U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

30–456 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

EXAMINING U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS 

FOR AND RESPONSE EFFORTS TO SEASONAL 

INFLUENZA 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND 

INVESTIGATIONS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MARCH 8, 2018 

Serial No. 115–107 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

energycommerce.house.gov 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

Vice Chairman 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana 

ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio 

CATHY MCMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

LEONARD LANCE, New Jersey 

BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky 

PETE OLSON, Texas 

DAVID B. MCKINLEY, West Virginia 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

BILLY LONG, Missouri 

LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma 

RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey 

Ranking Member 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina 

DORIS O. MATSUI, California 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, New Mexico 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

DAVID LOEBSACK, Iowa 

KURT SCHRADER, Oregon 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, III, Massachusetts 

TONY CA ́ RDENAS, California 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

GREGG HARPER, Mississippi 

Chairman 

H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia 

Vice Chairman 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas 

SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana 

CHRIS COLLINS, New York 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

MIMI WALTERS, California 

RYAN A. COSTELLO, Pennsylvania 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon (ex officio) 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

Ranking Member 

JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois 

KATHY CASTOR, Florida 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

SCOTT H. PETERS, California 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey (ex 

officio) 

(II) 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Gregg Harper, a Representative in Congress from the State of Mississippi, opening statement ................................................................................. 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Hon. Diana DeGette, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado, opening statement ...................................................................................... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5 

Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, 

opening statement ................................................................................................ 6 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 

Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Jersey, prepared statement ........................................................................ 85 

WITNESSES

Anne Schuchat, M.D., Acting Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services ....................................... 10 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 101 

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 

Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human 

Services ................................................................................................................. 18 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 20 

Slide presentation ............................................................................................. 31 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 106 

Rick Bright, Ph.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, and Director, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, 

Department of Health and Human Services ...................................................... 43 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 45 

Answers to submitted questions 1 ................................................................... 110 

Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Commissioner of Food and Drugs, Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services ............................... 56 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58 

Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 112 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL

Subcommittee memorandum .................................................................................. 86 

1Dr. Bright did not answer submitted questions for the record by the time 

of printing. 

(1) 

EXAMINING U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS FOR AND RESPONSE EFFORTS TO 

SEASONAL INFLUENZA 

THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:56 a.m., in room 

2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Gregg Harper (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Harper, Griffith, Burgess, 

Brooks, Collins, Walberg, Walters, Carter, Walden (ex officio), 

DeGette, Schakowsky, Castor, Tonko, and Ruiz. 

Also present: Representative Green. 

Staff present: Jennifer Barblan, Chief Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Adam Buckalew, Professional Staff Member, Health; 

Karen Christian, General Counsel; Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, 

Oversight and Investigations, Digital Commerce and Consumer 

Protection; Ed Kim, Policy Coordinator, Health; Jennifer Sherman, 

Press Secretary; Alan Slobodin, Chief Investigative Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Austin Stonebraker, Press Assistant; Natalie Turner, Counsel, Oversight and Investigations; Hamlin Wade, 

Special Advisor for External Affairs; Christina Calce, Minority 

Counsel; Christopher Knauer, Minority Oversight Staff Director; 

and Miles Lichtman, Minority Policy Analyst. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREGG HARPER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 

Mr. HARPER. Good morning. 

This year, like so many previous years, we have had a bad flu 

season. After months of record-breaking, widespread flu activity, 

the CDC has reported that the flu season has finally peaked. We 

are probably still going to see flu activity until the middle of April, 

so if you have the flu or flu symptoms, it certainly is important to 

see your doctor and stay at home. 

Influenza is a leading cause of death in the United States, especially in a severe flu season. Every year, thousands of Americans 

die from the flu and thousands more are hospitalized from flu-related complications. Since 2010, the flu has caused between 12,000 

and 56,000 deaths per year. 

2 

This year was no exception. Tragically, as of February the 24th, 

there have already been 114 influenza-associated pediatric deaths 

this season. Some of those deaths have occurred in my home State 

of Mississippi. Although we have enhanced our preparedness for 

the flu in recent years, there is still room for improvement. 

The best way to prevent the flu is by getting your flu shot. Millions of Americans receive a flu shot every year to help protect 

them against this illness. Unfortunately, there are many Americans that do not do that. Last year, only 59 percent of children and 

about 43 percent of adults received flu vaccination. 

Even though only a little over half of Americans typically get 

vaccinated, CDC estimates that flu vaccination prevented 3,000 

pneumonia and influenza deaths during the 2015–2016 flu season 

alone. Increasing the number of Americans that get the annual flu 

vaccine will prevent more deaths and illnesses. 

Not only can the flu vaccine help prevent an individual from getting the flu, but it also helps reduce severe outcomes when someone does get sick with the flu. During past seasons, about 80 percent of flu-associated deaths in children have occurred in children 

who were not vaccinated. 

Similarly, a recent study found that receiving the flu vaccine reduced severe outcomes in hospitalized patients by reducing deaths, 

reducing ICU admissions, reducing ICU length of stays, and reducing overall length of stay for hospital patients. 

While the flu vaccine is currently the best tool to prevent illness, 

there is room for improvement. The CDC recently announced that 

this year’s flu vaccine was only about 36 percent effective in preventing an individual from getting the flu. The vaccine’s effectiveness varied from different age groups and for different strains of 

the virus. For example, the vaccine was 59 percent effective in children. However, it was much less effective in adults. For all age 

groups, the vaccine was only 25 percent effective this season 

against the deadliest strain of the flu, H3N2. 

The vaccine’s reduced effectiveness against H3N2, the most virulent and predominant strain of the flu this season, is especially 

concerning. Historically, we have struggled to make an effective 

vaccine against H3N2. 

For example, during the 2014–2015 flu season, this committee 

closely examined the flu vaccine’s reduced effectiveness due to the 

mismatch between the H3N2 strain used to develop the vaccine 

and the H3N2 strain that was actually circulating. 

During the 2014–2015 season, the flu vaccine was only 9 percent 

effective because the H3N2 virus had mutated before the flu season 

began. This experience reminded us of the importance of being able 

to rapidly detect and respond to changes in the challenging and circulating flu viruses. 

According to the FDA, this year, the vaccine’s reduced effectiveness against the H3N2 virus was not caused by a mismatch. One 

factor that may explain why the flu vaccine was not that effective 

against the H3N2 strain is a mutation caused by the vaccine and 

egg adaptation through the egg-based manufacturing process. 

Currently, about 80 to 85 percent of the flu vaccines are manufactured through the egg-based manufacturing process. When an 

inactivated flu virus is grown in chicken eggs during the vaccine 

3 

manufacturing process, genetic changes can occur in the virus that 

make the vaccine less effective in humans. Some researchers think 

that egg adaptation might be especially problematic for the H3N2 

virus. 

Of course, there are many different factors that also might explain the flu vaccine’s reduced effectiveness for H3N2. This issue 

needs to be thoroughly investigated so we can improve the vaccine 

manufacturing process, if necessary, and improve the vaccine’s effectiveness in the future. 

I appreciate the hard work and dedication of the people at HHS 

to improve our flu preparedness, including those at CDC, NIH, 

ASPR, and FDA. One of our top priorities is to keep Americans 

healthy during flu season and improve the Federal public health 

response. And I look forward to today’s testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Harper follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREGG HARPER

Good morning. This year, like so many previous years, we’ve had a bad flu season. 

After months of record-breaking widespread flu activity, the CDC has reported that 

the flu season has finally peaked. We’re probably still going to see flu activity until 

the middle of April, so if you have the flu or flu symptoms, it is important to see 

your doctor and stay home. 

Influenza is a leading cause of death in the United States, especially in a severe 

flu season. Every year, thousands of Americans die from the flu and thousands more 

are hospitalized from flu-related complications. Since 2010, the flu has caused between 12,000 and 56,000 deaths per year. This year was no exception. Tragically, 

as of February 24, there had already been 114 influenza-associated pediatric deaths 

this season. Some of these deaths have occurred in my home State of Mississippi. 

Although we’ve enhanced our preparedness for the flu in recent years, there is 

still room for improvement. The best way to prevent the flu is by getting your flu 

shot. Millions of Americans receive a flu shot every year to help protect them 

against illness. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Americans who do not get vaccinated. Last year, only 59 percent of children and about 43 percent of adults received the flu vaccination. Even though only a little over half of Americans typically 

get vaccinated, CDC estimates that flu vaccination prevented 3,000 pneumonia and 

influenza deaths during the 2015–2016 flu season alone. Increasing the number of 

Americans that get the annual flu vaccine will prevent more deaths and illnesses. 

Not only can the flu vaccine help prevent an individual from getting the flu, but 

it also may help reduce severe outcomes when someone does become sick with the 

flu. During past seasons, about 80 percent of flu-associated deaths in children have 

occurred in children who were not vaccinated. Similarly, a recent study found that 

receiving the flu vaccine reduced severe outcomes in hospitalized patients by reducing deaths, reducing ICU admissions, reducing ICU length of stay, and reducing 

overall length of stay for hospital patients. 

While the flu vaccine is currently the best tool to prevent illness, there is room 

for improvement. The CDC recently announced that this year’s flu vaccine was only 

about 36 percent effective in preventing an individual from getting the flu. The vaccine’s effectiveness varied for different age groups and for different strains of the 

virus. 

For example, the vaccine was 59 percent effective in children; however, it was 

much less effective for adults. For all age groups, the vaccine was only 25 percent 

effective this season against the deadliest strain of the flu, H3N2. 

The vaccine’s reduced effectiveness against H3N2, the most virulent and predominant strain of the flu this season, is especially concerning. Historically, we have 

struggled to make an effective vaccine against H3N2. For example, during the 

2014–2015 flu season, this committee closely examined the flu vaccine’s reduced effectiveness due to the mismatch between the H3N2 strain used to develop the vaccine and the H3N2 strain that was circulating. During the 2014–2015 season, the 

flu vaccine was only 19 percent effective because the H3N2 virus had mutated before the flu season started. This experience reminded us of the importance of being 

able to rapidly detect and respond to changes in the circulating flu viruses. 

