martes 10 de noviembre de 2009

Más de 6.000 muertos y medio millón de infectados por la gripe A(H1N1)


EPIDEMIOLOGÍA
Más de 6.000 muertos y medio millón de infectados por la gripe A(H1N1)
JANO.es · 10 Noviembre 2009 08:16

La OMS informa de la detección de casos en cerdos, hurones, pavos y gatos, todos procedentes de la transmisión directa de humanos infectados



La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) ha registrado al menos 6.071 fallecimientos y más de 482.300 infectados por el virus de la gripe A(H1N1) en todo el mundo desde que activó la alerta sanitaria por riesgo de pandemia el pasado mes de abril, según ha comunicado en su último informe publicado con datos actualizados hasta el 1 de noviembre.

En comparación con el anterior informe, se han registrado 359 nuevas muertes y más de 40.639 nuevos afectados por el virus A/H1N1, lo que indica una tendencia creciente en el número de infectados –el anterior informe registro 26.716– pero decreciente en el número de nuevas muertes, ya que en la semana anterior se registraron hasta 713 fallecimientos más.

Durante este periodo, la OMS ha confirmado los primeros casos de gripe en el Congo, con lo que asciende a 196 el número de países y territorios de ultramar afectados por el virus. Asimismo, en Afganistán, Croacia, Mongolia, Tanzania y Ucrania se han registrado las primeras muertes por complicaciones derivadas de esta enfermedad.


Bajas temperaturas y aumento de casos

Por regiones, la OMS ha registrado una nueva muerte en África y 573 nuevos infectados, con los que la cifra de víctimas mortales asciende a 76 y a 14.109 el número de casos confirmados. En América se llevan contabilizados 4.399 fallecimientos (224 más que la semana pasada) y 185.067 infectados (10.502 más).

Por su parte, en la zona del Mediterráneo Oriental ya hay 137 fallecidos (26 más) y 22.689 casos confirmados hasta la fecha (5.539 más); en el Sudeste Asiático han registrado por el momento 661 muertes (56 más) y 44.147 afectados (1.245 más); y en la zona del Pacífico Occidental hay 498 fallecidos (33 más) y 138.288 infectados por el virus A/H1N1 (8.779 casos más).

Mientras, en Europa la OMS ofrece una cifra estimada de más de 78.000 infectados (unos 14.000 más que en la última semana) y registra al menos 300 fallecidos (unos 19 más), pues como detalla el informe, no se pueden concretar datos “debido a la decisión de algunos países de realizar estimaciones sobre el número de infectados en lugar de cuantificarlos”.

Sea como fuere, la OMS alerta de un aumento de casos en Europa y Asia Central coincidiendo con la llegada de las bajas temperaturas. Y en Estados Unidos, la totalidad de los casos de gripe analizados dan positivo al virus A/H1N1.


Transmisión en animales
Desde los primeros casos del virus, detectados el pasado mes de abril, la OMS informa de que se han detectado casos en distintas especies animales, tanto en cerdos, hurones, pavos y gatos, todas ellas procedentes de la transmisión directa de humanos infectados.

Estos acontecimientos, aunque de carácter aislado, no han tenido ningún impacto en la evolución de la pandemia, que se extiende fácilmente a través de la transmisión entre humanos. De momento, indica la OMS, si no cambia la epidemiología estos casos seguirán sin plantear riesgos especiales para la salud humana.
OMS

External Biphasic Defibrillators MedWatch



External Biphasic Defibrillators: Initial Communication- 14 events reported in which 200 J biphasic defibrillator was ineffective in providing fibrillation/cardioversion therapy

