National Institutes of Health COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel: Perspectives and Lessons Learned.

DESCRIPTION: In March 2020, the White House Coronavirus Task Force determined that clinicians in the United States needed expert treatment guidelines to optimally manage patients with COVID-19, a potentially life-threatening disease caused by a new pathogen for which no specific treatments were known to be effective. METHODS: The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services requested that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) take the lead in expeditiously convening a panel of experts to create "living" guidelines that would be widely accessible and capable of frequent updating as important new information became available. RECOMMENDATIONS: The purpose of this article is to expand on the experiences of the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) over the past 4 years, summarize the Panel's final recommendations for COVID-19, highlight some challenges and unanswered questions about COVID-19 management, and inform future responses to public health emergencies. The Panel was formed in March 2020, and the first iteration of the guidelines was released in April 2020. Now that the public health emergency has ended, the NIH COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines have sunsetted. This role will now fall to professional societies and organizations, such as the American College of Physicians, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the World Health Organization, all of which have been active in this area.

Postexposure prophylaxis for occupational exposure to selected pathogens for healthcare personnel.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Timely postexposure prophylaxis is important after an occupational exposure. Here we review select organisms, exposure opportunities in the healthcare setting, and postexposure prophylaxis regimens. RECENT FINDINGS: Needlestick injuries pose a risk of exposure to bloodborne pathogens, such as HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C. Risk mitigation strategies should be reexamined in light of newer vaccines and therapeutics. Increased vaccine hesitancy and vaccine denialisms may foster the re-emergence of some infections that have become extremely uncommon because of effective vaccines. With increasing occurrences of zoonotic infections and the ease of global spread as evidenced by COVID-19 and mpox, healthcare exposures must also consider risks related to emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. SUMMARY: Early recognition and reporting of occupational exposures to pathogens with available postexposure prophylaxis is key to mitigating the risk of transmission. Providers should be able to evaluate the exposure and associated risks to provide prompt and appropriate postexposure prophylaxis.

Sex Differences in Influenza: The Challenge Study Experience.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical animal studies and retrospective human studies suggest that adult females have worse outcomes from influenza than males. Prospective studies in humans are missing. METHODS: Data from 164 healthy volunteers who underwent influenza A/California/04/2009/H1N1 challenge were compiled to compare differences between sexes. Baseline characteristics, including hormone levels, hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titers, neuraminidase inhibition (NAI) titers, and outcomes after challenge were compared. Linear and logistic regression models were built to determine significant predictor variables with respect to outcomes of interest. RESULTS: HAI titers were similar between the sexes, but NAI titers were higher in males than females at 4 weeks and 8 weeks postchallenge. Females were more likely to have symptoms (mean, 0.96 vs 0.80; P = .003) and to have a higher number of symptoms (median, 3 vs 4; P = .011) than males. Linear and logistic regression models showed that prechallenge NAI titers, but not HAI titers or sex hormone levels, were predictive of all shedding and symptom outcomes of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Females in our cohorts were more likely to be symptomatic and to have a higher number of symptoms than males. NAI titers predicted all outcomes of interest and may explain differential outcomes between the sexes.

Safety and Efficacy of CR6261 in an Influenza A H1N1 Healthy Human Challenge Model.

BACKGROUND: It is imperative to identify new targets for improved vaccines and therapeutics against influenza. One such target is the relatively conserved stalk region of the influenza A hemagglutinin (HA) surface protein. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, phase 2, placebo-controlled trial of a monoclonal antibody that targets the HA stalk (CR6261) in a H1N1pdm09 healthy volunteer human challenge model. A single 50 mg/kg dose of CR6261 was infused 24 hours after challenge. The primary efficacy outcome was area under the curve (AUC) of viral RNA detection over time. RESULTS: Ninety-one healthy volunteers were randomized and underwent influenza challenge; 49 received CR6261 and 42 received placebo. CR6261 had no statistically significant effect on AUC (AUC, 48.56 log [copies/mL] × days, interquartile range [IQR], 202 vs AUC, 25.53 log [copies/mL] × days, IQR, 155; P = .315) and no clinically significant effect on influenza disease measures including number of symptoms, duration of symptoms, or inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) scores. Preexisting anti-NA antibody titers were most predictive of reduced influenza disease. CR6261 reached a mean peak serum concentration of 1 × 106 ng/mL 15 minutes after infusion and a mean peak of 5.97 × 102 ng/mL in the nasal mucosa 2-3 days after infusion. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that a monoclonal anti-stalk approach to prevent or treat influenza infection may be limited in efficacy. Future approaches should consider including and evaluating anti-stalk antibodies as part of a multifaceted strategy rather than as a stand-alone therapeutic. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02371668.