According to the FDA, this year the vaccine’s reduced effectiveness against the 

H3N2 virus was not caused by a mismatch. One factor that may explain why the 

4 

flu vaccine was not that effective against the H3N2 strain is a mutation caused by 

the vaccine and egg adaptation through the egg-based manufacturing process. 

Currently, about 80 to 85 percent of the flu vaccines are manufactured through 

the egg-based manufacturing process. When an inactivated flu virus is grown in 

chicken eggs during the vaccine manufacturing process, genetic changes can occur 

in the virus that make the vaccine less effective in humans. Some researchers think 

that egg adaptation might be especially problematic for the H3N2 virus. Of course, 

there are many different factors that also might explain the flu vaccine’s reduced 

effectiveness for H3N2. This issue needs to be thoroughly investigated so we can improve the vaccine manufacturing process if necessary and improve the vaccine’s effectiveness in the future. 

I appreciate the hard work and dedication of the people at HHS to improve our 

flu preparedness, including those at CDC, NIH, ASPR, and FDA. One of our top priorities is to keep Americans healthy during flu season and improve the Federal public health response. I look forward to today’s testimony. 

Mr. HARPER. The Chair will now recognize the ranking member, 

Ms. DeGette, for purposes of an opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DIANA DEGETTE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

I am always happy to have this flu hearing, which we seem to 

do every year. Looking at the witnesses, I feel like we are getting 

the band back together again to talk once again about what we can 

do. 

I appreciate you all coming, and I am hoping that this year we 

can actually make some progress in talking about all of these 

issues that the chairman mentioned. 

We have had in this subcommittee seven hearings on flu preparedness since 2004. Most recently, in 2015, we had two hearings 

after the country was hit with a particularly severe 2014 and ’15 

flu season, in which the H3N2 strain of flu predominated. This 

year, again, we are experiencing a severe flu season caused by the 

H3N2, and that is really a stark reminder of how the flu is very, 

very serious. 

Hospitalizations have been high throughout the country. A hundred and fourteen children have died. As an example, my home 

State of Colorado set two records, not good records, this year, with 

nearly 4,000 people hospitalized due to flu and 160 flu outbreaks 

in long-term-care facilities. 

As the chairman mentioned, this year’s flu vaccine was only 36 

percent effective, and that is of concern. Even I had the flu, and 

I had my vaccine, too. 

And so, you know, this really is something that one would think 

in the year 2018 we would be able to tackle in a more meaningful 

way. 

I understand that the FDA’s Vaccine Advisory Committee just 

met to make recommendations for next year’s vaccine. I am looking 

forward to hearing from the FDA about how data on this year’s 

vaccine effectiveness helped to inform the decisionmaking for next 

year. 

I am also hoping, as usual, to hear more about research efforts 

to produce a more broadly protective vaccine or even a universal 

vaccine that can target all strains of flu. 

5 

And, Mr. Chairman, we have talked in these various hearings 

over the years about the egg-based vaccines. And the mutation of 

the virus within the egg is only one of the problems with egg-based 

vaccines. When you look at the more remote but yet very real 

threat of a pandemic flu, if you are relying on egg-based vaccines, 

you can’t be very nimble in producing vaccines in an effective and 

fast way. 

And so I think that, this year, if it is any good news, a silver lining about the ravages of this flu season, maybe it will make the 

public understand how important this issue is for our public health 

agencies to address. 

And I know all of our witnesses will remind us, even a vaccine 

with a low effectiveness rate will still protect millions from getting 

sick or may help mitigate the symptoms when people do get sick. 

And so, until we fix this system in a broader way, the flu vaccine 

is still our best tool. 

But, unfortunately, the number of Americans who got a flu shot 

this year has not changed from our last hearing in 2015. I am hoping that that is another thing we can discuss, about how we can 

persuade people to get the vaccine and concrete steps that perhaps 

we can take next year. 

As I said, we also have to work towards better treatment methods—in particular, more effective antiviral medications so that people who do become sick can be cared for before their illness becomes more serious. And I understand there are some of these 

medications in the pipeline right now. Maybe some of our witnesses 

can talk about these drugs that are in the pipeline, and also maybe 

they can talk about some of the spot shortages we saw this past 

season. 

Finally, the importance of a strong public health infrastructure 

cannot be overstated. Because of the critical work of Federal and 

State public health experts, we are always in a good position, but 

there is still more that needs to be done. And I am looking forward 

to hearing how we can coordinate our strategies across all levels 

of Government. 

So, Mr. Chairman, again, I want to thank the witnesses who are 

here today, some of which I have worked with for years. They are 

true public servants and truly dedicated to tackling this issue. And 

I know they will be our partners in this committee as we continue 

to go forward. 

Thanks, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. DeGette follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DIANA DEGETTE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this important hearing. This is a bipartisan issue, and I look forward to finding areas where we can work together on preparing our Nation against this threat. 

Flu preparedness and response is incredibly important, and the committee has a 

long history of addressing this issue. We have held seven hearings on flu preparedness since 2004. Most recently, in 2015, we held two hearings after the country was 

hit with a particularly severe 2014–15 flu season in which the H3N2-strain of flu 

predominated. 

This year, we are again experiencing a severe flu season caused by H3N2. It has 

been a stark reminder of just how serious the flu can be. 

Hospitalizations have been high throughout the country, and 114 children have 

died. 

6 

As an example, my home State, Colorado, has set two records this year, with 

nearly 4,000 people hospitalized due to flu, and 160 flu outbreaks in long term care 

facilities. 

I am troubled by the news that this year’s flu vaccine was only 36 percent effective, although I realize that this number is different for different age groups. 

I want to hear from our witnesses today about what ‘‘36 percent effective’’ means, 

and what research must be done to help our seasonal flu vaccine offer more protection. 

I understand that FDA’s vaccine advisory committee actually just met to make 

recommendations for next year’s vaccine. I hope that FDA will tell us how data on 

this year’s vaccine effectiveness helped to inform decision for next year. 

I also hope that we will hear more about research efforts designed to produce a 

more broadly protective vaccine, or perhaps even a universal vaccine that can target 

all strains of flu. 

I know that the flu virus is particularly hard to vaccinate against, but I also know 

that we have some of the brightest minds in the country working on this issue. 

I am sure that I echo the thoughts of many of my colleagues when I say that work 

towards better vaccine must be a priority for our public health agencies. 

As our witnesses will remind us today, though, even a vaccine with a low effectiveness rate will still protect millions from getting sick. The flu vaccine remains 

the best tool we have to protect as many people as possible. 

Only around forty percent of Americans received a flu shot this year. This number 

has not changed from the last time we had a flu hearing, in 2015. We can and must 

do better, and I hope that our witnesses today are prepared to discuss concrete steps 

that we can take to increase vaccination rates in this country. 

We also must work towards better treatment methods, in particular more effective 

antiviral medications, so that people who do become sick can be cared for before 

their illness becomes more serious. 

I hope that our witnesses today will describe the new drugs in the pipeline. I also 

hope that they are prepared to address the spot shortages we saw this past season, 

which may have prevented some individuals from being treated as quickly as they 

otherwise might have been. 

Finally, the importance of a strong public health infrastructure that allows us to 

prepare and respond cannot be overstated. 

Because of the critical work of our Federal and State public health experts, we 

are in a good position, but there is always more work to be done. We need coordinated response capabilities, effective communication strategies, and critical investments so we can strengthen our response to seasonal flu. 

I look forward to hearing about how far we have come and what more needs to 

be done to strengthen our national preparedness. 

Mr. Chairman, let me conclude by acknowledging and thanking the witnesses and 

the agencies before us today. We are fortunate to have your talent on the frontlines 

in the ongoing fight against infectious diseases, including influenza. 

We should thank you by ensuring that you always have the tools and resources 

you need to remain on the cutting edge of science and preparedness, and I hope you 

can tell us what you need going forward. 

I look forward to working together to move the country toward better flu preparedness. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Oh, also, I would ask unanimous consent to put 

Mr. Pallone’s opening statement in the record. He will not be able 

to come today. 

Mr. HARPER. Without objection. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the chairman of the full committee, 

Mr. Walden, for the purposes of an opening statement. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Mr. WALDEN. I thank the chairman, and I thank our witnesses 

for being here today. 

7 

You know, this has been, I think, one of the most severe flu seasons in the United States that we have seen. Nearly 50,000 people 

die in a single season. Today, we are currently experiencing a severe flu season with a predominantly deadly strain, by all accounts. 

It is vital to find ways to reduce deaths and hospitalizations from 

this challenging and changing virus. 

At Energy and Commerce, and this subcommittee in particular, 

we have a long history, as you have heard, of connecting these 

oversight hearings and trying to be as helpful as we can to you all 

as we work on the public policy. 

During our last hearing, in November of 2015, we explored many 

important issues, including how the Department of Health and 

Human Services could help improve our ability to respond to seasonal flu vaccine mismatches. 

For more than 70 years, most flu vaccines have been made 

through an egg-based process, and over the last decade we have 

seen some innovation in the manufacture of the annual flu vaccine. 

The FDA approved the first flu vaccine manufactured using cell 

culture technology in 2012. And the FDA approved the first flu vaccine manufactured using recombinant DNA technology in 2013. 

And in addition to new manufacturing technologies and methodologies, we have also seen new types of flu vaccine made available for the American people. Historically, flu vaccines, I understand, have been offered to protect against three different strains 

of flu virus. And, in 2012, the FDA approved the first flu vaccine 

that offered protection against four different strains. In ’09, the 

FDA approved the first high-dose flu vaccine for older adults, and 

some data show that the high-dose flu vaccine is more effective in 

older individuals than the normal dose. 

Now that we have different ways to manufacture the flu vaccine, 

we need to ensure we have enough data and information to make 

sure we are making the most effective seasonal flu vaccine possible. 

The FDA recently announced that preliminary data show that the 

cell-based flu vaccine might be somewhat more effective, I understand, in preventing the flu than the egg-based vaccine this season. 

We need to understand why that might be and why there are differences in effectiveness so we can improve vaccine manufacturing 

processes as necessary. 

As Subcommittee Chairman Harper has said and emphasized, 

the annual flu vaccine is still the best defense. Every year, thousands of lives are saved because people get that vaccine. 

And so, if you do get the flu, there are antivirals, as we all know. 