External Biphasic Defibrillators Energy Levels: Initial Communication
Audience: Cardiology healthcare professionals, hospital risk managers and biomedical engineering staff
Devices: External biphasic defibrillators that deliver energy levels ≤ 200 Joules (J), including monitor/defibrillators and automated external defibrillators (AEDs).
[Posted 11/10/2009] FDA notified healthcare professionals that it is investigating energy levels in external biphasic defibrillators with shocks ≤ 200 J. FDA received reports of 14 events since 2006 in which a 200 J biphasic defibrillator was ineffective in providing defibrillation/cardioversion therapy to a patient, whereas a subsequent shock from a different 360 J biphasic defibrillator resulted in immediate defibrillation/cardioversion. The majority of events occurred during attempts at cardioversion of atrial fibrillation, but there was at least one instance with defibrillation of a ventricular arrhythmia as well. Analysis of the 14 cases does not suggest the need for any change to current clinical practice, and as FDA continues its evaluation of this situation, providers are encouraged to follow the American Heart Association’s guidelines/algorithms for treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, and to follow manufacturers’ instructions for using defibrillators.
FDA is seeking additional information in order to interpret the significance of these events, and to determine whether FDA activities are advised. If you suspect a problem with a defibrillator, such as a situation where a patient received shocks from multiple devices, the problem should be reported to the FDA's MedWatch Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program online [at www.fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm], by phone 1-800-332-1088, or by returning the postage-paid FDA form 3500 [which may be downloaded from the MedWatch "Download Forms" page] by mail [to address on the pre-addressed form] or fax [1-800-FDA-0178].
Read the complete MedWatch 2009 Safety summary, including an link to the Initial Communication, at:
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm189259.htm

Energy Levels in External Biphasic Defibrillators: Initial Communication
Date: November 5, 2009


Audience:
Clinical community and specific health care professionals including Electrophysiology Labs, code teams, Cardiac Catheterization Labs, Operating Rooms, Intensive Care Units, Emergency Rooms, Risk Managers, Quality Managers, Patient Safety Coordinators, Directors of Nursing, Medical Directors, Biomedical/Clinical engineers, Emergency Medical Services

Professional Organizations, including the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, American Hospital Association, American Nurses Association, American Medical Association, and Electrophysiology physicians

Medical Specialty: Cardiology

Devices: External biphasic defibrillators that deliver energy levels ≤ 200 Joules (J), including monitor/defibrillators and automated external defibrillators (AEDs).

Summary of Problem and Scope
FDA is investigating energy levels in external biphasic defibrillators with shocks ≤ 200 J. We have received reports of 14 events since 2006 in which a 200 J biphasic defibrillator was ineffective in providing defibrillation/cardioversion therapy to a patient, whereas a subsequent shock from a different 360 J biphasic defibrillator resulted in immediate defibrillation/cardioversion. The majority of events occurred during attempts at cardioversion of atrial fibrillation, but there was at least one instance with defibrillation of a ventricular arrhythmia as well. FDA is seeking additional information in order to interpret the significance of these events, and to determine whether FDA activities are advised.

Recommendations
If you experience an event similar to those reported above, we encourage you to report to the FDA as outlined below under Reporting Problems.

So far, our analysis of the 14 cases does NOT suggest the need for any change to current clinical practice. As FDA continues its evaluation of this situation, we encourage you to follow the American Heart Association’s guidelines/algorithms for treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, and to follow manufacturers’ instructions for using defibrillators.

FDA Activities
In addition to reviewing our adverse event report database, FDA has explored the literature on defibrillation effectiveness. We recognize that there are multiple contributors to defibrillation and cardioversion success. Patient attributes, such as the size and shape of a person’s body, presenting rhythm, defibrillator attributes, such as energy level and waveform, and treatment conditions such as drug therapy and oxygenation, all affect defibrillation and cardioversion outcomes.

