Travel medicine has virtually stopped in light of the coronavirus pandemic. It is worth contemplating how travel medicine will be affected by the ongoing pandemic when international travel starts to become more possible. How will we advise patients and use the coming vaccines that may be available? Travel medicine practices are well-suited to play a major role in advising travellers in the pandemic era.

Background Since 1946 the controlled human infection model (CHIM) for Shigella has been used to improve understanding of disease pathogenesis, describe clinical and immunologic responses to infection and as a tool for vaccine development. As the frequency and intent for use in vaccine comparisons increases, standardization of the primary endpoint definition is necessary. Methods Subject-level data were obtained from previously conducted experimental Shigella CHIM studies. Signs and symptoms severity were categorized consistently across all studies. Sign and symptom correlations were estimated and univariate models were utilized to describe the association between stool output and other Shigella-attributable signs and symptoms. Multiple correspondence and hierarchical clustering analyses were performed to describe the co-occurrence of signs and symptoms. A disease score is proposed based on the co-occurrence of these events. Results Data were obtained on 54 subjects receiving 800 to 2000 colony forming units (cfu) of S. flexneri. The median maximum 24 hour stool output was 514 ml (IQR: 300, 998 ml) with a median frequency of 6 (IQR: 4, 9). Subjects reported abdominal pain or cramps (81.5%), headache (66.7%) and anorexia (64.8%), 50.0% had a fever and 27.8% had gross blood in multiple loose stools. Multiple correspondence analyses highlighted co-occurrence of symptoms based on severity. A 3-parameter disease severity score predicted shigellosis endpoints and better differentiated disease spectrum. Conclusion Dichotomous endpoints for Shigella CHIM fail to fully account for disease variability. An ordinal disease score characterizing the breadth of disease severity may enable a better characterization of shigellosis and can decrease sample size requirements. Furthermore, the disease severity score may be a useful tool for portfolio management by enabling prioritization across vaccine candidates with comparable efficacy estimates using dichotomous endpoints.

Background. Travellers' diarrhea (TD) remains one of the most common illnesses encountered by travellers to less developed areas of the world. Because bacterial pathogens such as enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), enteroaggregative E. coli, Campylobacter spp. and Shigella spp. are the most frequent causes, antibiotics have been useful in both prevention and treatment of TD. Methods. Results of trials that assessed the use of medications for the prevention and treatment of TD were identified through PubMed and MEDLINE searches using search terms 'travellers' diarrhea', 'prevention' and 'treatment'. References of articles were also screened for additional relevant studies. Results. Prevention of TD with antibiotics has been recommended only under special circumstances. Doxycycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, fluoroquinolones and rifaximin have been used for prevention, but at present the first three antibiotics may have limited use secondary to increasing resistance, leaving rifaximin as the only current option. Bismuth subsalicylate (BSS) (Pepto-Bismol tablets) is also an option for prophylaxis. Treatment with antibiotics has been recommended for moderate to severe TD. Azithromycin is the drug of choice, especially in Asia where Campylobacter is common. Fluoroquinolone antibiotics continue to be effectively used in Latin America and Africa where ETEC is predominant. BSS and loperamide (LOP) also are effective as standalone treatments. LOP may be used alone for treatment of mild TD or in conjunction with antibiotics for treatment of TD. Conclusions. Historically, antibiotic prophylaxis has not been routinely recommended and has been reserved for special circumstances such as when a traveller with an underlying illness cannot tolerate TD. Antibiotics with or without LOP have been useful in shortening the duration and severity of TD. Emerging antibiotic resistance, limited new antibiotic alternatives and faecal carriage of antibiotic-resistant bacteria by travellers may prompt a re-evaluation of classic recommendations for treatment and prevention of TD with antibiotics.