And we have heard—I can’t remember a flu season where more 

people I know have said, ‘‘Oh, yeah, I got Tamiflu’’ or ‘‘Somebody 

I know got Tamiflu’’ or whatever the antivirals are. So that is an 

important part of this, as well. And I would love for you to talk a 

bit about what has been in the press about the Japanese product, 

apparently, in Japan that might cut off the flu even sooner and 

what you see on that one, if anything. 

And one day we hope to have a universal vaccine. We are encouraged by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease’s 

recent release of a strategic plan for developing a universal flu vaccine. 

8 

I am also glad we have all of you here today and the director of 

the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority 

here to share the information that you all are working on. So thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Walden follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. GREG WALDEN

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on the very important issue 

of public health preparedness for and response efforts to the seasonal influenza. 

America is experiencing a severe flu season with a predominant deadly strain. In 

a bad flu season, more than 50,000 people die, nearly as many as the Nation lost 

during the Vietnam War. It is vital to find ways to reduce deaths and hospitalizations from this challenging virus. 

This is the reason why the committee has a long history of conducting oversight 

of the effectiveness of the flu vaccine and the Federal Government’s overall response 

to the seasonal influenza. During our last hearing in November 2015, we explored 

many important issues including how HHS could help improve our ability to respond to seasonal flu vaccine mismatch. 

For more than 70 years, most flu vaccines have been made through an egg-based 

process. Over the last decade, we have seen some innovation in the manufacturing 

of the annual flu vaccine. FDA approved the first flu vaccine manufactured using 

cell culture technology in 2012, and FDA approved the first flu vaccine manufactured using recombinant DNA technology in 2013. 

In addition to new manufacturing methodologies, we’ve also seen new types of flu 

vaccines available for Americans. Historically, flu vaccines have offered protection 

against three different strains of the flu virus. In 2012, however, FDA approved the 

first quadrivalent flu vaccine that offered protection against four different strains 

of the flu virus. In 2009, FDA approved the first high-dose flu vaccine for older 

adults and some data shows that the high-dose flu vaccine is more effective in older 

individuals than the normal dose. 

Now that we have different ways to manufacture the flu vaccine, we need to ensure that we have enough data and information to make sure we’re making the 

most effective seasonal flu vaccine possible. FDA recently announced that preliminary data shows that the cell-based flu vaccine might be somewhat more effective 

in preventing the flu than the egg-based vaccine this season. We need to understand 

why there might be a difference in effectiveness, so we can improve the vaccine 

manufacturing process if necessary. 

As Subcommittee Chairman Harper appropriately emphasized in his opening 

statement, the annual flu vaccine is the best way to prevent the flu. Every year, 

thousands of lives are saved by the flu vaccine. According to the CDC, flu vaccination during the 2015–2016 flu season prevented about 5.1 million illnesses, 2.5 million medical visits, 71,000 hospitalizations, and 3,000 pneumonia andinfluenza 

deaths. That’s a lot of people that were helped by the flu vaccine. Even with belowaverage overall effectiveness, this year’s vaccine was about 60 percent effective for 

children aged 6 months to 8 years. 

If you do get the flu, there are antivirals available to treat your illness. We look 

forward to hearing from CDC today about their education and outreach strategies 

to ensure providers and patients are aware of the importance of antivirals to treat 

the flu. 

One day, we hope to have a universal vaccine and we’re encouraged by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ recent release of a strategic plan 

for developing a universal flu vaccine. I know that we’re still a long way from having a universal vaccine, but I’m looking forward to hearing updates from NIH today 

on our progress in achieving this goal and the challenges that we face indeveloping 

a universal vaccine. I’m also glad that we have BARDA here today to share information about their work in helping to develop better flu vaccines and improve seasonal 

and pandemic influenza preparedness. 

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the related issues of pandemic influenza preparedness. Last year, the committee wrote to HHS about the status of the Pandemic 

Influenza Plan, which had not been updated in quite some time. I was pleased that 

HHS released the updated plan not long after receiving our letter, and recognized 

that pandemic and seasonal influenza planning are interdependent because of the 

continually changing nature of flu viruses. 

I appreciate the hard work and dedication of the people at HHS to protect Americans from the flu and its deadly consequences. I’m looking forward to our conversaVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:41 Jan 15, 2019 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\115THCONGRESS\115X107FLUPREP\115X107FLUPREPWORKING WAYNE
9 

tion today and to learning more about how we can continue to improve our preparedness for, and response to, the seasonal influenza. 

Mr. WALDEN. And, with that, I would yield the remainder of my 

time to the chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the good doctor 

from Texas, Dr. Burgess. 

Mr. BURGESS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to thank our witnesses for taking the time to testify 

before us today. Most of you are well-known to this subcommittee. 

The flu has hit many of our districts with astonishing force this 

year. The district that I represent in north Texas, our public health 

departments were strained. We had schools that had to close temporarily to prevent the spread of flu amongst children. Since the 

start of this flu season, more than 400 people in my area have been 

hospitalized as a result of the flu. Twelve reported influenza-associated deaths, including one pediatric death. 

Earlier this year, the Health Subcommittee was briefed by Dr. 

Fauci and someone from the CDC about the development and effectiveness of this year’s flu vaccine. The timing of this particular 

hearing is appropriate, given that we are just past the peak of flu 

season, and now people are working on the development of next 

year’s vaccine, and we are all anxious to hear what awaits for next 

year. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important and timely 

hearing, and I certainly look forward to hearing from our witnesses. And I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

I ask unanimous consent that the Members’ written opening 

statements will be made part of the record. 

Without objection, they will be entered into the record. 

Additionally, I ask unanimous consent that Energy and Commerce members not on the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations be permitted to participate in today’s hearing. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

I now would like to introduce our witnesses for today’s hearing. 

First, today, we have doctor Anne Schuchat, the Acting Director 

for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

We welcome you today. 

Second, we have Dr. Anthony Fauci, the Director of the National 

Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. 

Then we have Dr. Rick Bright, the Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Preparedness and Response and Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority at the Office of the 

Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, which means 

there’s no way that gets on a business card. 

But we’re glad to have you here. 

And, finally, the Honorable Scott Gottlieb, who serves as the 

Commissioner for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 

I want to thank you each for being here. This is a very important 

topic, and we look forward to having this discussion today. 

Are you each aware that the committee is holding an investigative hearing and, when so doing, we have the practice of taking testimony under oath? Does anyone have an objection to testifying 

under oath? 

10 

Seeing none, the Chair then advises you that, under the rules of 

the House and the rules of the committee, you are entitled to be 

accompanied by counsel. Do any of you desire to be accompanied 

by counsel for the purposes of today’s hearing? 

Seeing none, in that case, if you would please rise and raise your 

right hand, and I will swear you in. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Mr. HARPER. You are now under oath and subject to the penalties set forth in title 18, section 1001 of the United States Code. 

And you may now each give a 5-minute summary of your written 

statement. 

And we will begin first with Dr. Schuchat, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENTS OF ANNE SCHUCHAT, M.D., ACTING DIRECTOR, 

CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; ANTHONY S. 

FAUCI, M.D., DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY 

AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES, NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF 

HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; 

RICK BRIGHT, PH.D., DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR 

PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE, AND DIRECTOR, BIOMEDICAL ADVANCED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES; AND SCOTT GOTTLIEB, M.D., COMMISSIONER OF FOOD AND DRUGS, FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

STATEMENT OF ANNE SCHUCHAT 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of 

the committee. 

Influenza is a formidable adversary. The virus is ever-changing, 

it is with us every year, and it’s too often able to outsmart our immune systems. At CDC, we have worked with domestic and global 

partners to build cutting-edge systems to characterize influenza viruses and the disease they cause and to monitor vaccine effectiveness. 

We know that people are concerned about this flu season, and 

that concern is warranted. Influenza can be a very serious threat 

to the health of Americans. And despite the progress we’ve made, 

we have much more work to do. 

I’ll provide brief updates about this season and the work that 

CDC is doing to improve the tools for influenza prevention and control. 

As you’ve heard, this has been a severe season. Hospitalizations 

have broken records. Influenza-like illness presenting to doctors’ offices and emergency departments at its peak was about as high as 

we saw during the pandemic of 2009. Too many children have died 

already from influenza this season. We had intense activity in virtually the whole country at the same time, and that contributed to 

some of the spot shortages of antivirals. We are not over with the 

season. Disease is decreasing, but the B strains are starting to be 

as common as the H3N2 strains. 

11 

As you’ve heard, the vaccine effectiveness this season was lower 

than usual. It was at 36 percent overall and even lower for the 

H3N2 strains that dominated. Children did receive better protection from the flu vaccine—59 percent effectiveness in children and 

about 50 percent effectiveness against the H3N2 strain—a reminder that vaccinating children can be lifesaving against flu. 

Sadly, the vast majority of children who die from influenza have 

not received any vaccine at all. 

There are many theories about why influenza vaccines work less 

well against the H3N2 strains. One theory is that there are eggadapted changes that occur in the process of developing the vaccine. There may be differences in effectiveness based on prior immunization or prior exposure to flu strains. 

We are still characterizing the viruses for this year. We do not 

think there was antigenic drift, but there may be some changes in 

the viruses that could account for the severe season. That’s still 

under study. 

Some vaccine is better than no vaccine protection. We wish the 

vaccines worked better, but we do know that the vaccines are providing protection to many and they’re mitigating the severity of the 

disease. 

CDC has three objectives in our work with vaccines. We want to 

maximize use of the current vaccines. We want to support the 

NIH’s leadership in developing a universal vaccine. And, in the 

near term, we want to improve the current vaccines that we have. 

We have made significant progress since the 2009 pandemic. We 

have more data than ever before. We have more information on 

vaccine effectiveness from our multi-State network. We are producing more potential vaccine candidates. We are collecting more 

information on the genomic characteristics of the viruses using 

next-generation sequencing. We are working with pharmacies, 

long-term-care facilities, and insurers to address the spot shortages 

of antivirals and were able to smooth things out a bit during this 

season, but we know people were still frustrated. 

But, despite the progress we’ve made, there is much more to 

learn about influenza. And we think that investing in that learning 

can have direct implications for prevention and control. 