Safety and immunogenicity of a mosquito saliva peptide-based vaccine: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1 trial.

BACKGROUND: In animal models, immunity to mosquito salivary proteins protects animals against mosquito-borne disease. These findings provide a rationale to vaccinate against mosquito saliva instead of the pathogen itself. To our knowledge, no vector salivary protein-based vaccine has been tested for safety and immunogenicity in humans. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of Anopheles gambiae saliva vaccine (AGS-v), a peptide-based vaccine derived from four A gambiae salivary proteins, in humans. METHODS: In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1 trial, participants were enrolled at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, MD, USA. Participants were eligible if they were healthy adults, aged 18-50 years with no history of severe allergic reactions to mosquito bites. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using block randomisation and a computer-generated randomisation sequence, to treatment with either 200 nmol of AGS-v vaccine alone, 200 nmol of AGS-v with adjuvant (Montanide ISA 51), or sterile water as placebo. Participants and clinicians were masked to treatment assignment. Participants were given a subcutaneous injection of their allocated treatment at day 0 and day 21, followed by exposure to feeding by an uninfected Aedes aegypti mosquito at day 42 to assess subsequent risk to mosquito bites in a controlled setting. The primary endpoints were safety and immunogenicity at day 42 after the first immunisation. Participants who were given at least one dose of assigned treatment were assessed for the primary endpoints and analysis was by intention to treat. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03055000, and is closed for accrual. FINDINGS: Between Feb 15 and Sept 10, 2017, we enrolled and randomly assigned 49 healthy adult participants to the adjuvanted vaccine (n=17), vaccine alone (n=16), or placebo group (n=16). Five participants did not complete the two-injection regimen with mosquito feeding at day 42, but were included in the safety analyses. No systemic safety concerns were identified; however, one participant in the adjuvanted vaccine group developed a grade 3 erythematous rash at the injection site. Pain, swelling, erythema, and itching were the most commonly reported local symptoms and were significantly increased in the adjuvanted vaccine group compared with both other treatment groups (nine [53%] of 17 participants in the adjuvanted vaccine group, two [13%] of 16 in the vaccine only group, and one [6%] of 16 in the placebo group; p=0·004). By day 42, participants who were given the adjuvanted vaccine had a significant increase in vaccine-specific total IgG antibodies compared with at baseline than did participants who were give vaccine only (absolute difference of log10-fold change of 0·64 [95% CI 0·39 to 0·89]; p=0·0002) and who were given placebo (0·62 [0·34 to 0·91]; p=0·0001). We saw a significant increase in IFN-γ production by peripheral blood mononuclear cells at day 42 in the adjuvanted vaccine group compared with in the placebo group (absolute difference of log10 ratio of vaccine peptide-stimulated vs negative control 0·17 [95% CI 0·061 to 0·27]; p=0·009) but we saw no difference between the IFN-γ production in the vaccine only group compared with the placebo group (0·022 [-0·072 to 0·116]; p=0·63). INTERPRETATION: AGS-v was well tolerated, and, when adjuvanted, immunogenic. These findings suggest that vector-targeted vaccine administration in humans is safe and could be a viable option for the increasing burden of vector-borne disease. FUNDING: Office of the Director and the Division of Intramural Research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health.

Influenza A Reinfection in Sequential Human Challenge: Implications for Protective Immunity and "Universal" Vaccine Development.

