, MN MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Pregnant women who get the flu are at an increased risk for severe illness. To protect pregnant women, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends women receive inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) during any trimester of their pregnancy. This study used data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink to evaluate if there was an increased risk for selected major structural birth defects for infants whose mothers received IIV in the first trimester of pregnancy versus infants who were unexposed to IIV. Among over 425,000 live births, including 52,856 whose mothers received IIV during first trimester, we evaluated risks for major structural birth defects.  In this large observational study, we did not observe increased risks for major structural birth defects in offspring following first trimester maternal inactivated influenza vaccine exposure.
Author Interviews, BMJ, Flu - Influenza, Karolinski Institute, OBGYNE, Pediatrics, Pharmacology / 01.03.2017

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_32424" align="alignleft" width="146"]Dr. Sophie Graner Department of Women's and Childrens Health Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden Dr. Graner[/caption] Dr. Sophie Graner Department of Women's and Childrens Health Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Pregnant women are at increased risks of severe disease and death due to influensa infection, as well as hospitalization. Also influenza and fever increase the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes for their infants such as intrauterine death and preterm birth. Due to this, the regulatory agencies in Europe and the US recommended post exposure prophylaxis and treatment for pregnant women with neuraminidase inhibitors during the last influenza pandemic 2009-10. Despite the recommendations, the knowledge on the effect of neuraminidase inhibitors on the infant has been limited. Previously published studies have not shown any increased risk, but they have had limited power to assess specific neonatal outcomes such as stillbirth, neonatal mortality, preterm birth, low Agar score, neonatal morbidity and congenital malformations.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Pediatrics, Science, UCLA / 28.11.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Katelyn M. Gostic and Monique Ambrose Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of California Los Angeles MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Monique Ambrose: Influenza pandemics pose a serious, recurrent threat to human public health. One of the most probable sources of future pandemic influenza viruses is the pool of influenza A virus (IAV) subtypes that currently circulate in non-human animals. It has traditionally been thought that the human population is immunologically naïve and unprotected against these unfamiliar subtypes. However, our work suggests that an individual ‘imprints’ to the influenza A virus (IAV) encountered in early childhood in such a way that they retain protection against severe disease if they later encounter a novel IAV subtype that belongs to the same genetic group as their first exposure. Our research looked at human cases of H5N1 and H7N9, two avian IAV subtypes of global concern, to investigate what factors most strongly predicted risk of severe disease. The most striking explanatory factor was childhood IAV imprinting: our results suggest that individuals who had childhood imprinting on an IAV in the same genetic group as the avian IAV they encountered later in life experienced 75% protection against severe disease and 80% protection against death.
Allergies, Asthma, Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Pediatrics, Vaccine Studies / 14.11.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_29605" align="alignleft" width="143"]Deepa Patadia, MD Wexner Medical Center The Ohio State University Dr. Deepa Patadia[/caption] Deepa Patadia, MD Wexner Medical Center The Ohio State University MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Influenza vaccination is recommended every autumn for all children 6 months of age and older. It is particularly important for children with asthma, who are at high risk of hospitalization or severe illness if they contract influenza infection. The rates of influenza vaccination in children with asthma have not previously been well studied, but Healthy People 2020 has set a target goal to vaccinate 70% of all children for influenza. We found that rates of vaccination in our large primary care population was much lower than the target rate, with less than 50% of all children receiving the vaccine each year over a 5 year period; however rates were higher in children with asthma, albeit still only at 55%.
