Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, October 11, 2008, Week 41

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, May 29, 2009, revised Week 20

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, May 30, 2009, revised Week 21

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, June 13, 2009, revised Week 23

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, June 6, 2009, Week 22

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, June 27, 2009, Week 25

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, June 20, 2009, Week 24

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, July 4, 2009, Week 26

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Influenza and Other Respiratory Virus Weekly Activity Report, July 11, 2009, Week 27

Weekly report of the Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network produced by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network Final Report 2006-2008

The Iowa Influenza Surveillance Network (IISN) tracks the overall activity, age groups impacted, outbreaks, type and strain, and severity of seasonal influenza. In the 2006-2007 season the network had more than 90 reporting sites that included physicians, clinics, hospitals, schools and long term care facilities (Appendix A). Other non-network reporters who contributed influenza data included medical clinics, hospitals, laboratories, local public health departments and neighboring state health departments. 010203040506070424548495051521234567891011121314MMWR weekNumber of cases2006-20072005-2006 The 2006-2007 influenza season in Iowa began earlier than any previously recorded data indicates, however, the season’s peak occurred much later in the season. In addition to early cases, this season was also unusual in that all three anticipated strains (AH1N1, AH3N2, and B) were reported by the first of December (Appendix B). The first laboratory-confirmed case in the 2005-2006 season was identified December 5, 2005; the first case for the 2006-2007 season was on November 2, 2006. The predominant strain for 2005-2006 was influenza AH3, but for 2006-2007 both influenza AH1 and B dominated influenza infections. However improvements in influenza specimen submission to the University Hygienic Laboratory may have also played a role in early detection and overall case detection. In summary, all influenza activity indicators show a peak between the MMWR weeks 5 and 9 (i.e. February 14- March 4). Children from five years to eight years of age were impacted more than other age groups. There were few influenza hospitalizations and fatalities in all age groups.

Prevalence rate and reasons for refusals of influenza vaccine in elderly.

More knowledge on the reasons for refusal of the influenza vaccine in elderly patients is essential to target groups for additional information, and hence improve coverage rate. The objective of the present study was to describe precisely the true motives for refusal. All patients aged over 64 who attended the Medical Outpatient Clinic, University of Lausanne, or their private practitioner's office during the 1999 and 2000 vaccination periods were included. Each patient was informed on influenza and its complications, as well as on the need for vaccination, its efficacy and adverse events. The vaccination was then proposed. In case of refusal, the reasons were investigated with an open question. Out of 1398 patients, 148 (12%) refused the vaccination. The main reasons for refusal were the perception of being in good health (16%), of not being susceptible to influenza (15%), of not having had the influenza vaccine in the past (15%), of having had a bad experience either personally or a relative (15%), and the uselessness of the vaccine (10%). Seventeen percent gave miscellaneous reasons and 12% no reason at all for refusal. Little epidemiological knowledge and resistance to change appear to be the major obstacles for wide acceptance of the vaccine by the elderly.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Intradermal vs. Intramuscular Influenza Vaccine in Lung Transplant Recipients

Background: Immunogenicity of standard infl uenza vaccine is suboptimal in lung transplant recipients. Intradermal vaccine may elicit stronger responses due to recruitment of local dendritic cells. We compared the immunogenicity of the infl uenza vaccine administered intradermally (ID) to the standard intramuscular (IM) vaccination. Methods: In this investigator-blinded, two-center, prospective trial, lung transplant patients were randomized to receive intradermal (6ug) or intramuscular (15ug) 2008/9 trivalent inactivated infl uenza vaccine. Immunogenicity was evaluated using a standard hemagglutination inhibition assay (HIA). Response to the vaccine was defi ned as a fourfold increase of the HIA levels for any of the 3 viral strains in the vaccine. Geometric mean titers (GMT) and seroprotection rate (HIA ≥32) were also analyzed. Patients were followed during 6 months for the development of infl uenza or acute rejection. Results: We randomized 84 patients to receive the ID (n=41) vs. IM (n=43) vaccine, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Median time from transplantation was 3.4 yrs (ID) vs. 3.3 yrs (IM) (p=0.84). Vaccine response to at least one antigen was seen in 6/41 (14.6%) patients in the ID vs. 8/43 (18.6%) in the IM group (p=0.77). In the ID group, GMTs (95% CI) after vaccination were 15.7 (11.1-22.3) for H1N1, 84.0 (52.0-135.7) for H3N2, and 14.5 (9.6-21.8) for B strains vs. in the IM group 17.5 (11.8-25.9) for H1N1, 108.9 (77.5-153.2) for H3N2, and 20.2 (12.8-31.9) for B (p=NS, all 3 strains). Seroprotection was 39% (H1N1), 82.9% (H3N2) and 29.3% (B strain) in the ID group vs. 27.9% (H1N1), 97.7% (H3N2) and 58.1% (B strain) in the IM group. No factors associated with vaccine response were identifi ed. Mild adverse events were seen in 44% of patients (ID) vs. 34% (IM) (p=0.38). Two patients (4.8%) in the ID group developed infl uenza infection compared to none in the IM group. Two patients in each group developed biopsy-proven acute rejection during follow-up. Conclusions: Immunogenicity of the 2008/09 infl uenza vaccine was poor in lung transplant recipients. ID administration of the vaccine elicited similar immune responses to standard IM vaccination. Novel strategies of vaccination are needed to protect lung transplant recipients from infl uenza.

OpenFluDB, a database for human and animal influenza virus.

Although research on influenza lasted for more than 100 years, it is still one of the most prominent diseases causing half a million human deaths every year. With the recent observation of new highly pathogenic H5N1 and H7N7 strains, and the appearance of the influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 swine-like lineage, a collaborative effort to share observations on the evolution of this virus in both animals and humans has been established. The OpenFlu database (OpenFluDB) is a part of this collaborative effort. It contains genomic and protein sequences, as well as epidemiological data from more than 27,000 isolates. The isolate annotations include virus type, host, geographical location and experimentally tested antiviral resistance. Putative enhanced pathogenicity as well as human adaptation propensity are computed from protein sequences. Each virus isolate can be associated with the laboratories that collected, sequenced and submitted it. Several analysis tools including multiple sequence alignment, phylogenetic analysis and sequence similarity maps enable rapid and efficient mining. The contents of OpenFluDB are supplied by direct user submission, as well as by a daily automatic procedure importing data from public repositories. Additionally, a simple mechanism facilitates the export of OpenFluDB records to GenBank. This resource has been successfully used to rapidly and widely distribute the sequences collected during the recent human swine flu outbreak and also as an exchange platform during the vaccine selection procedure. Database URL: http://openflu.vital-it.ch.