BACKGROUND: Identification of correlates of protection against human influenza A virus infection is important in development of broadly protective ("universal") influenza vaccines. Certain assumptions underlie current vaccine developmental strategies, including that infection with a particular influenza A virus should offer long-term or lifelong protection against that strain, preventing reinfection. In this study we report observations made when 7 volunteers participated in sequential influenza challenge studies where they were challenged intranasally using the identical influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus approximately 1 year apart. We evaluate and describe the outcomes of these 7 rechallenge participants and discuss what these results may suggest about correlates of protection and development of more broadly protective influenza vaccines. METHODS: Seven participants were enrolled in 2 viral challenge studies at 7.5- to 18.5-month intervals. Both challenge studies used the identical lot of influenza A (H1N1)pdm09 virus administered intranasally. We evaluated pre- and postchallenge hemagglutination inhibition, neuraminidase inhibition, and stalk antibody titers; peripheral blood leukocyte host gene expression response profiles; daily viral detection via nasal wash; and clinical signs and symptoms. RESULTS: At least 3 of 7 participants demonstrated confirmed laboratory evidence of sequential infection, with 5 of 7 demonstrating clinical evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The data presented in this report demonstrate that sequential infection with the identical influenza A virus can occur and suggest it may not be rare. These data raise questions about immune memory responses in an acute superficial respiratory mucosal infection and their implications in development of broadly protective influenza vaccines. Further investigation of these observations is warranted. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01646138; NCT01971255.

A Dose-finding Study of a Wild-type Influenza A(H3N2) Virus in a Healthy Volunteer Human Challenge Model.

BACKGROUND: The development of vaccines and therapeutics has relied on healthy volunteer influenza challenge studies. A validated human infection model with wild-type A(H1N1)pdm09 was reported previously. Our objective was to characterize a wild-type influenza A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Participants received a single dose of a cell-based, reverse-genetics, Good Manufacturing Practices-produced wild-type influenza A(H3N2)2011 virus intranasally and were isolated at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center for ≥9 days. Dose escalation was performed from 104 to 107 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose). Viral shedding and clinical disease were evaluated daily. RESULTS: Of 37 participants challenged, 16 (43%) had viral shedding and 27 (73%) developed symptoms, with 12 (32%) participants experiencing mild to moderate influenza disease (MMID), defined as shedding and symptoms. Only participants receiving 106 and 107 TCID50 experienced MMID at 44% and 40%, respectively. Symptom severity peaked on day 3, whereas most viral shedding occurred 1-2 days after challenge. Only 10 (29%) participants had a ≥4-fold rise in hemagglutination inhibition antibody titer after challenge. CONCLUSIONS: The A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus safely induced MMID in healthy volunteers, but caused less MMID than the A(H1N1)pdm09 challenge virus even at the highest dose. There was less detection of shedding though the incidence of symptoms was similar to A(H1N1)pdm09. Fewer serum anti-hemagglutinin (HA) antibody responses with less MMID indicate that preexisting immunity factors other than anti-HA antibody may limit shedding in healthy volunteers. This A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus can be utilized in future studies to further explore pathogenesis and immunity and to evaluate vaccine candidates. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02594189.

Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO©) Scores in Influenza-Positive Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO©) scores for quantifying the presence and severity of influenza symptoms. METHODS: An observational prospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years) with influenza-like illness in the United States, the United Kingdom, Mexico, and South America was conducted. Participants completed the 37-item draft FLU-PRO daily for up to 14 days. Item-level and factor analyses were used to remove items and determine factor structure. Reliability of the final tool was estimated using Cronbach α and intraclass correlation coefficients (2-day reliability). Convergent and known-groups validity and responsiveness were assessed using global assessments of influenza severity and return to usual health. RESULTS: Of the 536 patients enrolled, 221 influenza-positive subjects comprised the analytical sample. The mean age of the patients was 40.7 years, 60.2% were women, and 59.7% were white. The final 32-item measure has six factors/domains (nose, throat, eyes, chest/respiratory, gastrointestinal, and body/systemic), with a higher order factor representing symptom severity overall (comparative fit index = 0.92; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06). Cronbach α was high (total = 0.92; domain range = 0.71-0.87); test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, day 1-day 2) was 0.83 for total scores and 0.57 to 0.79 for domains. Day 1 FLU-PRO domain and total scores were moderately to highly correlated (≥0.30) with Patient Global Rating of Flu Severity (except nose and throat). Consistent with known-groups validity, scores differentiated severity groups on the basis of global rating (total: F = 57.2, P < 0.001; domains: F = 8.9-67.5, P < 0.001). Subjects reporting return to usual health showed significantly greater (P < 0.05) FLU-PRO score improvement by day 7 than did those who did not, suggesting score responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that FLU-PRO scores are reliable, valid, and responsive to change in influenza-positive adults.

