Infectious disease modeling methods as tools for informing response to novel influenza viruses of unknown pandemic potential.

The rising importance of infectious disease modeling makes this an appropriate time for a guide for public health practitioners tasked with preparing for, and responding to, an influenza pandemic. We list several questions that public health practitioners commonly ask about pandemic influenza and match these with analytical methods, giving details on when during a pandemic the methods can be used, how long it might take to implement them, and what data are required. Although software to perform these tasks is available, care needs to be taken to understand: (1) the type of data needed, (2) the implementation of the methods, and (3) the interpretation of results in terms of model uncertainty and sensitivity. Public health leaders can use this article to evaluate the modeling literature, determine which methods can provide appropriate evidence for decision-making, and to help them request modeling work from in-house teams or academic groups.

Capacity building in national influenza laboratories--use of laboratory assessments to drive progress.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory testing is a fundamental component of influenza surveillance for detecting novel strains with pandemic potential and informing biannual vaccine strain selection. The United States (U.S.) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), under the auspices of its WHO Collaborating Center for Influenza, is one of the major public health agencies which provides support globally to build national capacity for influenza surveillance. Our main objective was to determine if laboratory assessments supported capacity building efforts for improved global influenza surveillance. METHODS: In 2010, 35 national influenza laboratories were assessed in 34 countries, using a standardized tool. Post-assessment, each laboratory received a report with a list of recommendations for improvement. Uptake of recommendations were reviewed 3.2 mean years after the initial assessments and categorized as complete, in-progress, no action or no update. This was a retrospective study; follow-up took place through routine project management rather than at a set time-point post-assessment. WHO data on National Influenza Centre (NIC) designation, External Quality Assessment Project (EQAP) participation and FluNet reporting was used to measure laboratory capacity longitudinally and independently of the assessments. All data was further stratified by World Bank country income category. RESULTS: At follow-up, 81% of 614 recommendations were either complete (350) or in-progress (145) for 32 laboratories (91% response rate). The number of countries reporting to FluNet and the number of specimens they reported annually increased between 2005, when they were first funded by CDC, and 2010, the assessment year (p < 0.01). Improvements were also seen in EQAP participation and NIC designation over time and more so for low and lower-middle income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments using a standardized tool have been beneficial to improving laboratory-based influenza surveillance. Specific recommendations helped countries identify and prioritize areas for improvement. Data from assessments helped CDC focus its technical assistance by country and region. Low and lower-middle income countries made greater improvements in their laboratories compared with upper-middle income countries. Future research could include an analysis of annual funding and technical assistance by country. Our approach serves as an example for capacity building for other diseases.

Improvements in pandemic preparedness in 8 Central American countries, 2008-2012.

BACKGROUND: In view of ongoing pandemic threats such as the recent human cases of novel avian influenza A(H7N9) in China, it is important that all countries continue their preparedness efforts. Since 2006, Central American countries have received donor funding and technical assistance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to build and improve their capacity for influenza surveillance and pandemic preparedness. Our objective was to measure changes in pandemic preparedness in this region, and explore factors associated with these changes, using evaluations conducted between 2008 and 2012. METHODS: Eight Central American countries scored their pandemic preparedness across 12 capabilities in 2008, 2010 and 2012, using a standardized tool developed by CDC. Scores were calculated by country and capability and compared between evaluation years using the Student's t-test and Wilcoxon Rank Sum test, respectively. Virological data reported to WHO were used to assess changes in testing capacity between evaluation years. Linear regression was used to examine associations between scores, donor funding, technical assistance and WHO reporting. RESULTS: All countries improved their pandemic preparedness between 2008 and 2012 and seven made statistically significant gains (p < 0.05). Increases in median scores were observed for all 12 capabilities over the same period and were statistically significant for eight of these (p < 0.05): country planning, communications, routine influenza surveillance, national respiratory disease surveillance, outbreak response, resources for containment, community interventions and health sector response. We found a positive association between preparedness scores and cumulative funding between 2006 and 2011 (R2 = 0.5, p < 0.01). The number of specimens reported to WHO from participating countries increased significantly from 5,551 (2008) to 18,172 (2012) (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Central America has made significant improvements in influenza pandemic preparedness between 2008 and 2012. U.S. donor funding and technical assistance provided to the region is likely to have contributed to the improvements we observed, although information on other sources of funding and support was unavailable to study. Gains are also likely the result of countries' response to the 2009 influenza pandemic. Further research is required to determine the degree to which pandemic improvements are sustainable.

Overexpression of glutathione peroxidase with two isoforms of superoxide dismutase protects mouse islets from oxidative injury and improves islet graft function.

Primary nonfunction of transplanted islets results in part from their sensitivity to reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated during the isolation and transplantation process. Our aim was to examine whether coexpression of antioxidant enzymes to detoxify multiple ROS increased the resistance of mouse islets to oxidative stress and improved the initial function of islet grafts. Islets from transgenic mice expressing combinations of human copper/zinc superoxide dismutase (SOD), extracellular SOD, and cellular glutathione peroxidase (Gpx-1) were subjected to oxidative stress in vitro. Relative viability after hypoxanthine/xanthine oxidase treatment was as follows: extracellular SOD + Gpx-1 + Cu/Zn SOD > extracellular SOD + Gpx-1 > extracellular SOD > wild type. Expression of all three enzymes was the only combination protective against hypoxia/reoxygenation. Islets from transgenic or control wild-type mice were then transplanted into streptozotocin-induced diabetic recipients in a syngeneic marginal islet mass model, and blood glucose levels were monitored for 7 days. In contrast to single- and double-transgenic grafts, triple-transgenic grafts significantly improved control of blood glucose compared with wild type. Our results indicate that coexpression of antioxidant enzymes has a complementary beneficial effect and may be a useful approach to reduce primary nonfunction of islet grafts.

Enhanced expression of glutathione peroxidase protects islet beta cells from hypoxia-reoxygenation.

The survival of pancreatic islet beta-cell xenografts and allografts may be affected by damaging reactive oxygen and nitrogen species generated during hypoxia-reoxygenation. Peroxynitrite, which is formed from superoxide and nitric oxide, appears to be an important mediator of beta-cell destruction. The intracellular antioxidant enzymes glutathione peroxidase-1 (Gpx-1) and copper-zinc superoxide dismutase (CuZn SOD) detoxify peroxynitrite and superoxide, respectively. The aim of this study was to examine whether enhanced expression of Gpx-1 and/or CuZn SOD protected NIT-1 mouse insulinoma cells from hypoxia-reoxygenation injury. Stable transfectants expressing human Gpx-1 or CuZn SOD were isolated and tested for their resistance to hydrogen peroxide (H(2)O(2)) and menadione, which generates superoxide intracellularly. Clones expressing one or both enzymes were subjected to hypoxia in glucose-free medium for 18 h, followed by reoxygenation in complete medium for 1.5 h. Cell viability was measured using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazoliumbromide (MTT) reduction assay. Increases of up to two fold in Gpx or total SOD activity protected NIT-1 cells from H(2)O(2) and menadione. Expression of Gpx-1 significantly increased NIT-1 survival following hypoxia-reoxygenation (viability 65 +/- 9% vs. control 15 +/- 3%, P < 0.001) but CuZn SOD expression had no effect (15 +/- 1%). Expression of both enzymes was no more protective (60 +/- 6%) than expression of Gpx-1 alone. Genetic manipulation of islet beta cells to increase expression of Gpx-1 may protect them from oxidative injury associated with the transplantation procedure.