In closing, I know this has been a difficult flu season and a 

heartbreaking one for too many families. Flu continues to be a priority for the CDC. We are literally working 24/7 on this issue. And 

we are all, across HHS, committed to working together to find ways 

and tools to help Americans reduce their risk of getting sick. 

I look forward to answering your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Schuchat follows:] 

12 


30456.001

1 

Testimony before the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

United States House of Representatives 

U.S. Public Health Preparedness for and Response Efforts to 

Seasonal Influenza 

Anne Schuchat, MD (RADM, USPHS) 

Acting Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

For Release upon Delivery 

March 8, 2018 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. 
13 


30456.002

Good morning Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, and Members of the Committee. 

am Dr. Anne Schuchat, Acting Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and 

Acting ATSDR Administrator. I want to thank the Committee for the opportunity to provide an update on 

the current influenza (flu) season and for bringing attention to this ongoing and very serious public 

health threat. CDC works collaboratively with our colleagues in other components of the Department of 

Health and Human Services to protect the nation's health. I and the CDC leadership team are committed 

to ensuring that CDC will continue to conduct critical science, provide health information and act quickly 

to protect our nation through the control and prevention of disease, injury, and disability in the United 

States and globally. 

At CDC we have spent decades building the surveillance and diagnostic capacity to rapidly 

detect, prevent and respond to annual influenza epidemics, and emerging novel and pandemic influenza 

threats. Seasonal and pandemic influenza prevention and response are inextricably linked, as 

preparedness for seasonal flu ensures preparedness for an influenza pandemic. CDC leads efforts that 

span from detection of influenza to protection against the ever-changing virus. Our systems provide the 

scientific basis for vaccine virus selection- for each year's seasonal flu vaccine as well as for pandemic 

vaccine stockpiling. We diligently monitor for genetic changes in the flu virus, and identify how those 

genetic changes affect disease transmission and severity. We build public awareness and provider 

knowledge about prevention methods and early treatment with antivirals, and support public sector 

delivery of routine and emergency immunizations. Throughout each season, we monitor both the safety 

and effectiveness of influenza vaccine, and today I will provide some more information specifically about 

our systems to monitor vaccine effectiveness and highlight some of the work we are doing to improve 

vaccines. We are better prepared than we have ever been to detect, prevent, treat, and respond to 

influenza; however, despite the progress we have made in fighting the flu, seasonal influenza viruses 

constantly change and are adept at outfoxing our immune systems. It is critical that we deepen our 

2 
14 


30456.003

understanding of influenza and use this knowledge to make near-term improvements to influenza 

vaccines. 

This year's influenza season has been challenging across the United States, and has been 

heartbreaking for families who have lost loved ones. Every year influenza causes significant burden in 

this country with many millions of Americans becoming ill, hundreds of thousands of them requiring 

hospitalization, and tens of thousands dying. 

The 2017-2018 influenza season has been a severe one. Flu activity began to increase in early 

November and then increased rapidly from December through early February. This season, the levels of 

influenza-like illness, which is a measure based on outpatient visits and emergency department visits, 

reached levels as high as at the peak of the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic. Unlike in other seasons when flu 

activity varied in timing and intensity across states, during this 2017-2018 season, many states 

experienced widespread and high flu activity at the same time. We cannot predict how long this season 

will last, and while we have started to see a decline in rates of people visiting their doctor for influenzalike illness, we expect to see several more weeks of ongoing flu activity, with continued reports of 

hospitalizations and flu deaths in children and adults. 

The majority of people with influenza so far this season have been infected with the H3N2 

influenza virus. During H3N2 predominant seasons, we see more cases, more visits to the doctor, more 

hospitalizations, and more deaths, especially among older people. It is still too early to assess the full 

burden of influenza disease for this year, but estimates from recent seasons where H3N2 was 

predominant, like the 2012-13 and 2014-15 seasons, provide an indication of what to anticipate for this 

season. CDC estimated that during seasons like those, influenza accounted for as many as 35.6 million 

illnesses, 16.6 million medically attended visits, 710,000 hospitalizations, and 56,000 deaths. 

3 
15 


30456.004

CDC recommends a yearly flu vaccine for everyone six months of age and older as the most 

important step in preventing influenza infection. Flu vaccines protect against three or four different flu 

viruses. Three-component vaccines contain an H3N2, an H1N1, and a B virus. Four-component vaccines 

have an additional B virus component. Unfortunately, flu vaccines do not usually work as well against 

H3N2 viruses; however, even with reduced vaccine effectiveness, vaccination can prevent flu deaths, 

illnesses, medical visits, and hospitalizations. Among flu-associated pediatric deaths in the United States 

from 2010 to 2016, 78 percent of children who died had not been fully vaccinated. 

The influenza vaccine production process requires that virus strains be selected in February of 

each year for vaccine that will be used to protect Americans in the fall. Throughout the year, CDC 

studies thousands of flu viruses in our laboratory to evaluate whether the currently circulating flu 

viruses have changed, or drifted, over the months since selection of the virus strains. So far this season, 

we are not seeing significant drift in the currently circulating viruses, including the H3N2 viruses that are 

predominating. 

Where we are seeing differences is when we compare the vaccine viruses prepared for 

manufacturing egg-based influenza vaccine to those that are currently circulating. These differences are 

notable for the H3N2 viruses; unfortunately, the adaptation to growth in eggs makes the H3N2 vaccine 

viruses less similar to the circulating wild-type H3N2 viruses in the community. These egg-adapted 

changes are likely one of several possible contributors to the relatively lower vaccine effectiveness 

typically seen against H3N2 viruses compared with H1N1 or influenza B viruses. 

CDC has developed and maintains the nation's system for monitoring the effectiveness of 

influenza vaccines. This network's routine data inform recommendations on vaccine use, selection of 

new viruses for updating the vaccines, communication to the public, and sharing important information 

for manufacturers regarding the performance of their vaccines. In February, CDC published its interim 

estimates for this season's vaccine effectiveness (VE). CDC found that vaccination this season has 

4 
16 


30456.005

reduced the risk of having to go to the doctor for flu by 36 percent so far, and that flu vaccine is offering 

substantial protection against H1N1 flu {67 percent) as well as moderate protection against fluB viruses 

(42%). Vaccine effectiveness against this season's dominant H3N2 viruses is about 25 percent, similar to 

what CDC expected at the beginning of the season. These results are also similar to the final U.S. vaccine 

effectiveness estimates of 32 percent against H3N2 viruses reported last season (2016-2017). 

Importantly, the vaccine offered better protection against H3N2 for children six months to eight years 

old, with estimated effectiveness of S1 percent. Overall, the vaccine is 59 percent effective against both 

influenza A and B in children six months to eight years of age. 

Over the last three years, CDC has significantly improved our global surveillance and 

characterization of influenza viruses in support of more effective vaccines. Globally coordinated 

epidemiologic and virologic surveillance is the foundation of the influenza vaccine virus selection and 

development process. The World Health Organization (WHO) Global influenza Virus Surveillance and 

Response System (GISRS) is a global network that provides year-round surveillance of influenza viruses. 

Within GISRS, CDC serves as one of five Collaborating Centers that receive and characterize thousands of 

influenza viruses each year. CDC has expanded domestic and global disease surveillance and laboratory 

detection capacity to support improvements in vaccine virus selection and in flu vaccine effectiveness. 

CDC contributes a large amount of data for both the U.S. and global viruses, and is an innovator in new 

methods for the stain selection process. Key activities include partnerships with more than 50 Ministries 

of Health and other health agencies to strengthen global influenza surveillance, develop new 

technologies, such as next-generation sequencing, to analyze and characterize flu viruses more quickly, 

and to increase the number of egg-derived viruses CDC produces to expand options for suitable vaccine 

development. 

5 
17 


30456.006

Still, more can and needs to be done to support development of better vaccines. CDC continues 

to support the long-term goal of developing longer-lasting, more broadly protective "universal" 

influenza vaccines in collaboration with HHS agency partners, and to focus on incremental vaccine 

improvements that would provide better tools to prevent influenza. Until better vaccines are available, 

CDC focuses on optimizing use of the currently available vaccines. 

Thank you for the opportunity to talk about CDC's role in the 2017-2018 influenza season. I am 

happy to answer any questions you may have. 

6 
18 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you very much. 

The Chair will now recognize Dr. Fauci for 5 minutes for the purposes of his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF ANTHONY S. FAUCI 

Dr. FAUCI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member DeGette, Chairman Walden, members of the committee. Thank 

you for giving me the opportunity to talk to you about the role of 

the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the 

NIH in addressing seasonal and pandemic influenza. 

All right. Next slide. 

As you can see, as I have testified before this committee multiple 

times, that the NIH research in this case in influenza is multifaceted, involving basic research, research resources, clinical research, ultimately with the development of countermeasures in the 

form of diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. For the purpose of 

today’s discussion, I’ll focus only on vaccines. 

If I can have the next slide. 

As seen in this slide, as mentioned before—and let me start off 

by reiterating what you said, what Ms. DeGette said, and what 

Anne Schuchat said, is that it is always better to get vaccinated 

than not to get vaccinated. 

But, in that reality, we can do better with the vaccines that we 

have, because the current influenza vaccines are not consistently 

effective. We have an example of that this year. Also, pandemics 

occur, and the responses are generally not very effective. We’ve 

seen that with the 2009 pandemic flu, and we continue to chase 

after potential pandemics like H5N1, H7N9. 

Next slide. 

The major challenges in influenza vaccinology is we need to improve on the current influenza vaccines. We need to improve the 

production of these from egg-based to cell-based to recombinant 

DNA technology, and I’ll get back to that in a moment. And, also, 

we need to, as Anne mentioned, develop universal influenza vaccines for broad coverage. 

Next slide. 

Egg-based technology is time-honored indeed, it has been effective, but it’s antiquated. We need to graduate into the 21st century. 

Cell-based is better, but recombinant DNA technologies that I’ll get 

into in a moment, which will be the tools to which we develop a 

universal flu vaccine, is the way of the future. 

Next slide. 

When you talk about improving seasonal influenza preparedness, 

that essentially marries you to preparing for a pandemic. And I’ll 

explain what I mean. 