Using the Influenza Patient-reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary to evaluate symptoms of influenza viral infection in a healthy human challenge model.

BACKGROUND: In clinical studies involving a healthy volunteer human challenge model, a valid and reliable measure to assess the evolution of patient-reported symptom type and severity following viral exposure is necessary. This study examines the use of the InFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary as a standardized measure of symptom severity in a healthy volunteer human challenge model. METHODS: Healthy adults admitted to the NIH Clinical Center (Day - 1) underwent a 9-day inpatient quarantine after intranasal challenge with a wild-type influenza A/H1N1pdm virus (Day 0). Participants completed the 32-item FLU-PRO diary twice daily for 14 days to assess presence, severity, and duration of symptoms across six body systems. Secondary analyses included descriptive statistics to examine FLU-PRO scores over the course of illness and analysis of variance to compare scores on Day 3 post-challenge by presence of viral shedding, and pre-challenge hemagglutinin and neuraminidase inhibition (HAI and NAI) titers. RESULTS: All but one subject (99%), who was lost to follow-up, completed twice daily FLU-PRO diaries on all study assessment days. FLU-PRO demonstrated that 61 of 65 subjects reported symptoms (Days: Median 5, Mean 6 ± 7), of whom 37 (61%) had viral shedding. Pre-challenge, 39 (64%) and 10 (16%) subjects had low (< 1:40) HAI and NAI titers, respectively. Nose, throat, body, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms reached peak intensity at Day 3, followed by chest/respiratory and eye symptoms at Day 4. Subjects with viral shedding had higher mean FLU-PRO scores compared to those without, except for Eye and GI domains (p <0.05). Mean FLU-PRO scores were significantly higher for subjects with low NAI titer (p <0.05) across all domains. No significant differences were observed between HAI titer groups. FLU-PRO scores of the low HAI-low NAI group (n = 10) were significantly higher (more severe) than the other two groups (p < 0.05) (high HAI-high NAI (n = 22), low HAI-high NAI (n = 29)). CONCLUSIONS: The FLU-PRO had high adherence and low respondent burden. It can be used to track symptom onset, intensity, duration, and recovery from influenza infection in clinical research. In this human challenge study, scores were responsive to change and distinguished known clinical subgroups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01971255 First Registered October 2, 2013.

Mucosal correlates of protection after influenza viral challenge of vaccinated and unvaccinated healthy volunteers.

The induction of systemic antibody titers against hemagglutinin has long been the main focus of influenza vaccination strategies, but mucosal immunity has also been shown to play a key role in the protection against respiratory viruses. By vaccinating and challenging healthy volunteers, we demonstrated that inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) modestly reduced the rate of influenza while predominantly boosting serum antibody titers against hemagglutinin (HA) and HA stalk, a consequence of the low neuraminidase (NA) content of IIV and the intramuscular route of administration. The viral challenge induced nasal and serum responses against both HA and NA. Correlations between mucosal IgA and serum IgG against specific antigens were low, whether before or after challenge, suggesting a compartmentalization of immune responses. Even so, volunteers who developed viral shedding for multiple days had lower baseline titers across both systemic and mucosal compartments as compared to those with no shedding or a single day of shedding. Regression analysis showed that pre-challenge HA inhibition titers were the most consistent correlate of protection across clinical outcomes combining shedding and symptoms, with NA inhibition titers and HA IgG levels only predicting the duration of shedding. Despite the inclusion of data from multiple binding and functional antibody assays against HA and NA performed on both serum and nasal samples, multivariate models were unable to account for the variability in outcomes, emphasizing our imperfect understanding of immune correlates in influenza and the importance of refining models with assessments of innate and cellular immune responses.IMPORTANCEThe devastating potential of influenza has been well known for over 100 years. Despite the development of vaccines since the middle of the 20th century, influenza continues to be responsible for substantial global morbidity and mortality. To develop next-generation vaccines with enhanced effectiveness, we must synthesize our understanding of the complex immune mechanisms culminating in protection. Our study outlines the differences in immune responses to influenza vaccine and influenza infection, identifying potential gaps in vaccine-induced immunity, particularly at the level of the nasal mucosa. Furthermore, this research underscores the need to refine our imperfect models while recognizing potential pitfalls in past and future attempts to identify and measure correlates of protection.

Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in a Large US population Over a Period of 12 Months.

Due to a combination of asymptomatic or undiagnosed infections, the proportion of the United States population infected with SARS-CoV-2 was unclear from the beginning of the pandemic. We previously established a platform to screen for SARS-CoV-2 positivity across a representative proportion of the US population, from which we reported that almost 17 million Americans were estimated to have had undocumented infections in the Spring of 2020. Since then, vaccine rollout and prevalence of different SARS-CoV-2 variants have further altered seropositivity trends within the United States population. To explore the longitudinal impacts of the pandemic and vaccine responses on seropositivity, we re-enrolled participants from our baseline study in a 6- and 12- month follow-up study to develop a longitudinal antibody profile capable of representing seropositivity within the United States during a critical period just prior to and during the initiation of vaccine rollout. Initial measurements showed that, since July 2020, seropositivity elevated within this population from 4.8% at baseline to 36.2% and 89.3% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. We also evaluated nucleocapsid seropositivity and compared to spike seropositivity to identify trends in infection versus vaccination relative to baseline. These data serve as a window into a critical timeframe within the COVID-19 pandemic response and serve as a resource that could be used in subsequent respiratory illness outbreaks.

Undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and delayed implementation of diagnostics have led to poorly defined viral prevalence rates in the United States and elsewhere. To address this, we analyzed seropositivity in 9089 adults in the United States who had not been diagnosed previously with COVID-19. Individuals with characteristics that reflected the U.S. population (n = 27,716) were selected by quota sampling from 462,949 volunteers. Enrolled participants (n = 11,382) provided medical, geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic information and dried blood samples. Survey questions coincident with the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, a large probability-based national survey, were used to adjust for selection bias. Most blood samples (88.7%) were collected between 10 May and 31 July 2020 and were processed using ELISA to measure seropositivity (IgG and IgM antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and the spike protein receptor binding domain). The overall weighted undiagnosed seropositivity estimate was 4.6% (95% CI, 2.6 to 6.5%), with race, age, sex, ethnicity, and urban/rural subgroup estimates ranging from 1.1% to 14.2%. The highest seropositivity estimates were in African American participants; younger, female, and Hispanic participants; and residents of urban centers. These data indicate that there were 4.8 undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infections for every diagnosed case of COVID-19, and an estimated 16.8 million infections were undiagnosed by mid-July 2020 in the United States.

Mapping a Pandemic: SARS-CoV-2 Seropositivity in the United States.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and delayed implementation of diagnostics have led to poorly defined viral prevalence rates. To address this, we analyzed seropositivity in US adults who have not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19. Individuals with characteristics that reflect the US population (n = 11,382) and who had not previously been diagnosed with COVID-19 were selected by quota sampling from 241,424 volunteers (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04334954). Enrolled participants provided medical, geographic, demographic, and socioeconomic information and 9,028 blood samples. The majority (88.7%) of samples were collected between May 10th and July 31st, 2020. Samples were analyzed via ELISA for anti-Spike and anti-RBD antibodies. Estimation of seroprevalence was performed by using a weighted analysis to reflect the US population. We detected an undiagnosed seropositivity rate of 4.6% (95% CI: 2.6 - 6.5%). There was distinct regional variability, with heightened seropositivity in locations of early outbreaks. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the highest estimated undiagnosed seropositivity within groups was detected in younger participants (ages 18-45, 5.9%), females (5.5%), Black/African American (14.2%), Hispanic (6.1%), and Urban residents (5.3%), and lower undiagnosed seropositivity in those with chronic diseases. During the first wave of infection over the spring/summer of 2020 an estimate of 4.6% of adults had a prior undiagnosed SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data indicate that there were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.8-6.8) undiagnosed cases for every diagnosed case of COVID-19 during this same time period in the United States, and an estimated 16.8 million undiagnosed cases by mid-July 2020.

Universal coronavirus vaccines: the time to start is now.

The continued explosive spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) despite aggressive public health measures has triggered an unprecedented international vaccine effort. However, correlates of protection, which can help guide intelligent vaccine design, are not known for SARS-CoV-2. Research on influenza immunity and vaccine development may provide valuable lessons for coronavirus efforts, especially considering similarities in rapid evolutionary potential. The apparent inevitability of future novel coronavirus outbreaks must prompt work on a universal coronavirus vaccine.

