Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority

In the coronavirus efficacy (COVE) phase 3 clinical trial, vaccine recipients were assessed for neutralizing and binding antibodies as correlates of risk for COVID-19 disease and as correlates of protection. These immune markers were measured at the time of second vaccination and 4 weeks later, with values reported in standardized World Health Organization international units. All markers were inversely associated with COVID-19 risk and directly associated with vaccine efficacy. Vaccine recipients with postvaccination 50% neutralization titers 10, 100, and 1000 had estimated vaccine efficacies of 78% (95% confidence interval, 54 to 89%), 91% (87 to 94%), and 96% (94 to 98%), respectively. These results help define immune marker correlates of protection and may guide approval decisions for messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines and other COVID-19 vaccines.

OBJECTIVES: To provide contemporary estimates of the burdens (costs and mortality) associated with acute inpatient Medicare beneficiary admissions for sepsis. DESIGN: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services DataLink Project. SETTING: All U.S. acute care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency). PATIENTS: All Medicare beneficiaries, 2012-2018, with an inpatient admission including one or more explicit sepsis codes. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Total inpatient hospital and skilled nursing facility admission counts, costs, and mortality over time. From calendar year (CY)2012-CY2018, the total number of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) beneficiaries with an inpatient hospital admission associated with an explicit sepsis code rose from 811,644 to 1,136,889. The total cost of inpatient hospital admission including an explicit sepsis code for those beneficiaries in those calendar years rose from $17,792,657,303 to $22,439,794,212. The total cost of skilled nursing facility care in the 90 days subsequent to an inpatient hospital discharge that included an explicit sepsis code for Medicare Part A/B rose from $3,931,616,160 to $5,623,862,486 over that same interval. Precise costs are not available for Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) patients. Using available federal data sources, we estimated the aggregate cost of inpatient admissions and skilled nursing facility admissions for Medicare Advantage patients to have risen from $6.0 to $13.4 billion over the CY2012-CY2018 interval. Combining data for fee-for-service beneficiaries and estimates for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, we estimate the total inpatient admission sepsis cost and any subsequent skilled nursing facility admission for all (fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) Medicare patients to have risen from $27.7 to $41.5 billion. Contemporary 6-month mortality rates for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a sepsis inpatient admission remain high: for septic shock, approximately 60%; for severe sepsis, approximately 36%; for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, approximately 31%; and for unspecified sepsis, approximately 27%. CONCLUSION: Sepsis remains common, costly to treat, and presages significant mortality for Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: The Ad26.COV2.S vaccine was highly effective against severe-critical coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), hospitalization, and death in the primary phase 3 efficacy analysis. METHODS: viral particles) or placebo. The primary end points were vaccine efficacy against moderate to severe-critical Covid-19 with onset at least 14 days after administration and at least 28 days after administration in the per-protocol population. Safety and key secondary and exploratory end points were also assessed. RESULTS: Median follow-up in this analysis was 4 months; 8940 participants had at least 6 months of follow-up. In the per-protocol population (39,185 participants), vaccine efficacy against moderate to severe-critical Covid-19 at least 14 days after administration was 56.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.3 to 60.8; 484 cases in the vaccine group vs. 1067 in the placebo group); at least 28 days after administration, vaccine efficacy was 52.9% (95% CI, 47.1 to 58.1; 433 cases in the vaccine group vs. 883 in the placebo group). Efficacy in the United States, primarily against the reference strain (B.1.D614G) and the B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant, was 69.7% (95% CI, 60.7 to 76.9); efficacy was reduced elsewhere against the P.1 (gamma), C.37 (lambda), and B.1.621 (mu) variants. Efficacy was 74.6% (95% CI, 64.7 to 82.1) against severe-critical Covid-19 (with only 4 severe-critical cases caused by the B.1.617.2 [delta] variant), 75.6% (95% CI, 54.3 to 88.0) against Covid-19 leading to medical intervention (including hospitalization), and 82.8% (95% CI, 40.5 to 96.8) against Covid-19-related death, with protection lasting 6 months or longer. Efficacy against any severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was 41.7% (95% CI, 36.3 to 46.7). Ad26.COV2.S was associated with mainly mild-to-moderate adverse events, and no new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of Ad26.COV2.S provided 52.9% protection against moderate to severe-critical Covid-19. Protection varied according to variant; higher protection was observed against severe Covid-19, medical intervention, and death than against other end points and lasted for 6 months or longer. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development and others; ENSEMBLE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04505722.).