Next slide. 

I wrote an article just recently when we got into the problem of 

the growing in eggs, with the adaptation in eggs leading to a less 

effective vaccine, to emphasize the need for a universal flu vaccine. 

Next slide. 

Now, let me talk to you a little bit about that, because there are 

some mechanisms that are simple now but nonetheless were not 

fully appreciated before we really understood the structural biology 

of these viruses. 

19 

On the left-hand part of this slide is an influenza model. That’s 

the virus. The arrow points to one protein, the hemagglutinin molecule, which is the part that binds to the cell receptor that gets you 

and I sick when we get the flu. 

Next slide. 

Now, a very interesting thing was noticed several years ago, is 

that this is made up, this molecule, of a head and a stem. Now, 

this is the way it really looks like, but if you want to emphasize 

it, think of a broccoli with a head and a stalk or a mushroom with 

a cap and the stalk. The head is the part that the immune system 

makes a response against. That’s the good news. 

The bad news is that that head is one that has many mutations 

that change from season to season—the drift that Dr. Schuchat 

spoke about and that Ms. DeGette spoke about. The stem, however, 

has few mutations. The little red dots are the mutations. So the 

trick is, how do you make a response selectively against the part 

of the virus that does not change as opposed to one that does 

change? 

Next slide. 

There are a number of ways of doing that. I’m going to just show 

you one example among many. 

Investigators at the NIH and funded by the NIH have a situation 

now where they can take that molecule, that hemagglutinin, and 

essentially shave off the head. It’s called a headless stem. Now, 

normally, that would fall apart, but it doesn’t fall apart, because 

investigators at the Vaccine Research Center have made mutations 

in the molecule to keep it stable. 

And what we’ve done, we’ve put on what’s called a nanoparticle. 

That’s on the far right of the slide. This is what it looks like 10 

million times blown up. So this is a little particle, but all of these 

are stems, so that when the immune system sees that, it doesn’t 

get distracted about anything else and it focuses in on making an 

antibody or a cell-mediated response against something that does 

not change. 

Next slide. 

Now, we recently, in June of this year, had a workshop in Rockville, Maryland, where we called together experts from the United 

States and throughout the world to help us at NIH to develop what 

we call a pathway to a universal influenza vaccine. 

Next slide. 

And I’m happy to say that just a few days ago we recently published our strategic plan and our research agenda in The Journal 

of Infectious Diseases to help us get to the goal that I’ve just been 

describing over the last 5 minutes. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Fauci and his slide presentation 

follow:] 

20 


30456.007

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Research Addressing 

the Public Health Threat of Influenza 

Testimony before the 

House Committee on Energy and Commerce 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. 

Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases 

March 8, 2018 
21 


30456.008

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member DeGette, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 

opportunity to discuss the response of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to the public health 

threat posed by influenza. I direct the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases 

(NIAID), the lead NIH institute for conducting and supporting research on established and 

emerging infectious diseases, including influenza. 

NIAID funds a longstanding, comprehensive portfolio of basic, translational, and clinical 

research on influenza focused on better understanding the virus and the disease that it causes as 

well as developing diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines to prevent and treat it. The current, 

remarkably severe influenza season, the consistently changing nature of seasonal influenza 

viruses, together with the ever-present threat of pandemic influenza, underscore the importance 

of this research to improve on our current influenza vaccines, as well as to lead us on a pathway 

toward the development of a universal influenza vaccine. The latter would provide long-lasting 

protection against multiple seasonal and pandemic influenza viruses. NIAID efforts in this regard 

are bolstered by ongoing collaborations with academia, philanthropic organizations, 

biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, as well as U.S. government partners, particularly 

the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA), and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), 

including the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARD A). 

Fundamental Research to Understand Influenza Evolution and Immunity 

2 
22 


30456.009

NIAID-supported basic research on influenza provides the foundation for developing new and 

improved diagnostics, antiviral therapies, and vaccines for influenza caused by both seasonal and 

pandemic virus strains. Detailed studies of how our immune system responds to influenza viruses 

and influenza vaccines are stimulating novel approaches for developing vaccine candidates that 

can elicit robust immune responses and provide broad protection against a variety of influenza 

virus strains. In accordance with the highest bioethical and scientific standards, NIH clinical 

researchers are investigating human influenza infection under carefully controlled conditions in 

which healthy volunteers are challenged with influenza virus. The scientists are closely 

examining the course of influenza infection from the moment of exposure to the virus to 

determine when viral shedding occurs, when symptoms begin and end, and when the body 

begins to mount an immune response against the virus. The researchers also are studying factors 

correlated with protection against influenza. These influenza challenge studies will serve as an 

efficient way to evaluate the safety and efficacy of novel approaches to treat or prevent influenza 

infection. The findings from these studies already are informing the design of future clinical 

trials to evaluate candidate influenza countermeasures, including vaccines. Additionally, NIAID 

is soliciting research proposals for studies that will follow cohorts of infants to determine how 

natural influenza infections and/or influenza vaccinations shape their responses to future 

influenza virus exposures as they enter adolescence and adulthood. The ultimate goal of this 

research is to provide key information to facilitate the design of broadly and durably protective 

influenza vaccines. 

NIAID also supports research to better understand the transmission, evolution, and pathogenesis 

of influenza viruses in animals and humans to inform the development of broadly protective 

influenza vaccines. For example, the NIAID Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and 

3 
23 


30456.010

Surveillance (CEIRS) study the emergence and spread of novel influenza viruses worldwide to 

lay the groundwork for new and improved control measures for circulating influenza viruses. 

The CEIRS global network of research sites has characterized newly detected influenza virus 

strains and has evaluated potential vaccine approaches for emerging influenza viruses, including 

those of avian origin. CEIRS investigators also have recapitulated influenza virus evolution in 

the laboratory, allowing them to predict viral mutations that may occur in nature. This 

information can be used to help design seasonal influenza vaccines that optimally match 

circulating strains. Influenza virus surveillance programs using next-generation genomic 

technologies supported by NIH also are providing an in-depth view of influenza virus evolution 

and insights into reducing the disease burden of seasonal and pandemic influenza. 

Influenza Vaccines 

Challenges Presented by Current Influenza Vaccines 

Licensed annual influenza vaccines, the primary tool for prevention of seasonal influenza, are 

updated each year to address the strains that experts deem likely to circulate during the upcoming 

influenza season. These vaccines are updated annually through supplements to their FDA 

licenses, which must be approved by FDA prior to distribution of the vaccines. The overall 

efficacy of seasonal influenza vaccines ranges from 40 to 60 percent when there is a good match 

between the vaccine and circulating influenza viruses, although they may be significantly less 

effective when varying degrees of mismatches occur between the circulating strains and the 

vaccine. These mismatches can be caused by the constant evolution of circulating influenza 

strains, as was observed in the 2014-2015 influenza season, or by mutations that occur when 

4 
24 


30456.011

viruses from humans are adapted to grow in eggs, a requirement for the egg-based vaccine 

manufacturing process, the predominant technology used for influenza vaccines globally. 

The public health response to influenza becomes particularly challenging when a pandemic strain 

emerges. This happens when the vast majority of the population has not been exposed to a newly 

emerging influenza strain and lacks immunity to it, as occurred with the 2009 pandemic HlNl 

influenza virus. The less than optimal efficacy of vaccines against seasonal influenza together 

with the constant threat that a pandemic strain may emerge, and the risk of seasonal influenza 

vaccine mismatches, emphasize the need for additional strategies to address both seasonal and 

pandemic influenza. A more broadly protective, or universal, influenza vaccine would be a 

valuable tool in our efforts to generate more durable protection against multiple influenza strains. 

It would also be important as we are pursuing the development of a universal influenza vaccine 

to improve on the efficacy of our current vaccines since it will take several years to develop a 

universal influenza vaccine ready for widespread use. 

Universal Influenza Vaccines 

NIAID has made the development of universal influenza vaccines a high priority, and in this 

regard, has begun a concerted effort to galvanize research in the field. On June 28-29, 2017, 

NIAID convened a group of domestic and international influenza experts at a research agendasetting workshop, "Pathway to a Universal Influenza Vaccine." Following this meeting, NIAID 

outlined its research priorities in a Strategic Plan for a Universal Influenza Vaccine published 

online on February 28, 2018, by the Journal of Infectious Diseases. The Strategic Plan focuses 

on three research areas: improving knowledge of the transmission, natural history, and 

pathogenesis of influenza infection; characterizing influenza immunity and immune factors that 

5 
25 


30456.012

correlate with protection against influenza; and supporting the rational design of universal 

influenza vaccines. Targeted investments in each of these research areas will be required to 

generate the critical information necessary to enable the development of universal vaccines 

effective against both seasonal and pandemic influenza. 

Strategies for Universal Influenza Vaccines 

Current NIAID research on universal influenza vaccines pursues multiple strategies that target 

parts of the influenza virus common across multiple influenza strains in an effort to broaden the 

immune system response and cover multiple, diverse influenza viruses. One scientific challenge 

in developing a truly universal vaccine relates to the influenza surface protein hemagglutinin 

(HA). Most antibodies against influenza virus target the "head" of the mushroom-shaped HA 

protein, which differs from strain to strain of influenza viruses and is constantly changing by 

mutation. In contrast, the "stem" of the mushroom-shaped HA protein remains relatively 

constant among diverse influenza virus strains, suggesting that strategies to generate immune 

responses against the HA stem could elicit broader protection against multiple influenza virus 

strains. 

Scientists at the NIAID Vaccine Research Center (VRC) have developed a vaccine candidate 

consisting of a ferritin nanoparticle to which is attached multiple copies of the stabilized headless stem of the HA protein from an HlNl influenza virus. This vaccine more effectively elicits 

an immune response specifically against the stem and protected animals against lethal influenza 

infection. Notably, the vaccine protected against a different influenza subtype (H5) than the Hl 

subtype upon which it was based, providing a proof-of-concept that vaccines targeting the HA 

stem could offer broad protection against diverse influenza strains. 

