Timothy M. Uyeki

Bio: Timothy M. Uyeki is an academic researcher from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The author has contributed to research in topics: Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 & Influenza A virus. The author has an hindex of 86, co-authored 309 publications receiving 42818 citations. Previous affiliations of Timothy M. Uyeki include National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases & University of California, San Francisco.

Assessing Change in Avian Influenza A(H7N9) Virus Infections During the Fourth Epidemic - China, September 2015-August 2016.

Abstract: Since human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus were first reported by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) in March 2013 (1), mainland China has experienced four influenza A(H7N9) virus epidemics. Prior investigations demonstrated that age and sex distribution, clinical features, and exposure history of A(H7N9) virus human infections reported during the first three epidemics were similar (2). In this report, epidemiology and virology data from the most recent, fourth epidemic (September 2015-August 2016) were compared with those from the three earlier epidemics. Whereas age and sex distribution and exposure history in the fourth epidemic were similar to those in the first three epidemics, the fourth epidemic demonstrated a greater proportion of infected persons living in rural areas, a continued spread of the virus to new areas, and a longer epidemic period. The genetic markers of mammalian adaptation and antiviral resistance remained similar across each epidemic, and viruses from the fourth epidemic remained antigenically well matched to current candidate vaccine viruses. Although there is no evidence of increased human-to-human transmissibility of A(H7N9) viruses, the continued geographic spread, identification of novel reassortant viruses, and pandemic potential of the virus underscore the importance of rigorous A(H7N9) virus surveillance and continued risk assessment in China and neighboring countries.

What is the optimal therapy for patients with H5N1 influenza

Abstract: Background to the debate In a 2007 article in PLoS Medicine [10], Holger J. Schunemann and colleagues described a new process used by the World Health Organization for rapidly developing clinical management guidelines in emergency situations. These situations include outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases. The authors discussed how they developed such a “rapid advice” guideline for the pharmacological management of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus infection. The guideline recommends giving the antiviral drug oseltamivir at a dose of 75 mg twice daily for five days. In this Debate, Nicholas White argues that such dosing is inadequate, Robert Webster and Elena Govorkova say that combination antiviral therapy should be used, and Tim Uyeki reminds us that clinical care of patients with H5N1 entails much more than antiviral treatment. These issues may also apply to therapy of patients hospitalized with severe disease due to novel swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus infection.

Surveillance of Influenza in Indonesia, 2003–2007

Abstract: Background Longitudinal data are limited about the circulating strains of influenza viruses and their public health impact in Indonesia. We conducted influenza surveillance among outpatients and hospitalized patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) across the Indonesian archipelago from 2003 through 2007. Methodology Demographic, clinical data, and respiratory specimens were collected for 4236 ILI patients tested for influenza virus infection by RT-PCR and viral culture. Principal Findings Influenza A and B viruses co-circulated year-round with seasonal peaks in influenza A virus activity during the rainy season (December–January). During 2003–2007, influenza viruses were identified in 20·1% (4236/21 030) of ILI patients, including 20·1% (4015/20 012) of outpatients, and 21·7% (221/1018) of inpatients. One H5N1 case was identified retrospectively in an outpatient with ILI. Antigenic drift in circulating influenza A and B virus strains was detected during the surveillance period in Indonesia. In a few instances, antigenically drifted viruses similar to the World Health Organization (WHO) vaccine strains were detected earlier than the date of their designation by WHO. Conclusions Influenza A and B virus infections are an important cause of influenza-like illness among outpatients and hospitalized patients in Indonesia. While year-round circulation of influenza viruses occurs, prevention and control strategies should be focused upon the seasonal peak during rainy season months. Ongoing virologic surveillance and influenza disease burden studies in Indonesia are important priorities to better understand the public health impact of influenza in South-East Asia and the implications of influenza viral evolution and global spread.

Cross-sectional survey and surveillance for influenza viruses and MERS-CoV among Egyptian pilgrims returning from Hajj during 2012-2015.

Abstract: Among a sample of Egyptians returning from Hajj pilgrimage during 2012-2015, over 30% met the case definition for influenza-like illness, 14.4% tested positive for influenza viruses, and none tested positive for MERS-CoV. Despite Egyptian Ministry of Health and Population requirement of influenza vaccination of pilgrims, only 19.7% of pilgrims reported influenza vaccination. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Clinical Characteristics of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in China.

Abstract: Background Since December 2019, when coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) emerged in Wuhan city and rapidly spread throughout China, data have been needed on the clinical characteristics of...

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Abstract: XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.