The formulation of accurate clinical case definitions is an integral part of an effective process of public health surveillance. Although such definitions should, ideally, be based on a standardized and fixed collection of defining criteria, they often require revision to reflect new knowledge of the condition involved and improvements in diagnostic testing. Optimal case definitions also need to have a balance of sensitivity and specificity that reflects their intended use. After the 2009–2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) initiated a technical consultation on global influenza surveillance. This prompted improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of the case definition for influenza – i.e. a respiratory disease that lacks uniquely defining symptomology. The revision process not only modified the definition of influenza-like illness, to include a simplified list of the criteria shown to be most predictive of influenza infection, but also clarified the language used for the definition, to enhance interpretability. To capture severe cases of influenza that required hospitalization, a new case definition was also developed for severe acute respiratory infection in all age groups. The new definitions have been found to capture more cases without compromising specificity. Despite the challenge still posed in the clinical separation of influenza from other respiratory infections, the global use of the new WHO case definitions should help determine global trends in the characteristics and transmission of influenza viruses and the associated disease burden.

No abstract

Four World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centres for Reference and Research on Influenza and one WHO Collaborating Centre for the Surveillance, Epidemiology and Control of Influenza (WHO CCs) tested 10,641 viruses collected by WHO-recognized National Influenza Centres between May 2013 and May 2014 to determine 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) data for neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir and laninamivir. In addition, neuraminidase (NA) sequence data, available from the WHO CCs and from sequence databases (n=3206), were screened for amino acid substitutions associated with reduced NAI susceptibility. Ninety-five per cent of the viruses tested by the WHO CCs were from three WHO regions: Western Pacific, the Americas and Europe. Approximately 2% (n=172) showed highly reduced inhibition (HRI) against at least one of the four NAIs, commonly oseltamivir, while 0.3% (n=32) showed reduced inhibition (RI). Those showing HRI were A(H1N1)pdm09 with NA H275Y (n=169), A(H3N2) with NA E119V (n=1), B/Victoria-lineage with NA E117G (n=1) and B/Yamagata-lineage with NA H273Y (n=1); amino acid position numbering is A subtype and B type specific. Although approximately 98% of circulating viruses tested during the 2013-2014 period were sensitive to all four NAIs, a large community cluster of A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses with the NA H275Y substitution from patients with no previous exposure to antivirals was detected in Hokkaido, Japan. Significant numbers of A(H1N1)pdm09 NA H275Y viruses were also detected in China and the United States: phylogenetic analyses showed that the Chinese viruses were similar to those from Japan, while the United States viruses clustered separately from those of the Hokkaido outbreak, indicative of multiple resistance-emergence events. Consequently, global surveillance of influenza antiviral susceptibility should be continued from a public health perspective.

A total of 13672 viruses, collected by World Health Organization recognised National Influenza Centres between May 2016 and May 2017, were assessed for neuraminidase inhibitor susceptibility by four WHO Collaborating Centres for Reference and Research on Influenza and one WHO Collaborating Centre for the Surveillance Epidemiology and Control of Influenza. The 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) was determined for oseltamivir and zanamivir for all viruses, and for peramivir and laninamivir in a subset (n = 8457). Of the viruses tested, 94% were obtained from the Western Pacific, Americas and European WHO regions, while limited viruses were available from the Eastern Mediterranean, African and South East Asian regions.Reduced inhibition (RI) by one or more neuraminidase inhibitor was exhibited by 0.2% of viruses tested (n = 32). The frequency of viruses with RI has remained low since this global analysis began (2015/16: 0.8%, 2014/15: 0.5%; 2013/14: 1.9%; 2012/13: 0.6%) but 2016/17 has the lowest frequency observed to date. Analysis of 13581 neuraminidase sequences retrieved from public databases, of which 5243 sequences were from viruses not included in the phenotypic analyses, identified 58 further viruses (29 without phenotypic analyses) with amino acid substitutions associated with RI by at least one neuraminidase inhibitor. Bringing the total proportion to 0.5% (90/18915).This 2016/17 analysis demonstrates that neuraminidase inhibitors remain suitable for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza virus infections, but continued monitoring is important. An expansion of surveillance testing is paramount since several novel influenza antivirals are in late stage clinical trials with some resistance already having been identified.

Emergence of influenza viruses with reduced susceptibility to neuraminidase inhibitors (NAIs) is sporadic, often follows exposure to NAIs, but occasionally occurs in the absence of NAI pressure. The emergence and global spread in 2007/2008 of A(H1N1) influenza viruses showing clinical resistance to oseltamivir due to neuraminidase (NA) H275Y substitution, in the absence of drug pressure, warrants continued vigilance and monitoring for similar viruses. Four World Health Organization (WHO) Collaborating Centres for Reference and Research on Influenza and one WHO Collaborating Centre for the Surveillance, Epidemiology and Control of Influenza (WHO CCs) tested 11,387 viruses collected by WHO-recognized National Influenza Centres (NIC) between May 2012 and May 2013 to determine 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) data for oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir and laninamivir. The data were evaluated using normalized IC50 fold-changes rather than raw IC50 data. Nearly 90% of the 11,387 viruses were from three WHO regions: Western Pacific, the Americas and Europe. Only 0.2% (n=27) showed highly reduced inhibition (HRI) against at least one of the four NAIs, usually oseltamivir, while 0.3% (n=39) showed reduced inhibition (RI). NA sequence data, available from the WHO CCs and from sequence databases (n=3661), were screened for amino acid substitutions associated with reduced NAI susceptibility. Those showing HRI were A(H1N1)pdm09 with NA H275Y (n=18), A(H3N2) with NA E119V (n=3) or NA R292K (n=1) and B/Victoria-lineage with NA H273Y (n=2); amino acid position numbering is A subtype and B type specific. Overall, approximately 99% of circulating viruses tested during the 2012-2013 period were sensitive to all four NAIs. Consequently, these drugs remain an appropriate choice for the treatment and prophylaxis of influenza virus infections.