Background
Seasonal influenza epidemics cause approximately 3 to 5 million cases of severe influenza and about 290,000 to 650,000 respiratory deaths each year globally [
1,
2]. Epidemiological data are needed to develop policies and specific measures to control influenza spread. Although extensive epidemiological data exist for temperate regions of Europe and North America, much less is available for the Asia-Pacific region [
3], which contains about 60% of the world’s population [
4]. The Asia-Pacific region is believed to have a similar burden of influenza to countries with temperate climates, but is considered to be an important source of new viruses and global influenza epidemics due to its large and highly interacting human and animal populations [
5]. As in the rest of the world, most influenza illness in the Asia-Pacific region is caused by influenza A viruses. However, influenza A and B co-circulate with varying patterns, and in some seasons influenza B is the dominant strain [
3,
5,
6].
In countries with temperate climates, influenza virus circulation generally peaks during the winter months, between late December and February in the Northern Hemisphere and between April and September in the Southern Hemisphere [
7]. However, in countries with tropical or subtropical climates, influenza seasonality is more variable with influenza activity observed throughout the year, especially during the rainy seasons [
8]. Within the tropical and subtropical zones of the Asia-Pacific region, influenza viruses circulate throughout the year in one of two latitude-dependent circulation patterns. In the first pattern, which occurs in tropical or partially tropical countries (e.g., Bangladesh, Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam), influenza virus circulation peaks during the summer monsoon season (usually between July and October); in the second pattern, which tends to occur in countries on or close to the equator (e.g., Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore), influenza viruses circulate at a stable level throughout the year with no obvious discrete peak [
3].
Because several countries in the Asia-Pacific region have more than one type of climate, regions within a country can show different influenza virus activity, making it difficult to optimize the timing of national vaccination programs [
3]. Information on the epidemiology and burden of influenza is therefore needed to guide influenza vaccination policies in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly for the few countries without guidelines or recommendations in place [
3,
9,
10]. Some studies have identified a need for improved levels of surveillance [
3,
6,
11]; however, little is known about the circulation of influenza A and B viruses, the spatial timing of epidemics, and how well influenza vaccination timing anticipates virus circulation. Here, we compared the patterns of influenza circulation in countries in the Asia-Pacific region to assess the timing of seasonal epidemics and the relationship with vaccination timing as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO).
Discussion
Influenza control depends upon epidemiological data of influenza virus circulation to ensure that vaccination is timed ahead of peak transmission. For most countries, the WHO-recommended timing of vaccination was appropriate for (i.e., within 4 months before) the timing of the influenza peak activity. In contrast, the vaccination timing recommendations in Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand were more than 4 months before the primary peak of influenza activity in these countries, when vaccine-induced immunity is starting to decline [
19,
20]. For the remaining four countries (India, Sri Lanka, Singapore, and Vietnam), the appropriateness of vaccination timing could not be determined because of mixed seasonality patterns consisting of two large peaks of influenza separated by several months.
Our results add important information on the timing of influenza epidemics in the Asia-Pacific region, and how well national vaccination programs are timed to precede peak influenza transmission. The seasonality and peaks in circulation we found are generally consistent with those reported for other regions of Southern Asia and South-East Asia [
11,
26] and of Iran and Pakistan [
17]. However, our analysis builds on these findings by describing influenza epidemics in East Asian countries, including China, Japan, Mongolia, and South Korea, which were not described in these earlier reports. In some cases, our results differed; for example, in India, we found a primary peak in March and a secondary peak in August, whereas Saha et al. reported a single peak in July or August [
11] and Hirve et al. reported a primary peak between April and June [
26]. Differences between the data in this study and other reports may derive from which surveillance data were used and which years were included. We and Saha et al. [
11] used FluNet data exclusively, whereas Hirve et al. used national surveillance data in addition to FluNet data [
26]. Moreover, our analysis included data from 2010 to 2017, whereas Saha et al. included 2006 to 2011 and Hirve et al. included 2010 to 2015. These methodological differences, and variability in circulating strains within different influenza seasons, limit comparisons between reports by country.
We also showed that influenza virus circulation patterns varied considerably across the Asia-Pacific region between 2010 and 2017. Overall, influenza B represented 31.4% of cases, which was a higher proportion than reported elsewhere. For example, the overall global median proportion of influenza B was 22.6% for 2000 to 2013 [
27], and by region, median proportions were reported to be 21% in Latin America for 2004 to 2012 [
28], 17% for Europe for 2000 to 2015 [
29], and 23.5% for the Middle East and North Africa for 2000 to 2016 [
17]. As reported previously [
6,
27], the Victoria and Yamagata lineages of influenza B co-circulated in various proportions between Asia-Pacific sub-regions and between countries in the same sub-region. A higher proportion of influenza B cases were uncharacterized than for influenza A (48.8% vs. 4.6%). This suggests that more resources are needed for B lineage characterization, particularly since influenza B cases represented around one-third of the seasonal influenza burden in most countries. Increasing B-lineage characterization could help inform which B strains to use for trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines in the Asia-Pacific region (and elsewhere considering this region is an important source of new influenza viruses and global epidemics [
5]), and would also improve evaluation of vaccine effectiveness by strain subtype in each season.
The WHO recommends that seasonal influenza vaccine should be given prior to the start of the primary period of increased influenza activity [
18]. Our study defined appropriate vaccination timing as being a maximum of 4 months before the peak in influenza cases, since several studies have reported that seasonal influenza vaccine protection becomes suboptimal beyond this time [
21‐
23,
30]. However, limited and conflicting data do not allow firm conclusions about the persistence of seroprotection over a defined period. Also, the evolution of influenza virus strains within the same season makes it difficult to distinguish waning vaccine-induced immunity from decreasing match between the vaccine and circulating strains.
Our results suggest – in contrast to recommendations by Hirve et al. [
26] – that countries should not be grouped and, instead, national or even regional data within each country should be used to inform when to vaccinate and which vaccines to use. For example, in countries with two peaks of influenza activity or where seasonality is complex or uncertain, offering influenza vaccination within 4 months before both influenza peaks might be most effective. This is consistent with recommendations by Newman et al. [
31], who described country-level epidemiology to guide local influenza vaccination programs for the Asia-Pacific region. However, these changes to national influenza vaccination timing could be challenging for some countries in terms of funding, vaccine coverage, and supply – particularly where twice-yearly vaccination is warranted.
This study benefited from the large number of confirmed influenza cases included and the near-complete representation of the Asia-Pacific region’s population. FluNet contains data from surveillance systems in geographically disparate sentinel sites. However, the setting (i.e., community vs. hospital sentinel sites), severity, level of data completeness, and detailed methods for FluNet data collection are not described, and thus limit interpretation of results and comparison between countries. For example, China had the highest proportion of influenza cases (66.5%) consistent with it being the most populous country in the Asia-Pacific region, whereas India, the second-most populous country, had only 3% of all cases.
For countries with a large latitudinal spread, the data may also lack the geographical precision needed to detect sub-national variation in influenza seasonality [
32]. Therefore, for countries with mixed influenza seasonality (e.g., India and China), the results should be interpreted with caution. For several countries (i.e., India, Sri Lanka, Singapore, and Vietnam), further in-depth evaluation of spatial timing will be needed to make specific recommendations for the timing of vaccination. This could be addressed through improvements in local surveillance data and their accessibility.