RNA viruses, such as influenza virus, have a high rate of mutation. Some of these mutations lead to viruses that are resistant to the currently used antiviral drugs and can be selected in the presence of antiviral drugs. If the drug-resistant viruses are biofit, their replication can lead to serious disease that cannot be treated effectively with the previously used antiviral compounds. This scenario has occurred frequently. When amantadine hydrochloride was used to treat influenza virus type A infections, 30% of the virus isolates obtained from treated patients were found to be resistant (9,11,22). With the licensing of the neuraminidase (NA) inhibitors, the selection of influenza viruses resistant to these inhibitors was of concern (32, 39, 43, 52, 61). In vitro resistance associated with amino acid substitutions in the hemagglutinin (HA) or NA antigens or both has been reported for the NA inhibitors (4,14,15,32,40,49,55). Despite these concerns, recent reports have demonstrated that there is little or no natural resistance to oseltamivir or zanamivir (5, 33). To determine if mutations to zanamavir occurred in vivo, the drug susceptibilities of clinical isolates obtained during a phase II clinical trial of zanamivir were determined by the plaque reduction assay (PRA), the NA inhibition (NAI) assay, and an in vivo assay using ferrets (3,17). A comparison of 41 paired isolates obtained before and during therapy with zanamivir showed no shifts in susceptibility to zanamivir when measured by the NAI assay, but the PRA using MDCK cells showed variable susceptibility to zanamivir. The susceptibilities of the clinical isolates determined by the PRA did not correlate with in vivo susceptibility studies in humans and ferrets, whereas the NAI assay did correlate with the in vivo susceptibility assays. In a study of 54 isolates obtained after treatment with oseltamivir, 2 clinical isolates were resistant in the NAI assay and an additional 8 were resistant in the PRA (16). These discrepancies between the PRA and the NAI assay could be due to the isolation of viruses with mutations in the HA gene that lead to in vitro resistance. NA inhibitor-resistant viruses with mutations in the HA gene would be scored in the PRA, but not in the NAI assay. The close relationship between the drug susceptibilities obtained with the NAI assay and the in vivo assays suggests that for these clinical isolates the NAI assay correlates better with the in vivo assay than the PRA for the NA inhibitors. The present evidence suggests that only mutations in the NA gene that lead to resistance to the NA inhibitors are clinically relevant.The currently used in vitro drug susceptibility assays, such as the PRA, the virus yield reduction assay, and the neutral red dye uptake assay, are cumbersome, time-consuming, and subjective (21, 45). A PCR-based drug susceptibility assay has recently been published, but its usefulness in clinical trials has not been evaluated (54). Previously, we demonstrated that the susceptibilities of herpes simplex viruses and h...