Pre-existing immunity to influenza virus hemagglutinin stalk might drive selection for antibody-escape mutant viruses in a human challenge model.

The conserved region of influenza hemagglutinin (HA) stalk (or stem) has gained attention as a potent target for universal influenza vaccines1-5. Although the HA stalk region is relatively well conserved, the evolutionarily dynamic nature of influenza viruses6 raises concerns about the possible emergence of viruses carrying stalk escape mutation(s) under sufficient immune pressure. Here we show that immune pressure on the HA stalk can lead to expansion of escape mutant viruses in study participants challenged with a 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza virus inoculum containing an A388V polymorphism in the HA stalk (45% wild type and 55% mutant). High level of stalk antibody titers was associated with the selection of the mutant virus both in humans and in vitro. Although the mutant virus showed slightly decreased replication in mice, it was not observed in cell culture, ferrets or human challenge participants. The A388V mutation conferred resistance to some of the potent HA stalk broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (bNAbs). Co-culture of wild-type and mutant viruses in the presence of either a bNAb or human serum resulted in rapid expansion of the mutant. These data shed light on a potential obstacle for the success of HA-stalk-targeting universal influenza vaccines-viral escape from vaccine-induced stalk immunity.

Deep sequencing of 2009 influenza A/H1N1 virus isolated from volunteer human challenge study participants and natural infections.

Nasal wash samples from 15 human volunteers challenged with GMP manufactured influenza A/California/04/2009(H1N1) and from 5 naturally infected influenza patients of the 2009 pandemic were deep sequenced using viral targeted hybridization enrichment. Ten single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) positions were found in the challenge virus. Some of the nonsynonymous changes in the inoculant virus were maintained in some challenge participants, but not in others, indicating that virus is evolving away from the Vero cell adapted inoculant, for example SNPs in the neuraminidase. Many SNP sites in challenge patients and naturally infected patients were found, many not identified previously. The SNPs identified, and phylogenetic analyses, showed that intrahost evolution of the virus are different in challenge participants and naturally infected patients. This study, using hybridization enrichment without PCR, provided an accurate and unbiased assessment of differential intrahost viral evolution from a uniform influenza inoculant in humans and comparison to naturally infected patients.

Differential Effects of Influenza Virus NA, HA Head, and HA Stalk Antibodies on Peripheral Blood Leukocyte Gene Expression during Human Infection.

In this study, we examined the relationships between anti-influenza virus serum antibody titers, clinical disease, and peripheral blood leukocyte (PBL) global gene expression during presymptomatic, acute, and convalescent illness in 83 participants infected with 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus in a human influenza challenge model. Using traditional statistical and logistic regression modeling approaches, profiles of differentially expressed genes that correlated with active viral shedding, predicted length of viral shedding, and predicted illness severity were identified. These analyses further demonstrated that challenge participants fell into three peripheral blood leukocyte gene expression phenotypes that significantly correlated with different clinical outcomes and prechallenge serum titers of antibodies specific for the viral neuraminidase, hemagglutinin head, and hemagglutinin stalk. Higher prechallenge serum antibody titers were inversely correlated with leukocyte responsiveness in participants with active disease and could mask expression of peripheral blood markers of clinical disease in some participants, including viral shedding and symptom severity. Consequently, preexisting anti-influenza antibodies may modulate PBL gene expression, and this must be taken into consideration in the development and interpretation of peripheral blood diagnostic and prognostic assays of influenza infection.IMPORTANCE Influenza A viruses are significant human pathogens that caused 83,000 deaths in the United States during 2017 to 2018, and there is need to understand the molecular correlates of illness and to identify prognostic markers of viral infection, symptom severity, and disease course. Preexisting antibodies against viral neuraminidase (NA) and hemagglutinin (HA) proteins play a critical role in lessening disease severity. We performed global gene expression profiling of peripheral blood leukocytes collected during acute and convalescent phases from a large cohort of people infected with A/H1N1pdm virus. Using statistical and machine-learning approaches, populations of genes were identified early in infection that correlated with active viral shedding, predicted length of shedding, or disease severity. Finally, these gene expression responses were differentially affected by increased levels of preexisting influenza antibodies, which could mask detection of these markers of contagiousness and disease severity in people with active clinical disease.