BACKGROUND:: Travelers' diarrhea causes significant morbidity including some sequelae, lost travel time and opportunity cost to both travelers and countries receiving travelers. Effective prevention and treatment are needed to reduce these negative impacts.METHODS:: This critical appraisal of the literature and expert consensus guideline development effort asked several key questions related to antibiotic and non-antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment, utility of available diagnostics, impact of multi-drug resistant (MDR) colonization associated with travel and travelers' diarrhea, and how our understanding of the gastrointestinal microbiome should influence current practice and future research. Studies related to these key clinical areas were assessed for relevance and quality. Based on this critical appraisal, guidelines were developed and voted on using current standards for clinical guideline development methodology.RESULTS:: New definitions for severity of travelers' diarrhea were developed. A total of 20 graded recommendations on the topics of prophylaxis, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up were developed. In addition, three non-graded consensus-based statements were adopted.CONCLUSIONS:: Prevention and treatment of travelers' diarrhea requires action at the provider, traveler and research community levels. Strong evidence supports the effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy in most cases of moderate to severe travelers' diarrhea, while either increasing intake of fluids only or loperamide or bismuth subsalicylate may suffice for most cases of mild diarrhea. Further studies are needed to address knowledge gaps regarding optimal therapies, the individual, community and global health risks of MDR acquisition, manipulation of the microbiome in prevention and treatment and the utility of laboratory testing in returning travelers with persistent diarrhea.

BACKGROUND:Under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO) Global Action Plan, PATH supported evaluation of a trivalent, seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine candidate produced by the Institute of Vaccines and Medical Biologicals (IVAC), a Vietnamese manufacturer.METHODS:In 2015, 60 healthy adult subjects 18-45years of age were enrolled in a Phase 1, single center, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study conducted at a district health center in Thai Binh Province, Vietnam. The study evaluated the overall safety and immunogenicity of a seasonal, trivalent inactivated split virion influenza vaccine. Volunteers were given either vaccine or placebo in a randomized 1:1 ratio. After undergoing screening, eligible volunteers provided their signed consent and were enrolled in the study. On the first day of immunization, randomly chosen volunteers received IVACFLU-S 15μg (mcg) hemagglutinin of each of the three strains in 0.5mL or placebo by intramuscular injection. All volunteers were monitored for adverse events and underwent blood testing at screening and Day 8 to assess the vaccine candidate's safety. Sera obtained before and 21days after immunization were tested for influenza antibody titers using the hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) and microneutralization tests (MNT).RESULTS:Vaccine was well tolerated, and there were no serious adverse events reported. HAI and MNT identified serum antibody responses against the three influenza strains in nearly all volunteers who received the vaccine. Overall, serum HAI responses of fourfold or greater were observed in 93 percent, 83 percent, and 77 percent of H1, H3, and B strains, respectively. Seroprotection rates were also very high.CONCLUSIONS:IVAC's seasonal, trivalent influenza vaccine was safe and well tolerated and induced high levels of seroconversion and seroprotection rates. These clinical data are a first step towards demonstrating the feasibility of producing the vaccine locally and that seasonal vaccine production in Vietnam may be an effective strategy for enhancing the global influenza vaccine supply. ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02598089, October 15, 2015.

BACKGROUND:Solithromycin, a novel macrolide antibiotic with both intravenous and oral formulations dosed once daily, has completed 2 global phase 3 trials for treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.METHODS:A total of 863 adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team [PORT] class II-IV) were randomized 1:1 to receive either intravenous-to-oral solithromycin or moxifloxacin for 7 once-daily doses. All patients received 400 mg intravenously on day 1 and were permitted to switch to oral dosing when clinically indicated. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority (10% margin) of solithromycin to moxifloxacin in achievement of early clinical response (ECR) assessed 3 days after first dose in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary endpoints included demonstrating noninferiority in ECR in the microbiological ITT population (micro-ITT) and determination of investigator-assessed success rates at the short-term follow-up (SFU) visit 5-10 days posttherapy.RESULTS:In the ITT population, 79.3% of solithromycin patients and 79.7% of moxifloxacin patients achieved ECR (treatment difference, -0.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.1 to 5.2). In the micro-ITT population, 80.3% of solithromycin patients and 79.1% of moxifloxacin patients achieved ECR (treatment difference, 1.26; 95% CI, -8.1 to 10.6). In the ITT population, 84.6% of solithromycin patients and 88.6% of moxifloxacin patients achieved clinical success at SFU based on investigator assessment. Mostly mild/moderate infusion events led to higher incidence of adverse events overall in the solithromycin group. Other adverse events were comparable between treatment groups.CONCLUSIONS:Intravenous-to-oral solithromycin was noninferior to intravenous-to-oral moxifloxacin. Solithromycin has potential to provide an intravenous and oral option for monotherapy for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:NCT01968733.