Novel data streams (NDS), such as web search data or social media updates, hold promise for enhancing the capabilities of public health surveillance. In this paper, we outline a conceptual framework for integrating NDS into current public health surveillance. Our approach focuses on two key questions: What are the opportunities for using NDS and what are the minimal tests of validity and utility that must be applied when using NDS? Identifying these opportunities will necessitate the involvement of public health authorities and an appreciation of the diversity of objectives and scales across agencies at different levels (local, state, national, international). We present the case that clearly articulating surveillance objectives and systematically evaluating NDS and comparing the performance of NDS to existing surveillance data and alternative NDS data is critical and has not sufficiently been addressed in many applications of NDS currently in the literature.

A wide range of research has promised new tools for forecasting infectious disease dynamics, but little of that research is currently being applied in practice, because tools do not address key public health needs, do not produce probabilistic forecasts, have not been evaluated on external data, or do not provide sufficient forecast skill to be useful. We developed an open collaborative forecasting challenge to assess probabilistic forecasts for seasonal epidemics of dengue, a major global public health problem. Sixteen teams used a variety of methods and data to generate forecasts for 3 epidemiological targets (peak incidence, the week of the peak, and total incidence) over 8 dengue seasons in Iquitos, Peru and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Forecast skill was highly variable across teams and targets. While numerous forecasts showed high skill for midseason situational awareness, early season skill was low, and skill was generally lowest for high incidence seasons, those for which forecasts would be most valuable. A comparison of modeling approaches revealed that average forecast skill was lower for models including biologically meaningful data and mechanisms and that both multimodel and multiteam ensemble forecasts consistently outperformed individual model forecasts. Leveraging these insights, data, and the forecasting framework will be critical to improve forecast skill and the application of forecasts in real time for epidemic preparedness and response. Moreover, key components of this project-integration with public health needs, a common forecasting framework, shared and standardized data, and open participation-can help advance infectious disease forecasting beyond dengue.

The United States radiation medical countermeasures (MCM) programme for radiological and nuclear incidents has been focusing on developing mitigators for the acute radiation syndrome (ARS) and delayed effects of acute radiation exposure (DEARE), and biodosimetry technologies to provide radiation dose assessments for guiding treatment. Because a nuclear accident or terrorist incident could potentially expose a large number of people to low to moderate doses of ionising radiation, and thus increase their excess lifetime cancer risk, there is an interest in developing mitigators for this purpose. This article discusses the current status, issues, and challenges regarding development of mitigators against radiation-induced cancers. The challenges of developing mitigators for ARS include: the long latency between exposure and cancer manifestation, limitations of animal models, potential side effects of the mitigator itself, potential need for long-term use, the complexity of human trials to demonstrate effectiveness, and statistical power constraints for measuring health risks (and reduction of health risks after mitigation) following relatively low radiation doses (<0.75 Gy). Nevertheless, progress in the understanding of the molecular mechanisms resulting in radiation injury, along with parallel progress in dose assessment technologies, make this an opportune, if not critical, time to invest in research strategies that result in the development of agents to lower the risk of radiation-induced cancers for populations that survive a significant radiation exposure incident.