Although the reports received by FDA (cited above) involve multiple shocks from defibrillators from different manufacturers on a single patient, FDA is also aware that the scientific literature does not provide clarity on this question of optimal energy delivery. The only randomized trial known to us comparing effects of different energy levels focused on patients with cardiac arrest, in contrast to the reports received by FDA that primarily relate to atrial arrhythmias. In that trial, patients were randomized to fixed energy delivery (150 J even if multiple shocks were required) or escalating energy delivery (200, then 300 and finally 360 J, if multiple shocks were required). Although escalating energy levels resulted in a greater proportion of successful cardioversion/defibrillation for patients requiring multiple shocks (primarily in those patients in ventricular fibrillation rather than those in ventricular tachycardia), there were no detectable differences in clinical outcomes (survival to 1 hour, to 24 hours or to discharge).1

Reporting Problems
Prompt reporting of adverse events can help FDA identify and better understand the risks associated with medical devices. If you suspect a problem with a defibrillator, such as a situation where a patient received shocks from multiple devices, we encourage you to file a voluntary report through MedWatch, the FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting program.

Healthcare personnel employed by facilities that are subject to FDA's user facility reporting requirements should follow the reporting procedures established by their facilities.

To help us learn as much as possible about situations in which a patient received shocks from multiple defibrillators, please include the following information in your reports, if available:

Energy level/intensity
Waveform (biphasic truncated exponential or biphasic rectilinear)
Acute vs. chronic cardiac rhythms
Drug therapy
Oxygenation
Paddles vs. pads
Delay in therapy
Make and model of devices
Time from collapse to shock
If you have questions about this communication, please contact the Division of Small Manufacturers, International and Consumer Assistance (DSMICA) at DSMICA@cdrh.fda.gov or 800-638-2041.

This document reflects FDA’s current analysis of available information, in keeping with our commitment to inform the public about ongoing safety reviews of medical devices. The nature, magnitude and possible public health impact of this situation are not yet clear.

------------------
1 Stiell IG, Walker RG, Nesbitt LP, et al., Circulation. 2007;115:1511-15173

H1N1 influenza vaccine [MedWatch]



MedWatch - Dear Healthcare Professional letter from FDA Commissioner Hamburg re: H1N1 influenza vaccine

Dear MedWatch:

Please find attached the Dear Healthcare Professional letter from Dr. Margaret Hamburg, Commissioner of Food and Drugs, thanking healthcare providers for their efforts during the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak. The letter also addresses questions of vaccine safety and availability.

In the letter, Commissioner Hamburg outlines the processes that took the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine from creation to manufacture to distribution. We hope this information will be helpful to you when answering questions about the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines.

The letter can also be viewed via FDA’s H1N1 website at http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm189691.htm

Letter from the Commissioner to Nation’s Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine
November 10, 2009

Dear Healthcare Professional,

I am writing first to thank you for your extraordinary efforts during the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak.

As this new infectious disease sweeps through communities across the country, you must juggle your usual patient care responsibilities with a special role in influenza response. Delays in vaccine delivery and the persistence of myths about vaccination have not made your job any easier. Thank you for rising to this public health challenge.

I am also writing to provide information that can be helpful as you talk to patients about the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines -- the best tools we have to prevent severe illness and death caused by the virus.

As the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), I am pleased to have this opportunity to communicate with you directly at this key moment in time.

The Department of Health and Human Services is working with influenza vaccine manufacturers and state and local public health officials to make these vaccines widely available. So far, more than 41 million doses of the 2009 H1N1 vaccine have been allocated to the states for distribution across the country, and more is becoming available every day.

Some of your patients may be asking how the FDA, the manufacturers, and the scientific community can have confidence in vaccines that were available just six months after the 2009 H1N1 virus emerged. Understanding more about the manufacturing and approval process for these vaccines should help you to answer their questions.

Every year, FDA and vaccine manufacturers follow a series of steps to make a new influenza vaccine targeted to the three main circulating strains of influenza. These steps have produced effective and very safe vaccines time and again, adding up to hundreds of millions of doses administered in the United States alone.

We followed this same path for the 2009 H1N1 vaccines.



Making the 2009 H1N1 Vaccine

First, scientists at laboratories in the United States and elsewhere modified the 2009 H1N1 virus into a version suitable to be used as the “seed” for the development of vaccines. The process that was followed is similar in every respect to that which is employed every year for the preparation of seasonal influenza vaccines, as slightly different strains appear regularly each year. For the 2009 H1N1 virus, modified strains suitable for vaccine manufacturing were created and provided to influenza vaccine manufacturers by late May.

