Thursday, May 3, 2012

Controversial Influenza Research


              Two papers were submitted to the journal Nature in August 2011 that dealt with influenza.  One came from the University of Wisconsin-Madison lab of Yoshihiro Kawaoka; the other from a team at the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and was headed by Ron Fouchier.  To say that this research caused a stir would be an understatement.  A “pause” was placed on this research in both countries due to fears from the community about viral release (the original letter and a note about it was found on my other blog, Dr. Amedeo).  Meanwhile, the papers themselves were heavily discussed by Nature editors, the World Health Organization, the general public and the US National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB).  The initial position was that, in the interest of public security, these papers should only be made available to certain people who applied for the information or published without their methods and certain key results hidden.  In a land of peer-reviewed work and government red-tape, these options were not well received.  After much discussion, the NSABB backed off and left Nature to make the final publication decision.  Nearly nine months after the papers were first received, the Kawaoka paper was published in the journal Nature, appearing online ahead of print on May 2nd, 2012.  The Fouchier group paper will be published in the journal Science in the next few weeks.

                What was the hub-bub all about?  Pandemics.  Bioterrorism.  Freedom of information.

                I covered the influenza virus, and the Spanish influenza in particular, in an earlier series of posts on this blog, which you can find here.  Three key pieces of information from those posts are important to explaining the above papers:  

One. Two proteins exist on the outside of an influenza virus that are very important to viruses being able to bind a cell and then get inside.  They are called hemaglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (N). Several versions of each protein exist and each version is given its own number.  An influenza virus is named for the versions of HA and N that are found on the outside.  For example, most people remember the H1N1 scare.  That particular strain of influenza had version 1 of HA and version 1 of N.  

Two. Influenza viruses are specific for certain species.  Human influenza viruses exist; avian influenza viruses exist; even swine flus exist.  In each of these viruses, the HA protein is specialized for binding to the cells in that particular animal.  The number 5 in H5 is telling you the version of HA in the influenza, and species specific nature of the virus tells you what cells that particular H5 is specialized to bind.  

Three. The specialization of each HA is not static.  Viruses quickly infect cells, replicate inside, and move on to infecting other cells and replicating again.  This is a lot of DNA replication and virus generation in a short time.  Mutations happen.  Influenza viruses gain mutations (aka evolve) quickly.  Sometimes these mutations allow for a previous version of H5 that could only bind to birds now suddenly being able to bind humans.  When these types of sudden shifts happen, pandemics can result.  The Spanish Influenza was an example of this sudden host change from birds to humans and resulted in a pandemic that swept through World War I America.

                Currently, a form of influenza called H5N1 is circulating in Indonesia, Vietnam, and Egypt among other places.  This virus is able to infect birds and has resulted in the culling of millions of birds.  578 humans have been infected by H5N1 resulting in 340 deaths.  Interestingly, there is little evidence for human to human transmission of the virus.  The virus only infected a human from direct human-bird contact.  The virus gained the ability to infect a human but not to be easily transmitted between humans.  This keeps the H5N1 virus somewhat contained and low risk to the public.  However… what if, just like the Spanish Influenza of the early 20th century, H5N1 suddenly gained the ability to infect humans and transmit easily between them?  Well, we could possibly have a pandemic on our hands that could result in the deaths of thousands or millions of people throughout the world.  

The labs of Kawaoka and Fouchier wanted to know what changes could occur in the H5 protein that would allow it to reliably infect humans and allow for easy human to human transmission.  The Kawaoka paper highlights two areas of the protein and how they could be mutated to potentially switch H5N1’s ability to easily infect humans.  The Fouchier paper is still unpublished, but I know its focus is similar.  The concern about these papers arose from two things: 1. These labs made viruses that could infect humans.  Did these labs have regulations in place to safeguard escape of the virus from the laboratories?  2. These papers outline, in detail, how to switch the strictly avain H5N1 virus into a potential deadly human weapon.  Should that information be made public?  In the end, it was decided so.  

Kawaoka published an impassioned editorial explaining the reasoning for his research and the importance it holds to staving off future pandemics.  The WHO asked for higher safety standards, with which both labs complied and those standards will be published by the WHO in the coming weeks.  The journals wanted the option for peer-reviewed quality work (something that would not happen if these papers were only released to certain people or without methods).  In a Nature editorial, the reason for publication was outlined as thus:


Having now considered these matters in depth, the editors of this journal have decided that we will not consider either alternative for papers in Nature in the forseeable future.  A paper that omits key results or methods disables subsequent research and peer review.  Furthermore, after much internal and external deliberation, we cannot imagine any mechanism or criterion by which to sensibly judge who should or should not be allowed to see the work.  Nor do we believe that any restricted information distributed to university laboratories would stay confidential long.


If you are curious to the contents of the Kawaoka paper, see my most recent post on Dr. Amedeo.  When the Fouchier paper becomes available, I will post a similar summary there, as well.




REFERENCES:
Kawaoka Editorial: Kawaoka et al. "Flu transmission work is urgent." Nature 

Nature Editorial: "Publishing Risky Research." Nature (2012) 485, pg 5

Kawaoka Paper: Imai et al. "Experimental adaptation of an influenza H5 HA confers respiratory droplet transmission to a reassortant H5 HA/H1N1 virus in ferrets." Nature (2012), published online ahead of print


No comments:

Post a Comment