Forecasts of influenza activity in human populations could help guide key preparedness tasks. We conducted a scoping review to characterize these methodological approaches and identify research gaps. Adapting the PRISMA methodology for systematic reviews, we searched PubMed, CINAHL, Project Euclid, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for publications in English since January 1, 2000 using the terms "influenza AND (forecast* OR predict*)", excluding studies that did not validate forecasts against independent data or incorporate influenza-related surveillance data from the season or pandemic for which the forecasts were applied. We included 35 publications describing population-based (N = 27), medical facility-based (N = 4), and regional or global pandemic spread (N = 4) forecasts. They included areas of North America (N = 15), Europe (N = 14), and/or Asia-Pacific region (N = 4), or had global scope (N = 3). Forecasting models were statistical (N = 18) or epidemiological (N = 17). Five studies used data assimilation methods to update forecasts with new surveillance data. Models used virological (N = 14), syndromic (N = 13), meteorological (N = 6), internet search query (N = 4), and/or other surveillance data as inputs. Forecasting outcomes and validation metrics varied widely. Two studies compared distinct modeling approaches using common data, 2 assessed model calibration, and 1 systematically incorporated expert input. Of the 17 studies using epidemiological models, 8 included sensitivity analysis. This review suggests need for use of good practices in influenza forecasting (e.g., sensitivity analysis); direct comparisons of diverse approaches; assessment of model calibration; integration of subjective expert input; operational research in pilot, real-world applications; and improved mutual understanding among modelers and public health officials.

Following a mass-casualty nuclear disaster, effective medical triage has the potential to save tens of thousands of lives. In order to best use the available scarce resources, there is an urgent need for biodosimetry tools to determine an individual's radiation dose. Initial triage for radiation exposure will include location during the incident, symptoms, and physical examination. Stepwise triage will include point of care assessment of less than or greater than 2 Gy, followed by secondary assessment, possibly with high throughput screening, to further define an individual's dose. Given the multisystem nature of radiation injury, it is unlikely that any single biodosimetry assay can be used as a standalone tool to meet the surge in capacity with the timeliness and accuracy needed. As part of the national preparedness and planning for a nuclear or radiological incident, the authors reviewed the primary literature to determine the capabilities and limitations of a number of biodosimetry assays currently available or under development for use in the initial and secondary triage of patients. Understanding the requirements from a response standpoint and the capability and logistics for the various assays will help inform future biodosimetry technology development and acquisition. Factors considered include: type of sample required, dose detection limit, time interval when the assay is feasible biologically, time for sample preparation and analysis, ease of use, logistical requirements, potential throughput, point-of-care capability, and the ability to support patient diagnosis and treatment within a therapeutically relevant time point.

Background: For most classes of drugs, rapid development of therapeutics to treat emerging infections is challenged by the timelines needed to identify compounds with the desired efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic profiles. Fully human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) provide an attractive method to overcome many of these hurdles to rapidly produce therapeutics for emerging diseases. Methods: In this study, we deployed a platform to generate, test, and develop fully human antibodies to Zaire ebolavirus. We obtained specific anti-Ebola virus (EBOV) antibodies by immunizing VelocImmune mice that use human immunoglobulin variable regions in their humoral responses. Results: Of the antibody clones isolated, 3 were selected as best at neutralizing EBOV and triggering FcγRIIIa. Binding studies and negative-stain electron microscopy revealed that the 3 selected antibodies bind to non-overlapping epitopes, including a potentially new protective epitope not targeted by other antibody-based treatments. When combined, a single dose of a cocktail of the 3 antibodies protected nonhuman primates (NHPs) from EBOV disease even after disease symptoms were apparent. Conclusions: This antibody cocktail provides complementary mechanisms of actions, incorporates novel specificities, and demonstrates high-level postexposure protection from lethal EBOV disease in NHPs. It is now undergoing testing in normal healthy volunteers in preparation for potential use in future Ebola epidemics.