An outbreak of acute gastroenteritis involving 249 persons, 32% of whom were hospitalized, occurred on a U.S. Army installation in 1990. Campylobacter jejuni was isolated from 81 of 163 (50%) persons cultured. Seventeen isolates of C. jejuni available for serotyping were Lior serotype 5. The outbreak remained restricted to one recruit barracks area and adjacent Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps cadet barracks. Infection of sequential cohorts of recruits over an interval of 3 weeks suggested a continuing or intermittent common source. Contaminated food was not implicated because affected persons ate at separate dining facilities and other facilities with the same food sources had no associated illnesses. There was a strong association between the amount of water consumed by recruits and risk of diarrhea (chi-square test for trend, p<0.001). Samples of drinking water collected in the affected area had no residual chlorine and when cultured yielded greater than 200 colonies of coliform bacteria per 100 mL of water sampled. Although Campylobacter was not isolated from water, living and dead birds were found in an elevated water storage tank providing drinking water to the affected area. This and other similar outbreaks indicate that contamination of water storage tanks can lead to large outbreaks of Campylobacter enteritis.

Acute diarrhea is the most common medical complaint of international travelers to high-risk tropical and semitropical regions of the world. Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) is the most common cause with strains of Campylobacter jejuni and other invasive bacterial enteropathogens also important causes especially in South Asia. Treatment can shorten the disease. Loperamide and other drugs acting symptomatically can decrease the number of watery stools passed and antimicrobial agents can shorten the overall illness. Because of the significance of acquiring fecal carriage of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae with antibiotics, most travel authorities only recommend treatment with these drugs when illness is moderate to severe. Mild illness, which allows people to function relatively normally, is best left untreated or treated symptomatically. A major health consequence of travelers' diarrhea (TD) is development of postinfectious functional bowel disease, which may occur in as many as 5% of those reporting TD.

Accurately assessing mucosal immune responses to candidate vaccines remains a technical challenge. ELISPOT is widely used as a surrogate of mucosal immune response by directly enumerating circulating antibody secreting cells (ASCs), while antibody in lymphocyte supernatant (ALS) titers the total amount of antibody secreted by ASC ex vivo using ELISA. ALS is more practical than ELISPOT because the ASC supernatant is frozen for ELISA that can be conducted at any time, with any antigen, and in any laboratory. We compared IgA and IgG responses to serotype-specific Shigella LPS using ELISPOT and ALS in subjects following vaccination or infection with Shigella. ALS results correlated well with ELISPOT results, and the ALS method was both sensitive and specific for the detection of antibody responses against Shigella LPS. Based on these observations, the ALS assay is a practical and flexible alternative to ELISPOT for measuring mucosal IgA responses to Shigella LPS antigen.

ABSTRACT Noroviruses (NoVs) are increasingly being recognized as an important enteric pathogen of gastroenteritis worldwide. The prevalence of NoVs as a cause of diarrhea acquired by travelers in developing countries is not well known. We examined the prevalence and importance of NoV infection in three international traveler cohorts with diarrhea acquired in three developing regions of the world, Mexico, Guatemala, and India. We also characterized the demographics and symptoms associated with NoV diarrhea in these travelers. Stool samples from 571 international travelers with diarrhea were evaluated for traditional enteropathogens. NoVs were identified using reverse transcription-PCR and probe hybridization. NoVs were identified in 10.2% of cases of travelers' diarrhea and, overall, was the second most common pathogen, following diarrheagenic Escherichia coli. The detection of NoV diarrhea significantly varied over the three study time periods in Guadalajara, Mexico, ranging from 3 of 98 (3.0%) diarrheal stools to 12 of 100 (12.0%) fecal specimens ( P = 0.03). The frequency of NoV diarrhea was also dependent upon the geographic region, with 17 of 100 (17.0%) travelers to Guatemala, 23 of 194 (11.9%) travelers to India, and 3 of 79 (3.8%) travelers to Mexico testing positive for NoVs from 2002 to 2003 ( P = 0.02). NoVs are important pathogens of travelers' diarrhea in multiple regions of the world. Significant variation in the prevalence of NoV diarrhea and in the predominant genogroup infecting travelers was demonstrated, dependent upon the specific geographic location and over time.