Next, companies began manufacturing the 2009 H1N1 vaccines in the same factories where they are licensed to manufacture seasonal influenza vaccines – using the same equipment and the same testing procedures. FDA inspects these plants at least once a year to assure that quality controls are followed at every step in the production process. FDA’s oversight covers both those facilities that make the inactivated vaccines (the “flu shot”) and those that make live attenuated viral vaccine (the “nasal spray”).

A critical part of influenza vaccine production is the growth of the vaccine strain in specially produced eggs. After inoculation of the eggs, the virus replicates, creating hundreds of thousands of copies of itself. It is the efficiency of this growth that determines how much vaccine can be produced and how quickly. The material harvested from these eggs is then further processed into the vaccines that you administer to your patients.

As recently as a few years ago, egg shortages would have prevented summertime and fall production of a vaccine against a new strain of influenza. Fortunately, this year, manufacturers could tap into a reserve supply of eggs made by additional flocks of chickens. These flocks were available under contracts put in place for just this purpose – to respond to a possible pandemic.

At the end of July, FDA sought public input. We convened a public meeting of FDA’s expert vaccine advisory committee to review the agency’s approach to approval of the 2009 H1N1 vaccines. This committee includes scientists, physicians, public health officials and a consumer representative. The committee supported making the vaccines according to the same approach used every year for the seasonal influenza vaccines.

The next step was to develop a tool to accurately measure the amount of vaccine antigen that was being produced. Scientists from the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, and other nations, working together as part of the World Health Organization, developed the reagents needed to assure the proper amount of antigen goes into each dose of vaccine.

On September 15, after reviewing applications from manufacturers similar to those submitted each year for licensed seasonal vaccine, FDA licensed four vaccines against the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus.

The agency found that all of the appropriate documentation had been submitted, and all of the standards had been met. In fact, had this new virus emerged a few months earlier, it could have been included as one of the three strains in the 2009 seasonal vaccine. In this key respect, although the strain of the 2009 H1N1 virus is new, the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccines are not.

Over the summer, the National Institutes of Health and vaccine manufacturers initiated clinical trials to determine the dose and number of doses needed to induce an optimal immune response. The good news is that just as for seasonal vaccine, one dose of H1N1 vaccine will likely be protective for healthy adults, the elderly, and older children. For children ages nine and younger, two doses of the H1N1 vaccine will likely be optimal, also similar to seasonal vaccine. No serious adverse events attributable to the vaccine have emerged during the clinical trials, which have so far included over 3600 patients at NIH-supported institutions alone.



Monitoring Vaccine Safety

We are now in a position never before experienced in the history of influenza. Just as a new and serious virus is spreading widely around the country, causing hospitalizations and deaths, a vaccine is becoming available to help prevent infection and protect the public. This accomplishment is the result of the efforts of hundreds of scientists across the world in the private and public sectors. Although a gap still remains between the demand for the vaccine and the currently available supply, this is the first time in history that any vaccine has been available at the time that an influenza pandemic has struck.

We are not cutting any corners. Just as for seasonal influenza vaccine, no lot of the 2009 H1N1 vaccine can be used until it has been carefully evaluated and released as sterile and potent by both the manufacturer and by the FDA.

In addition, the FDA and other agencies are looking for any unexpected, rare, serious adverse events and are quickly investigating concerns. We are also collaborating with our global counterparts to share information and experience. Should any safety concerns arise, we will evaluate them thoroughly and bring them to the public’s attention quickly.

I encourage you to report any adverse effects that you believe are linked to any vaccine, including the 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccine, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (http://vaers.hhs.gov/index). Other resources for 2009 H1N1 influenza, including a detailed description of vaccine safety efforts, are online at www.flu.gov.