6 
26 


30456.013

In addition, VRC researchers have conducted several clinical trials of another influenza vaccine 

strategy designed to elicit enhanced and broadly reactive antibody responses. Recent NIAID 

Phase I clinical trials have tested an initial vaccination with an influenza virus DNA vaccine 

candidate known as a "prime" followed by a "boost" with a standard inactivated seasonal 

influenza vaccine. The clinical trials demonstrated that such regimens were safe and produced 

anti-influenza A immune responses. NIAID intramural scientists also are evaluating a universal 

influenza vaccine consisting of a cocktail of avian influenza viruses comprised of either viruslike particles or inactivated vaccine strains. Both vaccine regimens protected mice and ferrets 

from infection with a wide range of influenza A strains, including strains not contained in the 

vaccine, suggesting another potential strategy to develop a universal influenza vaccine. NIAID 

plans to conduct Phase I safety and immunogenicity studies of this vaccine approach by next 

year. NIAID continues to evaluate each of these vaccine strategies to better understand how they 

could contribute to the design of universal influenza vaccines. 

NIAID also is pursuing novel vaccine approaches that may induce or boost broadly protective 

immune responses by targeting other conserved influenza proteins such as the nucleoprotein 

(NP) and the ion channel matrix protein (M2). In addition, NIAID is planning a Phase II clinical 

trial of M-OO 1, a vaccine candidate that contains several influenza fragments recognized by the 

immune system that are common among multiple influenza virus strains. The trial will assess 

whether receiving M-001 as a prime can help generate enhanced immune responses to a boost 

vaccination with a licensed seasonal influenza vaccine. 

A truly universal influenza vaccine would represent a groundbreaking advance in the fight 

against influenza. Although we cannot predict when a more broadly protective influenza vaccine 

7 
27 


30456.014

would be publicly available, we expect that progress toward that goal will occur in iterative and 

progressive steps. NIAID-supported research already has produced promising results. However, 

we anticipate that it will require significant scientific effort, and multiple refinements along the 

way, to achieve long-lasting, broadly protective vaccines that can be used in all populations. As 

we develop such vaccines, promising candidates will need to be evaluated over several influenza 

seasons to determine the extent and durability of the protection that they induce. 

Improving Current Influenza Vaccines 

Concurrent with efforts to develop a universal influenza vaccine, NIAID supports the 

development of flexible vaccine manufacturing processes, including the use of molecular 

biological techniques, to help shorten manufacturing times and increase production efficiency for 

current and future influenza vaccines. NIAID and industry partners are investigating recombinant 

DNA manufacturing techniques that could be rapidly mobilized when pandemic viruses emerge. 

In addition, NIAID has supported studies of improved vaccine strain selection and optimized 

high-yield vaccine strains as part of the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Improvement (SIVI) 

initiative, an interagency collaboration launched in 2016. The SIVI initiative builds upon the 

success of the Influenza Vaccine Manufacturing Improvement (IVMI) initiative, a collaboration 

with ASPR/BARDA, CDC, FDA, and vaccine manufacturers. The SIVI initiative focuses on 

approaches to maintain the effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccines in years when circulating 

viral strains have drifted by mutating. 

In addition, NIAID has supported the development of a new test that can be used to measure the 

amount of antigen -the substance that generates an immune response - in vaccines to enable a 

rapid vaccine response during an influenza outbreak or pandemic. The VaxArray Influenza 

8 
28 


30456.015

Pandemic Hemagglutinin test is a new immunoassay for seasonal and pandemic influenza 

vaccines that can identify multiple HA subtypes, including H5, H7, and H9. This assay 

represents an improvement over current tests because it can be deployed rapidly to determine and 

monitor the potency of a greater number of vaccine formulations, such as adjuvanted vaccines 

and dose-sparing vaccine preparations. 

Pandemic Vaccine Approaches 

For decades, NIAID has supported research to prepare for the possible emergence of pandemic 

influenza. NIAID, in collaboration with BARD A, has evaluated candidate vaccines against 

pandemic influenza viruses such as the 2009 HlNl and potential pandemic influenza viruses 

including H5Nl and H7N9. In the last five years, NIAID has supported 10 clinical trials 

enrolling more than 3,000 volunteers to assess the safety and immunogenicity of candidate 

pandemic influenza vaccines. These trials were conducted through the NIAID Vaccine and 

Treatment Evaluation Units (VTEUs), a longstanding clinical trials network for rapid testing of 

candidate vaccines and therapeutics. Several of the vaccines also were evaluated for use in 

special populations such as children and older adults. The VTEUs currently are conducting two 

Phase II clinical trials of a new vaccine to protect against emerging H7N9 influenza virus strains. 

The trials arc now enrolling volunteers at sites across the United States to test the vaccine's 

immunogenicity and safety at different dosages and treatment schedules. The studies also will 

evaluate whether a product called an adjuvant given together with the vaccine boosts the immune 

response of people receiving the vaccine. In addition, NIAID intramural scientists are conducting 

clinical studies of prime-boost vaccine regimens for swine (HI) and avian (H7) influenza 

9 
29 


30456.016

viruses, and collaborating with industry and BARD A to develop live, attenuated vaccines against 

influenza viruses with pandemic potential. 

Influenza Diagnostics 

NIAID supports the development of influenza diagnostics with improved speed, accuracy, and 

usability in settings where patients seek medical care. NIAID is helping to develop molecular 

diagnostic platforms capable of quickly distinguishing between seasonal strains. For example, a 

rapid molecular test system developed with longstanding NIAID support was recently cleared by 

the FDA to accurately distinguish influenza A from influenza B in nasal swab specimens. NIAID 

also supports the development of clinical assays to determine whether influenza virus strains are 

sensitive to neuraminidase inhibitors- drugs such as Tamiflu that can lessen the duration and 

severity of illness as well as potentially prevent infection in close contacts. 

Antiviral Therapies for Influenza 

Antiviral therapies for influenza are important tools in treating and preventing complications of 

influenza infection. However, the emergence of resistance to existing antiviral medications 

highlights the need for additional treatment options. NIAID supports research to develop broadspectrum antiviral drugs and other novel influenza therapeutics, several of which have advanced 

to clinical trials. For example, NIAID has furthered the development of RNA polymerase 

inhibitors, peptide inhibitors, and next-generation neuraminidase inhibitors. NIAID also is 

developing monoclonal antibodies against the influenza HA protein, which facilitates the 

attachment of the virus to respiratory tract cells. Antibodies that bind to HA potentially could 

block the interaction between the virus and human cells and thus mitigate influenza disease. 

10 
30 


30456.017

Several of these antibodies are currently in Phase II clinical trials, including a novel monoclonal 

antibody targeting the stem of the influenza HA protein. In addition, NIAID has launched three 

clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of novel influenza therapeutics in high-risk populations. 

These therapeutics include human plasma containing high levels of anti-influenza antibodies, 

concentrated immunoglobulin with high levels of anti-influenza antibodies, and a combination of 

three licensed influenza antiviral drugs. 

Conclusion 

NIAID has a long history of comprehensive and cutting-edge influenza research to develop 

better diagnostics, therapeutics, and vaccines. Sustained support ofNIAID' s basic, translational, 

and clinical influenza research will generate the knowledge needed to reach the goal of safe and 

effective influenza vaccines that provide durable protection against multiple strains of influenza 

virus and help us prepare for the next potential pandemic. NIAID will continue to collaborate 

with government, academic, and industry partners to develop improved tools to prevent, 

diagnose, and treat influenza infection. Importantly, NIAID will use its new Strategic Plan for a 

Universal Influenza Vaccine to guide future investments in influenza research to accelerate 

progress toward broadly protective influenza vaccines. 

11 

30456.018

Hearing of the House Energy and Commerce, Oversig

and Investigations Subcommittee 

The Role of the National 

Institutes of Health in 

Research Addressing Season

and Pandemic Influenza 

(/i , 

... 

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. 

Director 

National Institute of Allergy and 

Infectious Diseases 

National Institutes of Health 

March 8, 2018 ID National In

Allergy an

Infectious 

30456.019

Basic ~ Resources 

30456.020

Current seasonal influenza vaccines are no

consistently effective 

Ill Pandemics do occur and response after the 

fact is not effective 

Ill "Chasing after" potential pandemic outbrea

{pre-pandemic viruses) is costly and 

ineffective 

30456.021

Major Challenges in Influenza 

Vaccinology 

II Improve efficacy of current influenza vaccin

II Improve production of influenza vaccines 

-

egg-based vs. cell-based vs. recombinant 

DNA technology 

II Develop universal influenza vaccines for 

broad coverage 

30456.022

Evolution of Technologies for 

Influenza Vaccines 

Egg-based Cell-based 

Recombina

DNA 

Tech no log 
36 


30456.023

en 

en UfGCD 

·- N C Ec-a 

CDCDCD 

-a:::s .. c- fG 

fG 'C a. a.-f 

a. 

en 

en -caCD caNe 

cc, 

OCDCD en:::s._ 

fG- fG CD.._ a. 

cn.5CD 

.. 

a. 

30456.024

New England 

Journal of Medicine 

EstaWishd 181t ils THE NEW ENGL-\ND JOCJL ..... AL OF MEDIClN'E A..c'\TD st:RGERY 

Volume 378 2018 Number 1 

Chasing Seasonal Influenza 

-

The Need for a Universal 

Influenza Vaccine 

Cl Paules, SG Sullivan, K Subbarao, and AS Fauci 

30456.025

Hemagglutinin Protein: Major Targe

of Influenza Vaccines 

Influenza Virus 

Hemagglutinin (H

Protein 

Courtes

30456.026

Influenza A Hemagglutinin (HA) 

Head 

region 

Stem 

region 

Head region 

Target of current influenza 

vaccines 

Differs among influenza stra

Many mutations (•) each sea

Stem region 

Target of universal influenza 

vaccines 

Similar among influenza stra

Few mutations each season 

Courtes

30456.027

Representative Approach to the 

Development of a Universal Influen

Vaccine 

Influenza Virus 

Head 

Stem [ {vaccine 

target) 

HA Viral 

Surface Protein 

HAStem 

Nanoparticle 

HAStem 

Nanopartic

Vaccine 

Courtes
41 


30456.028

30456.029

The Journal of 

Infectious 

Diseases 

A Universal Influenza Vaccine: 

The Strategic Plan for the Nationa

Institute of Allergy and Infectious 

Diseases 

EJ Erbelding, D Post, E Stemmy, PC Roberts, A Deckhut Augustin

S Ferguson, Cl Paules, BS Graham, AS Fauci 
43 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you very much for that testimony. 

