Suchergebnisse

Outbreak cases of acute respiratory disease (ARD) associated with subspecies B2 human adenovirus 11a (HAdV-11a) infection were detected during 2005 in a military basic training camp in Singapore. The Singapore HAdV-11a strain is highly similar to other Asian strains of HAdV-11, including strain QS-DLL, which is responsible for the recently described 2006 outbreak of ARD in China.

In an earlier study on respiratory infections in Singapore military recruits, four influenza C virus (FLUCV) infections were detected out of the 1354 samples collected. All four isolates were detected in 2006, and their whole genome was completely sequenced and analysed. Phylogenetic analysis of the hemagglutinin esterase fusion (HEF) gene revealed that all four Singapore isolates belonged to the C/Japan‐Kanagawa/1/76‐related lineage. However, the genes of the four FLUCV isolates had origins from several different lineages, and the genome composition resembles that of the C/Japan‐Miyagi/9/96‐like strains that had been circulating in Japan between 1996 and 2000.

Background: Antiviral post-exposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir has been used as a strategy in mitigating the Influenza A (H1N1-2009) pandemic. There have been few reports of well-documented prophylaxis failures and the reasons for failure. Objectives: We report herein a series of 10 cases of prophylaxis failures and explore the reasons behind their prophylaxis failure. Study design: In the early pandemic phase, the military employed oseltamivir post-exposure ring-prophylaxis of affected units. From June 22 to July 30, 2009, cases of laboratory-confirmed prophylaxis failures were identified. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and tested by PCR. Samples with sufficient RNA material were sent for whole genome sequencing, and screened for mutations that confer oseltamivir resistance, especially the H275Y mutation. Results: Ten cases of laboratory-confirmed prophylaxis failure were identified, with a mean age of 22.3 years. One case was asymptomatic; the remaining 9 had fever or cough but without severe complications. The mean duration of exposure before starting oseltamivir was 1.9 days (SD 0.9), while the mean duration of oseltamivir consumption before symptom onset was 1.9 days (SD 1.4). None of the samples had the H275Y mutation or other known mutations that confer resistance. From the whole genome sequencing, several mutations at the HA (T220S, E275V, T333A, D239G); PB2 (K660R, L607V, V292I); NS1 (F103S), and NP (W104G) gene segments were detected, but none of them were likely to result in anti-viral resistance. Conclusions: Primary prophylaxis failures exhibited mild symptoms without complications; all did not have the H275Y mutation and were unlikely to result from other mutations.

Background: Antiviral post-exposure prophylaxis with oseltamivir has been used as a strategy in mitigating the Influenza A (H1N1-2009) pandemic. There have been few reports of well-documented prophylaxis failures and the reasons for failure. Objectives: We report herein a series of 10 cases of prophylaxis failures and explore the reasons behind their prophylaxis failure. Study design: In the early pandemic phase, the military employed oseltamivir post-exposure ring-prophylaxis of affected units. From June 22 to July 30, 2009, cases of laboratory-confirmed prophylaxis failures were identified. Nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and tested by PCR. Samples with sufficient RNA material were sent for whole genome sequencing, and screened for mutations that confer oseltamivir resistance, especially the H275Y mutation. Results: Ten cases of laboratory-confirmed prophylaxis failure were identified, with a mean age of 22.3 years. One case was asymptomatic; the remaining 9 had fever or cough but without severe complications. The mean duration of exposure before starting oseltamivir was 1.9 days (SD 0.9), while the mean duration of oseltamivir consumption before symptom onset was 1.9 days (SD 1.4). None of the samples had the H275Y mutation or other known mutations that confer resistance. From the whole genome sequencing, several mutations at the HA (T220S, E275V, T333A, D239G); PB2 (K660R, L607V, V292I); NS1 (F103S), and NP (W104G) gene segments were detected, but none of them were likely to result in anti-viral resistance. Conclusions: Primary prophylaxis failures exhibited mild symptoms without complications; all did not have the H275Y mutation and were unlikely to result from other mutations.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the relative cross-protection conferred by infection with different groups of viruses through studies of sequential infections in humans. We investigated the presence of short-lived relative cross-protection conferred by specific prior viral infections against subsequent febrile respiratory illness (FRI). METHODS: Men enlisted in basic military training between December 2009 and December 2014 were recruited, with the first FRI as the study entry point. ResPlex II assays and real-time polymerase chain reaction assays were used to detect viral pathogens in nasal wash samples, and survival analyses were performed to determine whether infection with particular viruses conferred short-lived relative cross-protection against FRI. RESULTS: Prior infection with adenovirus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], .14–.44) or influenza virus (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, .38–.73) conferred relative protection against subsequent FRI episode. Results were statistically significant even after adjustment for the interval between enlistment and FRI (P < .001). Adenovirus-positive participants with FRI episodes tended to be protected against subsequent infection with adenovirus, coronavirus, enterovirus/rhinovirus, and influenza virus (P = .062–.093), while men with influenza virus–positive FRI episodes tended be protected against subsequent infection with adenovirus (P = .044) and influenza virus (P = .081). CONCLUSION: Prior adenovirus or influenza virus infection conferred cross-protection against subsequent FRI episodes relative to prior infection due to other circulating viruses.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the relative cross-protection conferred by infection with different groups of viruses through studies of sequential infections in humans. We investigated the presence of short-lived relative cross-protection conferred by specific prior viral infections against subsequent febrile respiratory illness (FRI). Methods: Men enlisted in basic military training between December 2009 and December 2014 were recruited, with the first FRI as the study entry point. ResPlex II assays and real-time polymerase chain reaction assays were used to detect viral pathogens in nasal wash samples, and survival analyses were performed to determine whether infection with particular viruses conferred short-lived relative cross-protection against FRI. Results: Prior infection with adenovirus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], .14–.44) or influenza virus (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, .38–.73) conferred relative protection against subsequent FRI episode. Results were statistically significant even after adjustment for the interval between enlistment and FRI (P < .001). Adenovirus-positive participants with FRI episodes tended to be protected against subsequent infection with adenovirus, coronavirus, enterovirus/rhinovirus, and influenza virus (P = .062–.093), while men with influenza virus–positive FRI episodes tended be protected against subsequent infection with adenovirus (P = .044) and influenza virus (P = .081). Conclusion: Prior adenovirus or influenza virus infection conferred cross-protection against subsequent FRI episodes relative to prior infection due to other circulating viruses. ; Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) ; Ministry of Education (MOE) ; Published version ; This work was supported by the Ministry of Education (tier 1 grant R-608-000-132-112 to C. X. P. C.) and by the Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Research, Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health (funded by the Singapore Ministry of Defence).