Annals Internal Medicine, Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Pediatrics, Vaccine Studies / 16.08.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_26888" align="alignleft" width="150"]Dr. Mark Loeb BSc (McGill), MD (McGill), MSc (McMaster), FRCPC Professor, Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine Joint Member, Dept of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics Division Director, Infectious Diseases, McMaster University Dr. Mark Loeb[/caption] Dr. Mark Loeb BSc (McGill), MD (McGill), MSc (McMaster), FRCPC Professor, Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine Joint Member, Dept of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics Division Director, Infectious Diseases, McMaster University MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: The background for this study is that in the U.S, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the committee that advises the CDC on vaccination policy, decided this June not to recommend LAIV (nasal live vaccine) for children. This is because of non-randomized studies conducted in the U.S suggesting that the vaccine was ineffective. This was an unprecedented decision in influenza vaccine policy making for children. Our study, a randomized, blinded, controlled trial, which is the most rigorous type of study design, conducted over 3 years (2012-13, 2013-2014, 2014-2015 influenza seasons), showed in fact very similar protection for children and their communities for the live and inactivated vaccines. We conducted the study in the Hutterite community of Western Canada which allowed us to compare the effect of the vaccines in entire communities. That is, we were able to study the direct effect and the indirect effect of these vaccines.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, JAMA, Pediatrics, Vaccine Studies / 07.07.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_25838" align="alignleft" width="144"]Marta C. Nunes, PhD DST/NRF:Vaccine Preventable Diseases Respiratory and Meningeal Pathogens Research Unit University of Witwatersrand Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital Soweto, South Africa Dr. Marta Nunes[/caption] Marta C. Nunes, PhD DST/NRF:Vaccine Preventable Diseases Respiratory and Meningeal Pathogens Research Unit University of Witwatersrand Chris Hani Baragwanath Academic Hospital Soweto, South Africa MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Response: Young infants are at increased risk for influenza infection and hospitalizations associated with influenza infection. While active annual influenza vaccination is the most efficient mode for the prevention of influenza infection, current vaccines are poorly immunogenic and not licensed for use in infants
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, OBGYNE, Pediatrics, Vaccine Studies / 09.05.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_24161" align="alignleft" width="142"]Julie H. Shakib, DO, MS, MPH Assistant Professor of Pediatrics | University of Utah Medical Director | Well Baby and Intermediate Nursery Salt Lake City Dr. Julie Shakib[/caption] Julie H. Shakib, DO, MS, MPH Assistant Professor of Pediatrics | University of Utah Medical Director | Well Baby and Intermediate Nursery Salt Lake City  MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Shakib: Immunization against influenza in the first six months of life is ineffective  due to an immature immune response. Passive protection via maternal immunization offers an alternative but only a few studies have evaluated the efficacy of this immunization strategy. We found that in infants born to women immunized against influenza during pregnancy, the risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza and influenza-related hospitalization were reduced by 70% and 81% in their first 6 months of life, respectively.This large study provides more evidence that when women are immunized against influenza during pregnancy, their infants are much less likely to be diagnosed with influenza in their first 6 months.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Vaccine Studies / 27.04.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_23831" align="alignleft" width="200"]Dr Anna C. Phillips PhD CPsychol AFBPsS Reader in Behavioural Medicine School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences University of Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham Dr. Anna Phillips[/caption] Dr Anna C. Phillips PhD CPsychol AFBPsS Reader in Behavioural Medicine School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences University of Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Phillips: We know that various factors can affect the response to vaccination and that older adults have a poorer response than younger people, i.e. they produce fewer antibodies.  We also know that many immune messengers and important hormones have daily rhythms in their levels and wanted to test whether the antibody response to vaccination might also be affected by time of day.  We randomised surgeries to giving morning or afternoon vaccinations and tested before and one month after the vaccination for levels of antibodies. Two of the three flu strains (viruses) contained in the vaccine showed a higher antibody response in the morning than in the afternoon, up to 4 x higher to one of the strains (A/California) and 1.5 x higher to the B strain. None of the potential mechanisms we measured (immune messengers, hormones) seemed to be driving this effect.
Annals Internal Medicine, Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Kaiser Permanente, Surgical Research, Vaccine Studies / 16.03.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: [caption id="attachment_22564" align="alignleft" width="142"]Sara Y. Tartof, PhD, MPH Kaiser Permanente Southern California Department of Research & Evaluation Dr. Sarah Tartoff[/caption] Sara Y. Tartof, PhD, MPH Kaiser Permanente Southern California Department of Research & Evaluation MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Dr. Tartof: The flu is a highly contagious respiratory infection that can cause serious complications, hospitalizations and, in some cases, even death. Some people, such as older adults, young children and people with certain health conditions, are at high risk for serious complications. In addition to recommending annual flu vaccination for people 6 months of age and older, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that hospitalized patients who are eligible receive the flu vaccine before discharge. Historically, inpatient rates of vaccination have been low. There has been concern among surgeons that vaccinating patients while they are in the hospital can contribute to increased risk of vaccine-related fever or muscle pain, which might be incorrectly attributed to surgical complications. However, there have been no data to support that concern. The objective of this study was to provide clinical evidence that would either substantiate or refute concerns about the safety of perioperative vaccination.