Mosquito-borne diseases pose some of the greatest challenges in public health, especially\nin tropical and sub-tropical regions of the world. Efforts to control these diseases have\nbeen underpinned by a theoretical framework developed for malaria by Ross and Macdonald,\nincluding models, metrics for measuring transmission, and theory of control that\nidentifies key vulnerabilities in the transmission cycle. That framework, especially\nMacdonald's formula for R0 and its entomological derivative,\nvectorial capacity, are now used to study dynamics and design interventions for many\nmosquito-borne diseases. A systematic review of 388 models published between 1970 and 2010\nfound that the vast majority adopted the Ross–Macdonald assumption of homogeneous\ntransmission in a well-mixed population. Studies comparing models and data question these\nassumptions and point to the capacity to model heterogeneous, focal transmission as the\nmost important but relatively unexplored component in current theory. Fine-scale\nheterogeneity causes transmission dynamics to be nonlinear, and poses problems for\nmodeling, epidemiology and measurement. Novel mathematical approaches show how\nheterogeneity arises from the biology and the landscape on which the processes of mosquito\nbiting and pathogen transmission unfold. Emerging theory focuses attention on the\necological and social context for mosquito blood feeding, the movement of both hosts and\nmosquitoes, and the relevant spatial scales for measuring transmission and for modeling\ndynamics and control.

In May 2021, after a systematic review of all available data, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices made an interim recommendation for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in adolescents aged 12–15 years for the prevention of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: In the Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) trial, estimated mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy against coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) was 94%. SARS-CoV-2 antibody measurements were assessed as correlates of COVID-19 risk and as correlates of protection. METHODS: Through case-cohort sampling, participants were selected for measurement of four serum antibody markers at Day 1 (first dose), Day 29 (second dose), and Day 57: IgG binding antibodies (bAbs) to Spike, bAbs to Spike receptor-binding domain (RBD), and 50% and 80% inhibitory dilution pseudovirus neutralizing antibody titers calibrated to the WHO International Standard (cID50 and cID80). Participants with no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Cox regression assessed in vaccine recipients the association of each Day 29 or 57 serologic marker with COVID-19 through 126 or 100 days of follow-up, respectively, adjusting for risk factors. RESULTS: Day 57 Spike IgG, RBD IgG, cID50, and cID80 neutralization levels were each inversely correlated with risk of COVID-19: hazard ratios 0.66 (95% CI 0.50, 0.88; p=0.005); 0.57 (0.40, 0.82; p=0.002); 0.42 (0.27, 0.65; p<0.001); 0.35 (0.20, 0.61; p<0.001) per 10-fold increase in marker level, respectively, multiplicity adjusted P-values 0.003-0.010. Results were similar for Day 29 markers (multiplicity adjusted P-values <0.001-0.003). For vaccine recipients with Day 57 reciprocal cID50 neutralization titers that were undetectable (<2.42), 100, or 1000, respectively, cumulative incidence of COVID-19 through 100 days post Day 57 was 0.030 (0.010, 0.093), 0.0056 (0.0039, 0.0080), and 0.0023 (0.0013, 0.0036). For vaccine recipients at these titer levels, respectively, vaccine efficacy was 50.8% (-51.2, 83.0%), 90.7% (86.7, 93.6%), and 96.1% (94.0, 97.8%). Causal mediation analysis estimated that the proportion of vaccine efficacy mediated through Day 29 cID50 titer was 68.5% (58.5, 78.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Binding and neutralizing antibodies correlated with COVID-19 risk and vaccine efficacy and likely have utility in predicting mRNA-1273 vaccine efficacy against COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: COVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04470427.

As of November 2015, the Ebola virus disease (EVD) epidemic that began in West Africa in late 2013 is waning. The human toll includes more than 28,000 EVD cases and 11,000 deaths in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, the most heavily-affected countries. We reviewed 66 mathematical modeling studies of the EVD epidemic published in the peer-reviewed literature to assess the key uncertainties models addressed, data used for modeling, public sharing of data and results, and model performance. Based on the review, we suggest steps to improve the use of modeling in future public health emergencies.