Dr. Bright, we’ll now recognize you for 5 minutes for the purposes of your opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF RICK BRIGHT 

Dr. BRIGHT. Great. Thank you. 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, and distinguished 

members of this committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak 

with you today on behalf of our Assistant Secretary for Preparedness Response, the ASPR, to discuss influenza and progress towards the development and availability of effective flu vaccines. 

I’m Rick Bright, the Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, known as BARDA, and also the 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. 

ASPR’s mission is to save lives and protect Americans from 21stcentury threats. BARDA is a component of ASPR that was created 

to ensure that we have medical countermeasures to protect people 

from the dire threats we face as a nation. And make no mistake, 

influenza is one of the most dangerous of those threats. 

BARDA was established and empowered with special authorities 

in the Pandemic and All Hazards Preparedness Act. Guided by a 

national strategy on pandemic influenza and largely funded 

through supplemental appropriations, we have proven what can be 

done when the Government is able to hire the best people, work 

with the best partners, and remain focused on the strategic fight 

against influenza. We have shown that the BARDA model works. 

With our industry and our Federal partners, BARDA has 

achieved 34 approvals from the FDA for drugs, vaccines, and 

diagnostics against a wide range of threats. We have increased domestic flu vaccine capacity over tenfold in world-class production 

facilities. We have shortened the vaccine response time with modern technologies. 

And we have diversified vaccine production platforms, most of 

that right here in America. No one can rival BARDA’s success in 

expanding capacity and pushing new products to the marketplace. 

We are proud of these new flu vaccines and the adjuvants now 

being produced in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Connecticut, and 

New York. These include the world’s first recombinant flu vaccine 

and the world’s largest cell-based vaccine production facility. 

And we are not done yet. Everything that BARDA and our partners have done and accomplished for pandemic influenza can make 

our seasonal influenza vaccines better and more responsive to the 

ever-changing virus. Building on our success, we are poised and we 

are partnered to make better flu vaccines available right now. 

Most vaccines today are still made in eggs. Although the process 

is optimized for efficiency, it has not changed much for decades, 

and it is no match for a rapidly changing virus. Cell- and recombinant-based technologies are now used to make licensed vaccines, 

and they offer speed and greater flexibility and may even be more 

effective than traditional egg-based vaccines. 

Despite these advantages, marketplace competition and limited 

domestic production capacity have largely kept these approaches on 

the shelf, representing only a fraction of the seasonal vaccine on 

the marketplace today. 

44 

There are actions to improve influenza vaccines now that can 

produce dramatic near-term benefit in parallel with the long-term 

efforts being undertaken across the Government to develop a universal flu vaccine. To make better, faster flu vaccines now, we propose, in collaboration with our industry partners, to take the following steps to improve the effectiveness of our existing vaccines: 

First, we must expand domestic capacity of the cell- and recombinant-based vaccines. Second, we must enhance their effectiveness 

with the addition of adjuvants or higher doses of antigen. Third, we 

need to conduct clinical trials to expand their use in all age groups. 

And, finally, we need to continue modernizing the vaccine production processes for speed and flexibility. 

While we are grateful for the supplemental funding that disrupted the status quo and fueled our progress, those funds have 

been fully obligated. To win this battle, it is critical that we sustain 

these hard-won gains and we implement these steps to reduce the 

threat we face every year from influenza. 

And the near-term vaccine improvement activities are only one 

piece of the puzzle. Equally important is the ongoing work funded 

by BARDA to develop diagnostics that can detect influenza sooner 

as well as more effective drug treatment options to treat sick people. These priorities, combined with improved vaccines, represent a 

comprehensive approach to protecting the Nation and the world 

against influenza. 

Together with our Federal and our industry partners, we have 

made tremendous progress. However, the threat remains. We stand 

at a unique moment in time, where we have tools and capabilities 

to dramatically enhance our fight against influenza. I look forward 

to working with this panel, your committee, and congressional colleagues. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present to you today. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Bright follows:] 

45 


30456.030

r~t:tt' Written Testimony r House Committee on Energy and 

~ f':, Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight 

' and Investigations 

Examining U.S. Public Health 

Preparedness for and Response Efforts to 

Seasonal Influenza 

Statement of 

Rick Bright, Ph.D 

Director, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority 

Deputy Assistant Secretary For Preparedness and Response 

For Release upon Delivery 

Expected at 10:00 a.m. 

March 8, 2018 
46 


30456.031

Introduction 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGettc, and distinguished members of the committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and 

Response (ASPR) to discuss the current influenza season and efforts to develop appropriate and 

effective medical countermeasures. I am Dr. Rick Bright, Director of the Biomedical Advanced 

Research and Development Authority (BARD A) and Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Preparedness and Response within ASPR. 

Today, I will provide background on the unique role of ASPR and BARD A in influenza 

preparedness, describe the progress made in preparing for an influenza pandemic, discuss the 

steps we can take now to support better and faster vaccine technologies, and highlight 

advancements in other medical products needed to mount an effective influenza response. 

The Influenza Threat- Seasonal and Pandemic 

Influenza has long posed a serious threat to human health. Seasonal influenza occurs every year, 

leading to hospitalizations and deaths. Because influenza viruses mutate as they traffic and 

reassort among birds, swine, and humans, achieving protection against seasonal influenza viruses 

is a significant challenge. In addition, because of the quickly changing nature of the virus and 

the potential for a pandemic, we have to act swiftly to develop effective medical 

countermeasures and make products available to limit spread. In the last decade, we have been 

reminded how complex the management of seasonal and pandemic influenza is. Challenges 

include supporting preparedness efforts across our healthcare system, developing and 

2 
47 


30456.032

manufacturing effective vaccines quickly, and mitigating the impact of the virus through 

development of diagnostics and antivirals. As a reminder, recent novel influenza outbreaks of 

significance include: 

• The HlNl pandemic of2009-2010; 

• The emergence of seasonal H3N2 virus variants in 2012 in the Midwest primarily 

affecting children; and, 

• The emergence ofH7N9 avian influenza viruses in China in 2013 that were highly 

virulent for humans, causing repeated outbreaks including the largest outbreak in 

2017 of a new variant of the H7N9 virus that required development of a new vaccine. 

It is important to note that our approaches to seasonal and pandemic influenza are inextricably 

interwoven; what we do in one area directly impacts the other. This holds true for preparedness 

efforts as well as medical countermeasure development and manufacturing capabilities. For 

example, expanding the domestic manufacturing capacity for pandemic response enabled 

manufacturers to have the capacity to include an additional strain in the seasonal vaccinemoving from three strain (trivalent) to four strain ( quadrivalent) seasonal vaccines for better 

coverage. This increased production capacity and also supported the U.S. policy to expand 

influenza vaccination recommendations to include all age groups, ensuring sufficient supply of 

vaccine would be available to everyone who needs it. 

What is ASPR? 

3 
48 


30456.033

ASPR has a central role in influenza preparedness. When ASPR was originally established by 

Congress a decade ago, the objective was to create "unity of command" by consolidating all 

federal public health and medical preparedness and response functions under the HHS Secretary, 

and by establishing the ASPR as the Secretary's principal advisor on these matters. This 

approach was modeled on the Goldwater-Nichols Act that created the Department of Defense 

(DoD) combatant commands; the impetus was the fragmented response to Hurricane Katrina in 

2005 and concerns about an H5Nl influenza pandemic. 

ASPR's mission is to save lives and protect Americans from 21st century health security threats. 

ASPR is, in effect, the national security mission manager for HHS. As such, on behalf of the 

Secretary ofHHS, ASPR leads the federal public health and medical, preparedness, response and 

recovery to disasters and public health emergencies, in accordance with the National Response 

Framework (NRF) and Emergency Support Function (ESF) No. 8, Public Health and Medical 

Support. It is ASPR's responsibility to coordinate the nation's medical and public health 

capabilities to help Americans during such events, whatever their cause. ASPR also coordinates 

with other components ofHHS with respect to HHS's role in ESF No. 6, Health and Social 

Services, and HHS's lead role as the coordinating agency with respect to the Health and Social 

Services Recovery Support Function. 

ASPR, in partnership with other HHS agencies, works to enhance medical surge capacity when 

needed during disasters by organizing, training, equipping, and deploying federal public health 

and medical personnel and providing logistical support for federal responses to public health 

emergencies. ASPR also supports readiness and preparedness efforts at the state and local level 

4 
49 


30456.034

by coordinating grants to support capabilities across the nation's healthcare infrastructure and 

carrying out drills and operational exercises. ASPR oversees advanced research, development, 

and procurement of medical countermeasures (e.g., vaccines, medicines, diagnostics, and other 

necessary medical supplies) against biomedical, chemical, radiological and nuclear agents and 

pandemic or epidemic diseases and coordinates the stockpiling of such countermeasures. 

What is BARDA? 

BARD A is a component of ASPR. Congress established BARD A to bridge the so-called "valley 

of death" in late-stage development of medical countermeasures where many products 

historically languished or failed due to a limited commercial market incentive. Generally, the 

development of an effective medical countermeasure can take over 10 years and cost over $1 

billion. By using flexible, nimble authorities, multi-year advanced funding, strong public-private 

partnerships, and cutting edge expertise, BARD A has successfully pushed innovative medical 

countermeasures, such as vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics, through advanced development to 

stockpiling and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval or licensing. 

In the last decade, BARD A's strong partnerships with 190 biotechnology and pharmaceutical 

companies, U.S. government partners, and academic institutions have led to 34 medical 

countermeasures approved or licensed by the FDA. BARD A has supported the development of 

27 medical countermeasures against Department of Homeland Security (DRS)-identified 

national security threats through Project BioShield, including products for smallpox, anthrax, 

botulinum, radiologic/nuclear emergencies, and chemical events. Fourteen of these products 

5 
50 


30456.035

have been placed in the Strategic National Stockpile and are ready to be used in an emergency. 