BACKGROUND:Enteropathogens cannot be identified in 40% to 50% of subjects with travelers' diarrhea (TD).METHODS:We used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods to look for the presence of two bacterial causes of diarrhea in a large group of international travelers after failing to detect a pathogen by conventional tests. DNA was isolated from the diarrheal stool and subjected to PCR from 162 subjects from whom we earlier failed to identify a pathogen in a previous study and included 54 from Antigua, Guatemala, 39 from Guadalajara, Mexico, 29 from Kolkata, India, and 40 from Goa, India. Gene products for enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC)--LT (heat-labile enterotoxin) and ST (heat-stable enterotoxin)--and diffusely adherent E. coli (DAEC), afa/dr (Afa fimbrial and Dr nonfimbrial family of adhesins), were used.RESULTS:At least one gene product was identified in diarrhea stool samples of 47 of 162 (29%) subjects. ETEC virulence genes (LT, ST) were found in 34 (21%) samples studied, with rates of occurrence ranging from 8% in Goa to 39% for the samples from Guatemala (p = 0.0006). A large number of ST-only strains explained the high ETEC rate in Guatemala. DAEC afa/dr family of adhesions was identified in between 8 and 14% of the samples.CONCLUSIONS:ETEC and DAEC were implicated in nearly one-third of the subjects initially diagnosed as pathogen negative. Direct PCR results from stools are consistent with the previous assumption that most undiagnosed TD is bacterial in nature and also highlights the potential value that PCR can add to studies designed to evaluate treatment and preventive interventions for TD, including vaccines.

Background & Aims: Antimotility agents provide rapid temporary relief of acute diarrhea, whereas antibiotics slowly cure the illness. Thus, the combination of an antimotility agent and an antibiotic may provide greater therapeutic benefit than either drug alone. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rifaximin-loperamide in the treatment of travelers' diarrhea. Methods: Consenting adults with acute diarrhea ( >= 3 unformed stools in 24 hours with >= 1 symptom of enteric infection) were randomized to receive rifaximin 200 mg 3 times daily for 3 days; loperamide 4 mg initially followed by 2 mg after each unformed stool; or a combination of both drugs using the same dosing regimen. The primary end point was the median time from beginning therapy until passing the last unformed stool. Results: A total of 310 patients completed treatment with rifaximin (n = 102), loperamide (n = 104), or rifaximin-loperamide combination therapy (n = 104). The groups showed demographic similarity. Rifaximin and rifaximin-loperamide significantly reduced the median time until passage of the last unformed stool (32.5 +/- 4.14 h and 27.3 +/- 4.13 h, respectively) vs loperamide (69 +/- 4.11 h; P =.0019). The mean number of unformed stools passed during illness was lower with rifaximin-loperamide (3.99 +/- 4.28) compared with rifaximin (6.23 +/- 6.90; P =.004) or loperamide alone (6.72 +/- 6.93; P =.002). All treatments were well tolerated with a low incidence of adverse events. Conclusions: Rifaximin-loperamide therapy provided rapid symptomatic improvement and greater overall wellness compared with either agent alone.

BACKGROUND:Antibacterial drugs appear to be effective in shortening the illness of a majority of cases of travelers' diarrhea.METHODS:This was a subanalysis from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in adult travelers with acute diarrhea treated with rifaximin 200 mg three times a day or placebo for 3 days. Efficacy was assessed by the interval beginning with the first dose of medication and ending with the last unformed stool passed after becoming well [time to last unformed stool (TLUS)]; number of unformed stools passed; percent with clinical improvement; and incidence of wellness achieved.RESULTS:Stool pathogens were not identified in pretreatment samples in 122 of 322 (38%) patients and 106 of 230 (46%) randomized to rifaximin and placebo, respectively. Among pathogen-negative patients, rifaximin was more effective than placebo for median TLUS (33 vs 68 h, p < 0.005), mean number of unformed stools passed (6.5 vs 8.6, p < 0.0001), and clinical wellness (77% vs 61%, p = 0.01). The adverse-event profiles between rifaximin and placebo were similar.CONCLUSIONS:More than one third of patients with travelers' diarrhea had pathogen-negative illness. Rifaximin was effective in treating the illness without associated side effects. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that undetected bacterial pathogens are the most likely cause of travelers' diarrhea without definable cause.

