During April 2009–June 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) requested state public health laboratories to submit specimens for antiviral susceptibility testing by 2 routes. In the first route, the first 5 influenza specimens of any type or subtype collected every 2 weeks from each laboratory underwent virus isolation for comprehensive antiviral testing, including testing by neuraminidase inhibition (NI) assay, sequencing viruses with elevated 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) values, and pyrosequencing for adamantine resistance–conferring M2 mutations. In the second route, the first 5 additional clinical specimens from pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus–infected patients that were collected each week by these laboratories were submitted and screened for the oseltamivir-resistant conferring neuraminidase H275Y mutation by using pyrosequencing. Patients with oseltamivir-resistant pandemic (H1N1) 2009 infection had demographic and clinical information collected by using a standard form.
Oseltamivir resistance was determined by either NI or pyrosequencing for the H275Y mutation. NI was performed on virus isolates with a chemiluminescent substrate; viruses with elevated IC
50 values for oseltamivir were identified as resistant, based on previously set criteria (
1,2). All oseltamivir-resistant viruses had H275Yconfirmed by pyrosequencing (
1). Original clinical specimens collected from surveillance were screened by pyrosequencing for H275Y, without NI. NI testing was performed at CDC, and pyrosequencing for H275Y was performed at CDC and state laboratories in Wisconsin, New York, and California. All oseltamivir-resistant viruses referenced here were reported on FluView (
3). Four patients, identified in June and August 2009, were reported previously (
4,5).
A comparison group of hospitalized patients infected with oseltamivir-susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 was identified from the Influenza Hospitalization Network (FluSurv-NET). FluSurv-NET includes 10 states that participate in the Emerging Infections Program, a population-based surveillance for hospitalized patients with influenza infection (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Tennessee), plus 6 states (Iowa, Idaho, Michigan, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota) added in response to the 2009 pandemic, as previously described (
3,6). The counties within FluSurv-NET represent 26 million persons (8.5% of the US population) (
6). The 16 states participating in FluSurv-NET collected demographic and clinical information for all hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza infection within their catchment counties (
6). We identified patients hospitalized in FluSurv-NET who had specimens submitted to national antiviral resistance surveillance by using Link Plus software to link antiviral resistance surveillance and FluSurv-NET data by patient county of residence, age, and sex and specimen collection date.
We considered identical matches on all 4 variables as a high probability match, e.g., a patient from FluSurv-NET who had a pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus specimen submitted to national antiviral resistance surveillance who had an oseltamivir-susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus infection. We validated our linking methods with Oregon data (n = 41); all 4 patients identified as high probability matches were true matches. For validation purposes, we identified 4 specimens that were matched on county, age, and sex but not on specimen collection date up to 7 days, e.g., moderate probability matches; 1 patient was hospitalized, 2 were outpatients, and 1 specimen was from a medical examiner (patient not hospitalized). The Oregon surveillance specimens that were neither high nor moderate probability matches were surveillance specimens from outpatients and cluster investigations (M. Vandermeer, pers. comm.).
Overall, 6,740 virus isolates and specimens were submitted to surveillance systems; 37 (0.5%) viruses were oseltamivir resistant (
3); 18 were identified by NI, contained the H275Y mutation, and were susceptible to zanamivir and resistant to adamantanes; the 19 remaining viruses were detected by pyrosequencing for H275Y. Oseltamivir-susceptible viruses exhibited IC
50 values ranging from 0.05 to 1.44 nmol/L. Oseltamivir-resistant viruses exhibited a median IC
50 value of 80.08 nmol/L (range 6.24–116.48 nmol/L).
Most patients infected with oseltamivir-resistant pandemic (H1N1) 2009 viruses were hospitalized (81%), had a severe immunocompromising condition (76%), and had been exposed to oseltamivir before collection of the specimen tested for antiviral resistance (89%) (); 9 (30%) had received oseltamivir as chemoprophylaxis, and 21 (70%) had received oseltamivir as treatment. Four patients with oseltamivir-resistant pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus infection had no documented exposure to oseltamivir before collection of the specimen for testing, including exposure to family members receiving oseltamivir. No epidemiologic links were found between the 4 patients.
| TableCharacteristics of patients infected with oseltamivir-resistant and -susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 viruses from national influenza antiviral resistance surveillance and enhanced hospital influenza surveillance, April 2009–June 2010*† (more ...) |
Among the 28 patients infected with oseltamivir-resistant pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, with a severe immunocompromising condition and a complete case form, 24 (86%) had a malignancy reported, 23 had a hematologic malignancy and were receiving chemo- or immunosuppressive therapy at the time of their infection, and 10 (38%) were recipients of a hematopoietic stem cell transplant (SCT). One patient had AIDS and a lymphoma of the central nervous system. Among the 3 immunosuppressed patients without a malignancy, 2 were recipients of solid organ (renal) transplants, and another had received SCT <6 months before influenza illness (reason for SCT could not be confirmed).
Among 1,982 national surveillance oseltamivir-susceptible specimens from the 16 FluSurv-NET states, 1,607 (81%) had county information; among these, 401 (25%) specimens were from FluSurv-NET counties, and 65 patients from FluSurv-NET were high probability matches to patients identified in antiviral resistance surveillance data (). Compared with patients with oseltamivir-resistant pandemic (H1N1) 2009 infections identified in national surveillance, few (11%) FluSurv-NET patients with an oseltamivir-susceptible pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus infection had severely immunosuppressive conditions, and few (14%) had oseltamivir exposure before collection of the specimen for testing, none were reported to have received oseltamivir as chemoprophylaxis. Among all 8,740 FluSurv-NET hospitalized patients with pandemic (H1N1) 2009 during this period, 10% had an immunosuppressive condition. Patients with oseltamivir-resistant infections had specimens for testing collected a median of 11 (range 2–37) days after oseltamivir initiation, and results may reflect testing due to clinical suspicion of resistance. Among the 6 FluSurv-NET patients with specimens collected after oseltamivir was begun, the median time between oseltamivir initiation and specimen collection was shorter.
This article has been 