Evaluation of Preexisting Anti-Hemagglutinin Stalk Antibody as a Correlate of Protection in a Healthy Volunteer Challenge with Influenza A/H1N1pdm Virus.

Influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein is currently the primary target of licensed influenza vaccines. Recently, broadly reactive antibodies that target the stalk region of the HA have become a major focus of current novel vaccine development. These antibodies have been observed in humans after natural infection with influenza A virus, but the data are limited. Using samples and data from the uniquely controlled setting of an influenza A/H1N1 virus human challenge study of healthy volunteers, we performed a secondary analysis that for the first time explores the role of anti-HA stalk antibody as a human correlate of protection. An anti-HA stalk antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was performed on samples from 65 participants challenged with a 2009 H1N1pdm virus. Pre- and postchallenge anti-HA stalk titers were then correlated with multiple outcome measures to evaluate anti-HA stalk antibody titer as a correlate of protection. Anti-HA stalk antibody titers were present before challenge and rose in response to challenge in 64% of individuals. Those individuals with higher titers at baseline were less likely to develop shedding, but not less likely to develop symptoms. Similar to the hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titer, the baseline anti-HA stalk antibody titer did not independently predict a decrease in the severity of influenza disease, while the antineuraminidase (neuraminidase inhibition [NAI]) titer did. As a correlate of protection, the naturally occurring anti-HA stalk antibody titer is predictive of a reduction of certain aspects of disease similar to HAI titer, but the NAI titer is the only identified correlate that is an independent predictor of a reduction of all assessed influenza clinical outcome measures.IMPORTANCE This is the first study to evaluate preexisting anti-HA stalk antibodies as a predictor of protection. We use a healthy volunteer influenza challenge trial for an examination of the role such antibodies play in protection. This study demonstrates that anti-HA stalk antibodies are naturally generated in response to an infection, but there is significant variability in response. Similar to antibodies that target the HA head, baseline anti-HA stalk antibody titer is a correlate of protection in terms of reduced shedding, but it is not a predictor of reduced clinical disease or an independent predictor of disease severity. These results, in the context of the limited data available in humans, suggest that vaccines that induce anti-HA stalk antibodies could play a role in future vaccine strategies, but alone, this target may be insufficient to induce a fully protective vaccine and overcome some of the issues identified with current vaccines.

Performance of the inFLUenza Patient-Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) diary in patients with influenza-like illness (ILI).

BACKGROUND: The inFLUenza Patient Reported Outcome (FLU-PRO) measure is a daily diary assessing signs/symptoms of influenza across six body systems: Nose, Throat, Eyes, Chest/Respiratory, Gastrointestinal, Body/Systemic, developed and tested in adults with influenza. OBJECTIVES: This study tested the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of FLU-PRO scores in adults with influenza-like illness (ILI). METHODS: Data from the prospective, observational study used to develop and test the FLU-PRO in influenza virus positive patients were analyzed. Adults (≥18 years) presenting with influenza symptoms in outpatient settings in the US, UK, Mexico, and South America were enrolled, tested for influenza virus, and asked to complete the 37-item draft FLU-PRO daily for up to 14-days. Analyses were performed on data from patients testing negative. Reliability of the final, 32-item FLU-PRO was estimated using Cronbach's alpha (α; Day 1) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC; 2-day reproducibility). Convergent and known-groups validity were assessed using patient global assessments of influenza severity (PGA). Patient report of return to usual health was used to assess responsiveness (Day 1-7). RESULTS: The analytical sample included 220 ILI patients (mean age = 39.3, 64.1% female, 88.6% white). Sixty-one (28%) were hospitalized at some point in their illness. Internal consistency reliability (α) of FLU-PRO Total score was 0.90 and ranged from 0.72-0.86 for domain scores. Reproducibility (Day 1-2) was 0.64 for Total, ranging from 0.46-0.78 for domain scores. Day 1 FLU-PRO scores correlated (≥0.30) with the PGA (except Gastrointestinal) and were significantly different across PGA severity groups (Total: F = 81.7, p<0.001; subscales: F = 6.9-62.2; p<0.01). Mean score improvements Day 1-7 were significantly greater in patients reporting return to usual health compared with those who did not (p<0.05, Total and subscales, except Gastrointestinal and Eyes). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest FLU-PRO scores are reliable, valid, and responsive in adults with influenza-like illness.