The 2017-2018 seasonal influenza epidemics were severe in the US and Australia where the A(H3N2) subtype viruses predominated. Although circulating A(H3N2) viruses did not differ antigenically from that recommended by the WHO for vaccine production, overall interim vaccine effectiveness estimates were below historic averages (33%) for A(H3N2) viruses. The majority (US) or all (Australian) vaccine doses contained multiple amino-acid changes in the hemagglutinin protein, resulting from the necessary adaptation of the virus to embryonated hen's eggs used for most vaccine manufacturing. Previous reports have suggested a potential negative impact of egg-driven substitutions on vaccine performance. With BARDA support, two vaccines licensed in the US are produced in cell culture: recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV, Flublok™) manufactured in insect cells and inactivated mammalian cell-grown vaccine (ccIIV, Flucelvax™). Quadrivalent ccIIV (ccIIV4) vaccine for the 2017-2018 influenza season was produced using an A(H3N2) seed virus propagated exclusively in cell culture and therefore lacking egg adaptative changes. Sufficient ccIIV doses were distributed (but not RIV doses) to enable preliminary estimates of its higher effectiveness relative to the traditional egg-based vaccines, with study details pending. The increased availability of comparative product-specific vaccine effectiveness estimates for cell-based and egg-based vaccines may provide critical clues to inform vaccine product improvements moving forward.

On November 7th and 8th, 2022, The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation (CEPI), The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), and the Wellcome Trust hosted a virtual workshop entitled “Mucosal Vaccines for SARS-CoV-2: Scientific Gaps and Opportunities.” During the workshop, researchers and vaccine developers from around the world discussed the potential of mucosal vaccines to block SARS-CoV-2 transmission and reviewed the status of SARS-CoV-2 mucosal vaccine research. Here, we summarize key challenges and opportunities in basic, translational, and clinical research that were highlighted during the meeting. We also provide recommendations to advance the field and accelerate the development of mucosal vaccines for SARS-CoV-2.

Diagnostic tests for detecting emerging influenza virus strains with pandemic potential are critical for directing global influenza prevention and control activities. In 2008, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention received US Food and Drug Administration approval for a highly sensitive influenza polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay. Devices were deployed to public health laboratories in the United States and globally. Within 2 weeks of the first recognition of 2009 pandemic influenza H1N1, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed and began distributing a new approved pandemic influenza H1N1 PCR assay, which used the previously deployed device platform to meet a >8-fold increase in specimen submissions. Rapid antigen tests were widely used by clinicians at the point of care; however, test sensitivity was low (40%-69%). Many clinical laboratories developed their own pandemic influenza H1N1 PCR assays to meet clinician demand. Future planning efforts should identify ways to improve availability of reliable testing to manage patient care and approaches for optimal use of molecular testing for detecting and controlling emerging influenza virus strains.

In the PREVENT-19 phase 3 trial of the NVX-CoV2373 vaccine (NCT04611802), anti-spike binding IgG concentration (spike IgG), anti-RBD binding IgG concentration (RBD IgG), and pseudovirus 50% neutralizing antibody titer (nAb ID50) measured two weeks post-dose two are assessed as correlates of risk and as correlates of protection against COVID-19. Analyses are conducted in the U.S. cohort of baseline SARS-CoV-2 negative per-protocol participants using a case-cohort design that measures the markers from all 12 vaccine recipient breakthrough COVID-19 cases starting 7 days post antibody measurement and from 639 vaccine recipient non-cases. All markers are inversely associated with COVID-19 risk and directly associated with vaccine efficacy. In vaccine recipients with nAb ID50 titers of 50, 100, and 7230 international units (IU50)/ml, vaccine efficacy estimates are 75.7% (49.8%, 93.2%), 81.7% (66.3%, 93.2%), and 96.8% (88.3%, 99.3%). The results support potential cross-vaccine platform applications of these markers for guiding decisions about vaccine approval and use.

