Session 1.3: Health Protection and Disease Prevention: A Critical Review of Experience

This is a summary of the presentations and discussion of Health Protection and Disease Prevention of the Conference, Health Aspects of the Tsunami Disaster in Asia, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) in Phuket, Thailand, 04-06 May 2005. The topics discussed included issues related health protection and disease prevention as pertaining to the responses to the damage created by the Tsunami. It is presented in the following major sections:(1) key questions; (2) national perspectives; (3) an international perspective; (4) laboratory aspects in disease surveillance; and (5) partnershi

Lessons Learned from Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 Pandemic Response in Thailand

The strengths and weaknesses of this response can inform planning for pandemics and other prolonged public health emergencies

Change in Japanese Encephalitis Virus Distribution,Thailand

Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) genotypes in Thailand were studied in pigs and mosquitoes collected near houses of confirmed human JEV cases in 2003–2005. Twelve JEV strains isolated belonged to genotype I, which shows a switch from genotype III incidence that started during the 1980s

Seroprevalence of Antibodies to Avian Influenza Virus A (H5N1) among Residents of Villages with Human Cases, Thailand, 20051

No evidence of influenza virus A (H5N1) neutralizing antibodies was found in residents of 4 villages where human cases had occurred the previous year

When to update COVID-19 vaccine composition

Vaccines against different SARS-CoV-2 variants have been approved, but continued surveillance is needed to determine when the antigen composition of vaccines should be updated, together with clinical studies to assess vaccine efficacy

A Comparison of Clinical and Epidemiological Characteristics of Fatal Human Infections with H5N1 and Human Influenza Viruses in Thailand, 2004–2006

BACKGROUND: The National Avian Influenza Surveillance (NAIS) system detected human H5N1 cases in Thailand from 2004-2006. Using NAIS data, we identified risk factors for death among H5N1 cases and described differences between H5N1 and human (seasonal) influenza cases. METHODS AND FINDINGS: NAIS identified 11,641 suspect H5N1 cases (e.g. persons with fever and respiratory symptoms or pneumonia, and exposure to sick or dead poultry). All suspect H5N1 cases were tested with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for influenza A(H5N1) and human influenza viruses. NAIS detected 25 H5N1 and 2074 human influenza cases; 17 (68%) and 22 (1%) were fatal, respectively. We collected detailed information from medical records on all H5N1 cases, all fatal human influenza cases, and a sampled subset of 230 hospitalized non-fatal human influenza cases drawn from provinces with ≥1 H5N1 case or human influenza fatality. Fatal versus non-fatal H5N1 cases were more likely to present with low white blood cell (p = 0.05), lymphocyte (p<0.02), and platelet counts (p<0.01); have elevated liver enzymes (p = 0.05); and progress to circulatory (p<0.001) and respiratory failure (p<0.001). There were no differences in age, medical conditions, or antiviral treatment between fatal and non-fatal H5N1 cases. Compared to a sample of human influenza cases, all H5N1 cases had direct exposure to sick or dead birds (60% vs. 100%, p<0.05). Fatal H5N1 and fatal human influenza cases were similar clinically except that fatal H5N1 cases more commonly: had fever (p<0.001), vomiting (p<0.01), low white blood cell counts (p<0.01), received oseltamivir (71% vs. 23%, p<.001), but less often had ≥1 chronic medical conditions (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of diagnostic testing during an influenza A(H5N1) epizootic, a few epidemiologic, clinical, and laboratory findings might provide clues to help target H5N1 control efforts. Severe human influenza and H5N1 cases were clinically similar, and both would benefit from early antiviral treatment

The immunogenicity and safety of a reduced PRP-content DTPw-HBV/Hib vaccine when administered according to the accelerated EPI schedule

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Combination vaccines improve coverage, compliance and effectively introduce new antigens to mass vaccination programmes. This was a phase III, observer-blind, randomized study of GSK Biologicals diphtheria-tetanus-whole cell pertussis vaccine combined with hepatitis B and <it>Haemophilus influenzae </it>type b vaccines, containing a reduced amount of polyribosyl-ribitol-phosphate (PRP) and a DTPw component manufactured at a different site (DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft]). The primary aim of this study was to demonstrate that DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft] was not inferior to the licensed DTPw-HBV/Hib (<it>Tritanrix</it>(tm)-HepB/<it>Hiberix</it>(tm)) vaccine or the DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5vaccine, also containing a reduced amount of PRP, with respect to the immune response to the PRP antigen, when administered to healthy infants, according to the Expanded Programme for Immunization (EPI) schedule at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>299 healthy infants were randomised to receive either DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft] DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5or DTPw-HBV/Hib according to the 6-10-14 week EPI schedule. Blood samples were analysed prior to the first dose of study vaccine and one month after the third vaccine dose for the analysis of immune responses. Solicited local and general symptoms such as pain, redness and swelling at the injection site and drowsiness and fever, unsolicited symptoms (defined as any additional adverse event) and serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded up to 20 weeks of age.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One month after the third vaccine dose, 100% of subjects receiving DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft] or DTPw-HBV/Hib and 98.8% of subjects receiving DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5vaccine had seroprotective levels of anti-PRP antibodies (defined as anti-PRP antibody concentration ≥0.15 μg/ml). Seroprotective antibody concentrations were attained in over 98.9% of subjects for diphtheria, tetanus and hepatitis B. The vaccine response rate to pertussis antigen was at least 97.8% in each group. Overall, the DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft] vaccine was well tolerated in healthy infants; no SAEs were reported in any group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The DTPw-HBV/Hib_2.5[Kft] vaccine was immunogenic and well-tolerated when administered according to the EPI schedule to Indian infants.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><url>http://www.clinicaltrials.gov</url> NCT00473668</p