Dynamic Patterns of Circulating Seasonal and Pandemic A(H1N1)pdm09 Influenza Viruses From 2007–2010 in and around Delhi, India

Influenza surveillance was carried out in a subset of patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) presenting at an Employee Health Clinic (EHS) at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi (urban) and pediatric out patients department of civil hospital at Ballabhgarh (peri-urban), under the Comprehensive Rural Health Services Project (CRHSP) of AIIMS, in Delhi region from January 2007 to December 2010. Of the 3264 samples tested, 541 (17%) were positive for influenza viruses, of which 221 (41%) were pandemic Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 168 (31%) were seasonal influenza A, and 152 (28%) were influenza B. While the Influenza viruses were detected year-round, their types/subtypes varied remarkably. While there was an equal distribution of seasonal A(H1N1) and influenza B in 2007, predominance of influenza B was observed in 2008. At the beginning of 2009, circulation of influenza A(H3N2) viruses was observed, followed later by emergence of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 with co-circulation of influenza B viruses. Influenza B was dominant subtype in early 2010, with second wave of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 in August-September, 2010. With the exception of pandemic H1N1 emergence in 2009, the peaks of influenza activity coincided primarily with monsoon season, followed by minor peak in winter at both urban and rural sites. Age group analysis of influenza positivity revealed that the percent positivity of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza virus was highest in >5–18 years age groups (OR 2.5; CI = 1.2–5.0; p = 0.009) when compared to seasonal influenza. Phylogenetic analysis of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 from urban and rural sites did not reveal any major divergence from other Indian strains or viruses circulating worldwide. Continued surveillance globally will help define regional differences in influenza seasonality, as well as, to determine optimal periods to implement influenza vaccination programs among priority populations

Efficacy of live attenuated and inactivated influenza vaccines among children in rural India: A 2-year, randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BackgroundInfluenza is a cause of febrile acute respiratory infection (FARI) in India; however, few influenza vaccine trials have been conducted in India. We assessed absolute and relative efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) among children aged 2 to 10 years in rural India through a randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted over 2 years.Methods and findingsIn June 2015, children were randomly allocated to LAIV, IIV, intranasal placebo, or inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in a 2:2:1:1 ratio. In June 2016, vaccination was repeated per original allocation. Overall, 3,041 children received LAIV (n = 1,015), IIV (n = 1,010), nasal placebo (n = 507), or IPV (n = 509). Mean age of children was 6.5 years with 20% aged 9 to 10 years. Through weekly home visits, nasal and throat swabs were collected from children with FARI and tested for influenza virus by polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated FARI; vaccine efficacy (VE) was calculated using modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis by Cox proportional hazards model (PH) for each year. In Year 1, VE was 40.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 25.2 to 51.9) for LAIV and 59.0% (95% CI 47.8 to 67.9) for IIV compared with controls; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was -46.2% (95% CI -88.9 to -13.1). In Year 2, VE was 51.9% (95% CI 42.0 to 60.1) for LAIV and 49.9% (95% CI 39.2 to 58.7) for IIV; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was 4.2% (95% CI -19.9 to 23.5). No serious adverse vaccine-attributable events were reported. Study limitations include differing dosage requirements for children between nasal and injectable vaccines (single dose of LAIV versus 2 doses of IIV) in Year 1 and the fact that immunogenicity studies were not conducted.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that LAIV and IIV vaccines were safe and moderately efficacious against influenza virus infection among Indian children.Trial registrationClinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2015/06/005902

Surveillance for Influenza-like-Illness in and around Delhi, North India, 2007–2010.

<p>*Denominator for the percentage is # influenza positive for that year.</p

Phylogenetic analysis of HA gene of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 strains isolated from Urban (blue) and peri-urban (green) sites from Delhi region, North India in Aug 2009 or 2010.

<p>The representative strains from 2009/A/California(H1N1) strain and from other parts of the world and India (Orange) were used to generate the phylogenetic tree. The characteristic amino acids unique to clade 7 (S203T) is shown at the root of the branch.</p

Comparative analysis of circulating influenza viruses (Influenza A and B) among children <18 years of age in urban (purple) and peri-urban (orange) setting from July-December 2009 (left panel) and January-December 2010 (right panel).

<p>Comparative analysis of circulating influenza viruses (Influenza A and B) among children <18 years of age in urban (purple) and peri-urban (orange) setting from July-December 2009 (left panel) and January-December 2010 (right panel).</p

Monthly trends and seasonality of circulating seasonal and pandemic influenza viruses in urban (Panel A) and peri-urban (Panel B) area from 2007–2010.

<p>The left axis shows monthly percent positivity. The overall % positivity of types and subtypes is shown as bar graph for urban (Top) and peri-urban (bottom) area from 2007 to 2010.</p

Distribution of ILI cases, seasonal and Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 positives by age groups in urban population from July 2009–December 2010.

<p>Distribution of ILI cases, seasonal and Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 positives by age groups in urban population from July 2009–December 2010.</p