It is likely that most families in the United States will be touched by H1N1 influenza this year. Fortunately, many will experience mild illness. Others will endure unspeakable tragedy. The benefits of preventing serious consequences from infection with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus far outweigh the risks associated with vaccination. All Americans, and especially pregnant women and others at high risk of severe influenza infection, should seriously consider the recommendation for vaccination to help protect themselves and their loved ones.

Thank you for your critical work during this challenging time.

Sincerely,
/s/

Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D.
Commissioner of Food and Drugs

Influenza Virus Vaccine for the 2009-2010 Season


Influenza Virus Vaccine for the 2009-2010 Season
Cumulative 2009/2010 Season Lot Release Status (Updated 11/10/2009, numbers unchanged from 11/4/2009)

Flu vaccine lots that have been released by FDA and are available for distribution by the manufacturers. For information on flu vaccine distribution schedules, please contact the manufacturers directly.

abrir aquí para acceder al documento FDA:
Influenza Virus Vaccine for the 2009-2010 Season

Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccines Composition and Lot Release


Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccines Composition and Lot Release
The four manufacturers will make the Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent vaccines using the established manufacturing processes for their seasonal influenza vaccines. FDA approved these vaccines as a strain change to each manufacturer’s seasonal influenza vaccine. There is considerable experience with seasonal influenza vaccine development and production and influenza vaccines produced by this technology have a long and successful track record of safety and effectiveness in the United States. The Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent vaccines will undergo the usual testing and lot release procedures that are in place for seasonal influenza vaccines.

Lot release information will be updated weekly. Last update: 11/10/2009.

abir aquí para acceder a la información:
Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 Monovalent Vaccines Composition and Lot Release

Recommended Pediatric Dosage of RETROVIR


On November 6, 2009, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved revised pediatric dosing recommendations that expand dosing to include children starting treatment at four weeks of age.
The revised label contains the following recommendation:
The recommended dosage in pediatric patients 4 weeks of age and older and weighing ≥4 kg is provided in Table 1. RETROVIR Syrup should be used to provide accurate dosage when whole tablets or capsules are not appropriate.

Table 1: Recommended Pediatric Dosage of RETROVIR
Body Weight (kg)/ Total Daily / Dose Dosage Regimen and Dose
b.i.d. t.i.d
Body Weight: 4 to < 9
Total Daily: 24 mg/kg/day
Dose Dosage Regimen and Dose
b.i.d. 12 mg/kg
t.i.d 8 mg/kg
.....................
Body Weight: ≥ 9 to < 30
Total Daily: 18 mg/kg/day
Dose Dosage Regimen and Dose
b.i.d. 9 mg/kg
t.i.d 6 mg/kg
.....................
Body Weight: ≥ 30
Total Daily: 600 mg/day
Dose Dosage Regimen and Dose
b.i.d. 300 mg
t.i.d 200 mg


Richard Klein
Office of Special Health Issues
Food and Drug Administration
Kimberly Struble
Division of Antiviral Drug Products
Food and Drug Administration

FDA Commissioner Addresses Nation’s Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine


FDA NOTE TO CORRESPONDENTS
For Immediate Release: Nov. 10, 2009

Media Inquires: Patricia El-Hinnawy, 301-796-4763; patricia.el-hinnawy@fda.hhs.gov
Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA

FDA Commissioner Addresses Nation’s Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine
Dr. Margaret Hamburg, Commissioner of Food and Drugs, today sent a letter to America’s doctors thanking them for their efforts during the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak and providing information on the safety of the 2009 H1N1 vaccines.

"Some of your patients may be asking how the FDA, the manufacturers and the scientific community can have confidence in vaccines that were available just six months after the 2009 H1N1 virus emerged," Dr. Hamburg wrote. "Understanding more about the manufacturing and approval process for these vaccines should help you to answer their questions."

The letter can be viewed at http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm189691.htm

Additional Information

FDA H1N1 Flu Page:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm150305.htm

abrir aquí para acceder al documento general:
FDA Commissioner Addresses Nation’s Doctors on H1N1 Vaccine