Search

Background At the start of the 2019–2020 influenza season, concern arose that circulating B/Victoria viruses of the globally emerging clade V1A.3 were antigenically drifted from the strain included in the vaccine. Intense B/Victoria activity was followed by circulation of genetically diverse A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses that were also antigenically drifted. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the United States against illness from these emerging viruses. Methods We enrolled outpatients aged ≥6 months with acute respiratory illness at 5 sites. Respiratory specimens were tested for influenza by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Using the test-negative design, we determined influenza VE by virus subtype/lineage and genetic subclades by comparing odds of vaccination in influenza cases versus test-negative controls. Results Among 8845 enrollees, 2722 (31%) tested positive for influenza, including 1209 (44%) for B/Victoria and 1405 (51%) for A(H1N1)pdm09. Effectiveness against any influenza illness was 39% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32–44), 45% (95% CI: 37–52) against B/Victoria and 30% (95% CI: 21–39) against A(H1N1)pdm09-associated illness. Vaccination offered no protection against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses with antigenically drifted clade 6B.1A 183P-5A+156K HA genes (VE 7%; 95% CI: –14 to 23%) which predominated after January. Conclusions Vaccination provided protection against influenza illness, mainly due to infections from B/Victoria viruses. Vaccine protection against illness from A(H1N1)pdm09 was lower than historically observed effectiveness of 40%–60%, due to late-season vaccine mismatch following emergence of antigenically drifted viruses. The effect of drift on vaccine protection is not easy to predict and, even in drifted years, significant protection can be observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A suspected outbreak of influenza A and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) at a long-term care facility in Los Angeles County was, months later, determined to not involve influenza. To prevent inadvertent transmission of infections, facilities should use highly specific influenza diagnostics and follow Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines that specifically address infection control challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background During the 2014–2015 US influenza season, 320 cases of non-mumps parotitis (NMP) among residents of 21 states were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). We conducted an epidemiologic and laboratory investigation to determine viral etiologies and clinical features of NMP during this unusually large occurrence. Methods NMP was defined as acute parotitis or other salivary gland swelling of >2 days duration in a person with a mumps- negative laboratory result. Using a standardized questionnaire, we collected demographic and clinical information. Buccal samples were tested at the CDC for selected viruses, including mumps, influenza, human parainfluenza viruses (HPIVs) 1–4, adenoviruses, cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), herpes simplex viruses (HSVs) 1 and 2, and human herpes viruses (HHVs) 6A and 6B. Results Among the 320 patients, 65% were male, median age was 14.5 years (range, 0–90), and 67% reported unilateral parotitis. Commonly reported symptoms included sore throat (55%) and fever (48%). Viruses were detected in 210 (71%) of 294 NMP patients with adequate samples for testing, ≥2 viruses were detected in 37 samples, and 248 total virus detections were made among all samples. These included 156 influenza A(H3N2), 42 HHV6B, 32 EBV, 8 HPIV2, 2 HPIV3, 3 adenovirus, 4 HSV-1, and 1 HSV-2. Influenza A(H3N2), HHV6B, and EBV were the most frequently codetected viruses. Conclusions Our findings suggest that, in addition to mumps, clinicians should consider respiratory viral (influenza) and herpes viral etiologies for parotitis, particularly among patients without epidemiologic links to mumps cases or outbreaks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background During the 2014–2015 influenza season in the United States, 256 cases of influenza-associated parotitis were reported from 27 states. We conducted a case-control study and laboratory investigation to further describe this rare clinical manifestation of influenza. Methods During February 2015–April 2015, we interviewed 50 cases (with parotitis) and 124 ill controls (without parotitis) with laboratory-confirmed influenza; participants resided in 11 states and were matched by age, state, hospital admission status, and specimen collection date. Influenza viruses were characterized using real-time polymerase chain reaction and next-generation sequencing. We compared cases and controls using conditional logistic regression. Specimens from additional reported cases were also analyzed. Results Cases, 73% of whom were aged <20 years, experienced painful (86%), unilateral (68%) parotitis a median of 4 (range, 0–16) days after onset of systemic or respiratory symptoms. Cases were more likely than controls to be male (76% vs 51%; P =.005). We detected influenza A(H3N2) viruses, genetic group 3C.2a, in 100% (32/32) of case and 92% (105/108) of control specimens sequenced (P =.22). Influenza B and A(H3N2) 3C.3 and 3C.3b genetic group virus infections were detected in specimens from additional cases. Conclusions Influenza-associated parotitis, as reported here and in prior sporadic case reports, seems to occur primarily with influenza A(H3N2) virus infection. Because of the different clinical and infection control considerations for mumps and influenza virus infections, we recommend clinicians consider influenza in the differential diagnoses among patients with acute parotitis during the influenza season. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]