Background. Few studies have validated the effectiveness of public health interventions in reducing influenza spread in real-life settings. We aim to validate these measures used during the 2009 pandemic. Methods. From 22 June to 9 October 2009, we performed a prospective observational cohort study using paired serum samples and symptom review among 3 groups of Singapore military personnel. "Normal" units were subjected to prevailing pandemic response policies. "Essential" units and health care workers had additional public health interventions (eg, enhanced surveillance with isolation, segregation, personal protective equipment). Samples were tested by hemagglutination inhibition; the principal outcome was seroconversion to 2009 influenza A(H1N1). Results. In total, 1015 individuals in 14 units completed the study, with 29% overall seroconversion. Seroconversion among essential units (17%) and health care workers (11%) was significantly lower than that in normal units (44%) (P < .001). Symptomatic illness attributable to influenza was also lower in essential units (5%) and health care workers (2%) than in normal units (12%) (P = .06). Adjusted for confounders, unit type was the only significant variable influencing overall seroconversion (P < .05). From multivariate analysis within each unit, age (P < .001) and baseline antibody titer (P = .012) were inversely related to seroconversion risk. Conclusions. Public health measures are effective in limiting influenza transmission in closed environments.

Background. Few studies have validated the effectiveness of public health interventions in reducing influenza spread in real-life settings. We aim to validate these measures used during the 2009 pandemic. Methods. From 22 June to 9 October 2009, we performed a prospective observational cohort study using paired serum samples and symptom review among 3 groups of Singapore military personnel. "Normal" units were subjected to prevailing pandemic response policies. "Essential" units and health care workers had additional public health interventions (eg, enhanced surveillance with isolation, segregation, personal protective equipment). Samples were tested by hemagglutination inhibition; the principal outcome was seroconversion to 2009 influenza A(H1N1). Results. In total, 1015 individuals in 14 units completed the study, with 29% overall seroconversion. Seroconversion among essential units (17%) and health care workers (11%) was significantly lower than that in normal units (44%) (P < .001). Symptomatic illness attributable to influenza was also lower in essential units (5%) and health care workers (2%) than in normal units (12%) (P = .06). Adjusted for confounders, unit type was the only significant variable influencing overall seroconversion (P < .05). From multivariate analysis within each unit, age (P < .001) and baseline antibody titer (P = .012) were inversely related to seroconversion risk. Conclusions. Public health measures are effective in limiting influenza transmission in closed environments.