Rifaximin was compared with placebo and ciprofloxacin for treatment of travelers' diarrhea in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Adult travelers (N = 399) consulting travel clinics in Mexico, Guatemala, and India were randomized to receive rifaximin 200 mg three times a day, ciprofloxacin (500 mg two times a day and placebo once a day), or placebo three times a day for 3 days. Patients recorded in daily diaries the time and consistency of each stool and documented symptoms for 5 days after treatment. Stool samples were collected for microbiologic evaluations before and after treatment. The median time to last unformed stool (TLUS) in the rifaximin group (32.0 hours) was less than one half that in the placebo group (65.5 hours; P = 0.001; risk ratio 1.6; 95% confidence interval 1.2, 2.2; primary efficacy endpoint). The median TLUS in the ciprofloxacin group was 28.8 hours (P = 0.0003 versus placebo; P = 0.35 versus rifaximin). Rifaximin was less effective than ciprofloxacin for invasive intestinal bacterial pathogens. Oral rifaximin is a safe and effective treatment of travelers' diarrhea caused by noninvasive pathogens.

Purpose: Examine preventive use of orally administered and poorly absorbed (<0.4%) rifaximin (R), an antibiotic marketed in the U.S. for treatment of uncomplicated travelers' diarrhea, (TD). Methods: Rifaximin was given in a dose of 600 mg in a single dose or matching placebo (P) for 14 days to 210 U.S. students within 72 hours of arrival in Mexico the summer of 2005. Results: Seven subjects randomized to R and two to P experienced TD within 24 hours of the first dose and were excluded from analyses. Three R subjects and 1 in the P group failed to return to the clinic and were counted as failures. 20/99 (20.2%) R-treated and 49/102 (48.0%) in P group (p < 0.001) developed TD, defined as ≥ 3 unformed stool per day plus an enteric symptom during the 14 days (protection rate 57.9%). Treated diarrhea or diarrhea requiring antimicrobial therapy occurred in 14 (14.1%) and 33 (32.4%) in the two respective groups (protection rate 56.3%). Diarrhea stool samples were positive for a pathogen in 4 R-treated and 17 P-treated subjects (p= 0.005). Pathogens identified in the R vs. P groups were: enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) 4 vs 15, and enteroaggregative E coli (EAEC) 2 vs 5. Median rifaximin minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of ETEC was 32 mg/ml in both treatment groups. Corresponding medians for EAEC were 48 and 32, respectively. Rifaximin was well tolerated with adverse events occurring in a similar percentage of both groups. Conclusions: This is the second study showing significant effectiveness of daily rifaximin in preventing TD in U.S. residents in Mexico. A third rifaximin prevention trial is underway with European travelers to Thailand. The use of rifaximin 600 mg QD is a promising agent to prevent TD in persons planning trips to high-risk regions who: are on a tight schedule; have become ill in past trips or have underlying comorbidity indicating possible increased susceptibility; or request preventive medication.

BACKGROUNDThis double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted to assess the efficacy of the nonabsorbed oral antibiotic rifaximin to prevent shigellosis in volunteers challenged with Shigella flexneri.METHODSVolunteers were randomized to receive either prophylactic rifaximin (200 mg 3 times daily for 3 days; n = 15) or placebo (n = 10) on days 0, 1, and 2. On day 1, volunteers were challenged with approximately 1500 colony-forming units of S. flexneri 2a strain 2457T given orally in sodium bicarbonate buffer.RESULTSThe incidence of diarrhea was 0 with rifaximin, compared with 60% with placebo (P = .001). The median time to onset of diarrhea was 78.5 h with placebo (P < .001). The incidence of dysentery was 0 for rifaximin and 10% for placebo (P = .4). The incidence of colonization with Shigella was 0 with rifaximin, compared with 50% with placebo (P < .005). A significant serum or mucosal immune response after challenge by at least 1 indicator (immunoglobulin A titer, immunoglobulin G titer, and immunoglobulin A antibody-secreting cell count) was 0 with rifaximin and 80% with placebo (P < .001).CONCLUSIONSRifaximin was effective and well tolerated, compared with placebo, in preventing shigellosis in this double-blind study of volunteers challenged with S. flexneri 2a.