Author Interviews, Flu - Influenza, Heart Disease / 10.02.2016

MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Tze-Fan Chao MD PhD Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine Taipei Veterans General Hospital Institute of Clinical Medicine, and Cardiovascular Research Center National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan Su-Jung Chen MD Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Institute of Public Health and School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University Taipei, Taiwan MedicalResearch: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings? Response: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in clinical practice, accounting for frequent hospitalizations, hemodynamic abnormalities, and thromboembolic events. Although the detailed mechanism of the occurrence of Atrial fibrillation remains unclear, systemic inflammation and sympathetic nervous system have been demonstrated to play an important role in the pathogenesis of AF. Flu (influenza infection) is a common disease which could happen to everyone in the daily life. It could cause significant morbidity and mortality, and is a serious human health concern worldwide. Previous studies have shown that influenza infection not only results in the productions of pro-inflammatory cytokines, but also activates the sympathetic nervous system, which are all related to the occurrence of  Atrial fibrillation. Therefore, we hypothesized that influenza infection could be a risk factor of new-onset AF. We also tested the hypothesis that influenza vaccination, a useful way to reduce the risk of influenza infection, could decrease the risk of AF. In this large scale nationwide case-control study, a total of 11,374 patients with newly diagnosed  Atrial fibrillation were identified from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. On the same date of enrollment, 4 control patients (without AF) with matched age and sex were selected to be the control group for each study patient. The relationship between AF and influenza infection/vaccination 1 year before the enrollment was analyzed. The results showed that influenza infection was associated with an 18% increased risk of AF, and the risk could be easily reduced through influenza vaccination.
Author Interviews, CDC, Flu - Influenza, OBGYNE, Vaccine Studies / 04.02.2016

[caption id="attachment_21281" align="alignleft" width="145"]Ikwo Oboho, MD, ScMLCDR, United States Public Health Service Medical Epidemiologist, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionPriority Populations Treatment Team| HIV Care & Treatment Branch | Division of Global HIV/TB Atlanta, GA 30333 Dr. Ikwo Oboho[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Ikwo Oboho, MD, ScMLCDR United States Public Health Service Medical Epidemiologist, Centers for Disease Control and PreventionPriority Populations Treatment Team| HIV Care & Treatment Branch | Division of Global HIV/TB Atlanta, GA 30333 MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? Dr. Oboho: ·Pregnant women with flu are at high risk of serious illness and complications, including death. The study is based on data gathered from a nationwide flu surveillance network that includes 14 states. The analysis focused on pregnant women hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed flu over four recent flu seasons, from 2010 to 2014. MedicalResearch.com: What are the main findings?  Dr. Oboho: ·       During the study period, 865 pregnant women were hospitalized with flu. Sixty-three of these patients, or about 7 percent, had severe illness.
  • After adjusting for underlying medical conditions, vaccination status, and pregnancy trimester, we found that early treatment with the antiviral drug oseltamivir was associated with a shorter hospital stay.
  • Among pregnant women with severe flu illness who were treated early with oseltamivir — within two days of the start of symptoms — the median length of stay was about five days shorter compared to hospitalized pregnant women with severe flu illness who were treated later
  • Pregnant women who were hospitalized with severe cases of flu illness were half as likely to have been vaccinated as women with non-severe illness.
Author Interviews, Education, Flu - Influenza, Vaccine Studies / 30.12.2015

[caption id="attachment_20371" align="alignleft" width="199"]Mubdiul Ali Imtiaz, MD Department of Internal Medicine Rutgers University, New Jersey Medical School Newark, NJ 07103.  Dr.  Mubdiul Ali Imtiaz[/caption] MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Mubdiul Ali Imtiaz, MD Department of Internal Medicine Rutgers University, New Jersey Medical School Newark, NJ 07103 Medical Research: What is the background for this study? Response: Resident physicians (RPs) were defined to be all individuals enrolled in a graduate medical education training program in a healthcare setting. There were 611 resident physicians enrolled in 47 post-graduate residency and fellowship programs at RU-NJMS during the 2013-2014 academic year. Influenza immunization was strongly recommended, but not mandatory for Resident physicians during 2013-2014. A link to the online survey using a standardized, anonymous, self-administered questionnaire was emailed by the program-chiefs to their respective RPs to collect demographic characteristics, influenza immunization status during the 2013-2014 and the previous season, and reasons for non-vaccination. Medical Research: What are the main findings? Response: The overall self-reported immunization rate of  Resident physicians in 2013-2014 was 76.7%. The immunization rate did not differ by the location of medical school attended (P= 0.55) or sex (P= 0.69). Among the respondents, 95.8% had influenza vaccination in the past and 83.1% received influenza vaccine during 2012-2013 flu season. History of influenza vaccination ever and in 2012-2013 were both significantly associated with receiving the vaccine during the 2013-2014 season (P<0.01 for both). The most common reason for not being vaccinated (38.6%) was “lack of time to get immunized” (see Figure 1). The most common cited motivating factors to be vaccinated during the next influenza season among the NVRPs were “making vaccinations in the workplace at convenient locations and times” (43.2%), “availability of mobile flu vaccination carts in hospital floors” (40.9%), and “establishing mandatory flu vaccination for employment” (36.4%).