Importance: The effectiveness of ivermectin to shorten symptom duration or prevent hospitalization among outpatients in the US with mild to moderate symptomatic COVID-19 is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of ivermectin, 400 μg/kg, daily for 3 days compared with placebo for the treatment of early mild to moderate COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: ACTIV-6, an ongoing, decentralized, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled platform trial, was designed to evaluate repurposed therapies in outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19. A total of 1591 participants aged 30 years and older with confirmed COVID-19, experiencing 2 or more symptoms of acute infection for 7 days or less, were enrolled from June 23, 2021, through February 4, 2022, with follow-up data through May 31, 2022, at 93 sites in the US. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive ivermectin, 400 μg/kg (n = 817), daily for 3 days or placebo (n = 774). Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to sustained recovery, defined as at least 3 consecutive days without symptoms. There were 7 secondary outcomes, including a composite of hospitalization or death by day 28. Results: Among 1800 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 48 [12] years; 932 women [58.6%]; 753 [47.3%] reported receiving at least 2 doses of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine), 1591 completed the trial. The hazard ratio (HR) for improvement in time to recovery was 1.07 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.96-1.17; posterior P value [HR >1] = .91). The median time to recovery was 12 days (IQR, 11-13) in the ivermectin group and 13 days (IQR, 12-14) in the placebo group. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and 9 in the placebo group (1.2% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.1 [95% CrI, 0.4-2.6]). The most common serious adverse events were COVID-19 pneumonia (ivermectin [n = 5]; placebo [n = 7]) and venous thromboembolism (ivermectin [n = 1]; placebo [n = 5]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatients with mild to moderate COVID-19, treatment with ivermectin, compared with placebo, did not significantly improve time to recovery. These findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04885530.

The rapid spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) along with its high number of mutations in the spike gene has raised alarms about the effectiveness of current medical countermeasures. To address this concern, we measured the neutralization of the Omicron BA.1 variant pseudovirus by postvaccination serum samples after two and three immunizations with the Pfizer/BioNTech162b2 SARS-CoV-2 mRNA (Pfizer/BNT162b2) vaccine, convalescent serum samples from unvaccinated individuals infected by different variants, and clinical-stage therapeutic antibodies. We found that titers against the Omicron variant were low or undetectable after two immunizations and in many convalescent serum samples, regardless of the infecting variant. A booster vaccination increased titers more than 30-fold against Omicron to values comparable to those seen against the D614G variant after two immunizations. Neither age nor sex was associated with the differences in postvaccination antibody responses. We also evaluated 18 clinical-stage therapeutic antibody products and an antibody mimetic protein product obtained directly from the manufacturers. Five monoclonal antibodies, the antibody mimetic protein, three antibody cocktails, and two polyclonal antibody preparations retained measurable neutralization activity against Omicron with a varying degree of potency. Of these, only three retained potencies comparable to the D614G variant. Two therapeutic antibody cocktails in the tested panel that are authorized for emergency use in the United States did not neutralize Omicron. These findings underscore the potential benefit of mRNA vaccine boosters for protection against Omicron and the need for rapid development of antibody therapeutics that maintain potency against emerging variants.

Effective antivirals provide crucial benefits during the early phase of an influenza pandemic, when vaccines are still being developed and manufactured. Currently, two classes of viral protein-targeting drugs, neuraminidase inhibitors and polymerase inhibitors, are approved for influenza treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis. Resistance to both classes has been documented, highlighting the need to develop novel antiviral options that may include both viral and host-targeted inhibitors. Such efforts will form the basis of management of seasonal influenza infections and of strategic planning for future influenza pandemics. This review focuses on the two classes of approved antivirals, their drawbacks, and ongoing work to characterize novel agents or combination therapy approaches to address these shortcomings. The importance of these topics in the ongoing process of influenza pandemic planning is also discussed.