Background: From June 22 through June 25, 2009, four outbreaks of infection with the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus occurred in Singapore military camps. We report the efficacy of ring chemoprophylaxis (geographically targeted containment by means of prophylaxis) with oseltamivir to control outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed environments. Methods: All personnel with suspected infection were tested and clinically isolated if infection was confirmed. In addition, we administered postexposure ring chemoprophylaxis with oseltamivir and segregated the affected military units to contain the spread of the virus. All personnel were screened three times weekly both for virologic infection, by means of nasopharyngeal swabs and reverse-transcriptase- polymerase-chain-reaction assay with sequencing, and for clinical symptoms, by means of questionnaires. Results: A total of 1175 personnel were at risk across the four sites, with 1100 receiving oseltamivir prophylaxis. A total of 75 personnel (6.4%) were infected before the intervention, and 7 (0.6%) after the intervention. There was a significant reduction in the overall reproductive number (the number of new cases attributable to the index case), from 1.91 (95% credible interval, 1.50 to 2.36) before the intervention to 0.11 (95% credible interval, 0.05 to 0.20) after the intervention. Three of the four outbreaks showed a significant reduction in the rate of infection after the intervention. Molecular analysis revealed that all four outbreaks were derived from the New York lineage of the 2009 H1N1 virus and that cases within each outbreak were due to transmission rather than unrelated episodes of infection. Of the 816 personnel treated with oseltamivir who were surveyed, 63 (7.7%) reported mild, nonrespiratory side effects of the drug, with no severe adverse events. Conclusions: Oseltamivir ring chemoprophylaxis, together with prompt identification and isolation of infected personnel, was effective in reducing the impact of outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed settings.

Background: From June 22 through June 25, 2009, four outbreaks of infection with the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus occurred in Singapore military camps. We report the efficacy of ring chemoprophylaxis (geographically targeted containment by means of prophylaxis) with oseltamivir to control outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed environments. Methods: All personnel with suspected infection were tested and clinically isolated if infection was confirmed. In addition, we administered postexposure ring chemoprophylaxis with oseltamivir and segregated the affected military units to contain the spread of the virus. All personnel were screened three times weekly both for virologic infection, by means of nasopharyngeal swabs and reverse-transcriptase- polymerase-chain-reaction assay with sequencing, and for clinical symptoms, by means of questionnaires. Results: A total of 1175 personnel were at risk across the four sites, with 1100 receiving oseltamivir prophylaxis. A total of 75 personnel (6.4%) were infected before the intervention, and 7 (0.6%) after the intervention. There was a significant reduction in the overall reproductive number (the number of new cases attributable to the index case), from 1.91 (95% credible interval, 1.50 to 2.36) before the intervention to 0.11 (95% credible interval, 0.05 to 0.20) after the intervention. Three of the four outbreaks showed a significant reduction in the rate of infection after the intervention. Molecular analysis revealed that all four outbreaks were derived from the New York lineage of the 2009 H1N1 virus and that cases within each outbreak were due to transmission rather than unrelated episodes of infection. Of the 816 personnel treated with oseltamivir who were surveyed, 63 (7.7%) reported mild, nonrespiratory side effects of the drug, with no severe adverse events. Conclusions: Oseltamivir ring chemoprophylaxis, together with prompt identification and isolation of infected personnel, was effective in reducing the impact of outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed settings.

BACKGROUND: From June 22 through June 25, 2009, four outbreaks of infection with the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus occurred in Singapore military camps. We report the efficacy of ring chemoprophylaxis (geographically targeted containment by means of prophylaxis) with oseltamivir to control outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed environments. METHODS: All personnel with suspected infection were tested and clinically isolated if infection was confirmed. In addition, we administered postexposure ring chemoprophylaxis with oseltamivir and segregated the affected military units to contain the spread of the virus. All personnel were screened three times weekly both for virologic infection, by means of nasopharyngeal swabs and reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction assay with sequencing, and for clinical symptoms, by means of questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 1175 personnel were at risk across the four sites, with 1100 receiving oseltamivir prophylaxis. A total of 75 personnel (6.4%) were infected before the intervention, and 7 (0.6%) after the intervention. There was a significant reduction in the overall reproductive number (the number of new cases attributable to the index case), from 1.91 (95% credible interval, 1.50 to 2.36) before the intervention to 0.11 (95% credible interval, 0.05 to 0.20) after the intervention. Three of the four outbreaks showed a significant reduction in the rate of infection after the intervention. Molecular analysis revealed that all four outbreaks were derived from the New York lineage of the 2009 H1N1 virus and that cases within each outbreak were due to transmission rather than unrelated episodes of infection. Of the 816 personnel treated with oseltamivir who were surveyed, 63 (7.7%) reported mild, nonrespiratory side effects of the drug, with no severe adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Oseltamivir ring chemoprophylaxis, together with prompt identification and isolation of infected personnel, was effective in reducing the impact of outbreaks of 2009 H1N1 influenza in semiclosed settings.