BARD A has also supported the development and production of23 influenza vaccines, antiviral 

drugs, and diagnostics; some of these were used in the 2009 HlN! pandemic, stockpiled to 

enhance preparedness for HSN!and H7N9 influenza outbreaks or pandemics, and some were 

licensed for seasonal influenza and are entering the marketplace. 

BARD A focuses on advanced development, which includes critical steps needed to transform a 

promising candidate into a product that is ready to use safely when a crisis hits. These steps 

include: optimizing and validating commercial scale manufacturing processes; optimizing 

product formulations, storage, product longevity and effectiveness; creating, optimizing, and 

validating assays to assure product integrity; and, conducting late-stage clinical safety and 

efficacy studies. 

Better and Faster Influenza Vaccines Right Now 

BARD A has always been driven by the strategy to make more, safer, faster, and better influenza 

vaccines. With benefits to both pandemic and seasonal influenza preparedness and response, 

BARD A has prioritized partnering with industry partners to build domestic vaccine 

manufacturing infrastructure, and develop and license better and faster manufactured influenza 

vaccines. With supplemental funding from Congress over the last decade, BARD A has invested 

heavily in increasing the domestic capacity for monovalent vaccine antigen production-from 

approximately 60 million doses to 600 million doses. 

6 
51 


30456.036

BARD A also established the first and largest pre-pandemic influenza vaccine stockpile in the 

world, one that could, if necessary, vaccinate tens of millions in the event ofHSNl and has 

advanced the science of antigens and adjuvants through unique programs. The stockpile and 

rapid response capability is a true national asset that not only provides vaccine to America's first 

responders and critical workforce, but also provides each vaccine manufacturer that holds a US 

license with valuable lead time to develop vaccines against influenza viruses that pose the greatest 

risk to becoming a pandemic virus. This asset also allows for BARD A, industry and HHS 

partners to develop reagents and conduct clinical studies to understand the science about each of 

these vaccines. This lead time and advance work saves a tremendous amount of time during the 

start of a pandemic, therefore leading to the more rapid availability of vaccine and ultimately to 

saving lives. While this represents a significant accomplishment, and a success of the BARDA 

public-private partnership model, there is more to be done to ensure that the most effective 

vaccines are available when and where we need them. 

Since the 2009 influenza pandemic, BARD A has made significant progress in partnering with 

cutting edge companies to develop novel manufacturing technologies that offer the potential to 

provide more effective influenza vaccines. 

The traditional technology for manufacturing influenza vaccines is egg-based. Although this 

method has been optimized for efficiency, it has not fundamentally changed since the 1940's, 

and it is still the predominant method of vaccine production for the commercial market today. 

Recognizing the need to improve the robustness and responsiveness of our vaccine 

manufacturing technology, BARD A first began supporting the development of six different cell7 
52 


30456.037

based manufacturing technologies in 2006 and three different recombinant manufacturing 

technologies in 2009. As a result of these investments, a cell-based influenza vaccine 

(Flucelvax®) was developed. Flucevlax was licensed by the FDA in 2012, and is now produced 

by Seqirus in Holly Springs, NC and can now be administered to individuals four years and 

older. In 2013, the FDA licensed the first recombinant influenza vaccine (Flublok®) that can be 

given to people over 18 years of age. This vaccine was developed by Protein Sciences 

Corporation which was recently acquired by Sanofi Pasteur. BARD A also supported several 

companies to develop influenze vaccine adjuvanted to enhance the effectiveness of the seasonal 

vaccine and to reduce the overall amount of vaccine antigen needed in a dose as a way of 

stretching a limited supply to protect more people faster during a pandemic. The first prepandemic vaccine adjuvanted was developed by GSK, which was soon followed by achieving 

licensure of a season influenza vaccine adjuvant for adults over age 65. 

These cell-based and recombinant technologies offer the potential to provide more effective 

vaccines than those produced in eggs, more quickly, and with flexibility to rapidly shift to keep 

pace with changes in the virus. However, due to marketplace competition, such as a current 

inability to differentiate cell-based and recombinant technologies in the market, and limited 

domestic production capacity, during the 2017/2018 influenza season these vaccine technologies 

represent only 18 percent and 3 percent, respectively, of the total vaccine available. Investments 

in next-generation manufacturing processes to maximize the scale, efficiency and speed of cellbased and recombinant technologies, as well as investments in clinical studies needed to expand 

age indications and validate potential benefits of these vaccines, including the potential to have 

more effective vaccines that are not vulnerable to adapting human vaccine viruses to grow 

8 
53 


30456.038

efficiently in chicken eggs will help improve preparedness and response for both seasonal and 

pandemic influenza. In addition, utilizing these flexible manufacturing technologies 

domestically also improves our capability to rapidly produce other critical medical 

countermeasures for other threats. 

There are significant strides that can be made to improve the effectiveness of our existing 

vaccines in preparation for the long-term vision of an ultimate universal influenza vaccine. 

Leveraging the successful development and licensure of both recombinant and cell-based 

influenza vaccines, we should: 

1) Continue to expand the domestic capacity of cell-based and recombinant influenza 

vaccines; 

2) Explore ways to enhance their effectiveness, such as through the addition of adjuvants 

and higher doses of vaccine; 

3) Conduct clinical trials in support of applications to expand their licensed indications for 

all age groups; and, 

4) Fully integrate manufacturing process improvements to realize efficiencies to increase 

flexibility and robustness while reducing response time and establishing a 21st century 

foundation for next generation vaccines. 

Moreover, to improve influenza vaccines now, we must modernize and harmonize the end-to-end 

process of vaccine production, to completely incorporate new technologies to decrease the time 

needed to produce vaccines that are ready for administration, and increase efficiency and 

flexibility. We must also work closely with our partners in industry and at the FDA to continue 

9 
54 


30456.039

to explore modem methods of continuous manufacturing of vaccine that will provide added 

flexibility and response capabilities matched to the rapid changes we know so well with 

influenza. BARD A will continue to invest in sustaining the overall domestic influenza vaccine 

manufacturing capacity to ensure vaccines can be produced and accessed quickly when needed 

to protect health in a pandemic. Emergency supplemental funding supported the work to 

increase this domestic resource, in recognition of the urgent need to have U.S.-based response 

capabilities, and we must sustain these hard-won gains. 

Advancing Other Medical Products Needed for Effective Influenza Response 

While vaccination is the best way to prevent influenza infection, every year, and especially in the 

event of a pandemic, a large number of individuals will nevertheless become ill and will need 

urgent treatment. There is an ample supply of antiviral drugs, including pediatric formulations, 

for this influenza season. However, continued development of novel antivirals is essential to 

provide additional treatment options if drug resistance emerges to our only class of currently 

FDA-approved and CDC-recommended influenza drugs. BARD A is committed to the 

development of novel treatments for people infected with influenza. Last year, BARD A utilized 

Other Transactional Authority to forge flexible, portfolio-based public-partnerships with Janssen, 

and Regeneron to address this critical need. 

Early information on influenza infection is critical for proper treatment, and can help reduce the 

spread of disease. The time needed to effectively access, administer, and receive results from 

current diagnostic tests often exceeds the window of opportunity for optimal treatment; current 

influenza drugs are most effective when taken within the first 48 hours of symptom onset. 

10 
55 


30456.040

Therefore, BARD A is partnering with companies and researchers to develop new influenza 

diagnostics. Our goal is to develop in-home and wearable diagnostics to inform and empower 

patients to take responsible actions towards earlier treatment and non-pharmaceutical approaches 

to reduce the severity of their illness, reduce the spread of disease, reduce overall health care 

costs and to save lives. An in-home or wearable diagnostic would have a positive impact by 

providing early, actionable information to the patient. 

Conclusion 

Influenza and other emerging infectious diseases with pandemic potential continue to mutate, 

evolve, and infect animals and humans, posing continued significant threats to global public 

health and to the security of the United States. Together with our Federal and industry partners, 

ASPR and BARD A have made huge progress towards pandemic influenza preparedness. Our 

Nation must continue to invest in domestic pandemic preparedness efforts and work with key 

global partners to prepare for, prevent, detect, and respond to emerging pandemic threats. 

Building on a decade's worth of progress, partnered with industry, the time is right to make 

better seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines, antivirals, and diagnostics widely available. 

BARD A has a unique responsibility in supporting advanced research, development, and 

procurement of pandemic influenza medical countermeasures. While the promise and 

advantages of universal influenza vaccines is an elusive but highly worthy goal, led by our 

colleagues at NIH, the near term threat of influenza demands that we work right now to make 

influenza vaccines better and faster, and we ensure that diagnostic tools and antiviral treatments 

are also available to save lives. Now is the time to act. Thank you for your time, and I look 

forward to your questions. 

II 
56 

Mr. HARPER. Thank you very much. 

The Chair now recognizes Scott Gottlieb for 5 minutes for the 

purposes of his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF SCOTT GOTTLIEB 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 

DeGette and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the invitation to testify on our response to the 2017–2018 seasonal flu. 

This flu season has been particularly hard. I agree with my colleagues that investing in and working towards a universal flu vaccine is crucial. Unfortunately, given where we are today in the development process, that reality is still many years off. 

While we should continue to focus on the discovery of a new 

breakthrough vaccine, we must also consider what immediate and 

intermediate steps we can take to enhance the production of existing licensed vaccines and what should be done to invest in advanced domestic manufacturing to ensure that new and existing 

technologies are scalable so that manufacturers meet domestic and 

global demand. 

There have been successes in developing alternatives to eggbased vaccines, such as cell-based and recombinant technologies, in 

part because of the collaborations and work by BARDA. However, 

despite these advances in vaccine development, the majority of 

manufacturers are still continuing to produce egg-based vaccines. 

There are reasons for this. The egg-based process works, and the 

vaccines are safe and effective. But, even more so, it would require 

an enormous investment to fundamentally change manufacturing. 

However, we believe it’s worth better understanding the potential of cell-based or recombinant alternatives. Some studies have 

found that cell-based or recombinant vaccines could be more efficacious than egg-based vaccines, but more data and analyses are 

needed. 

As one step to better understanding the differences between eggbased and cell-based technologies, we’re using CMS data to compare Medicare patients that received the cell-based vaccines to 

those who received an egg-based vaccine to determine which vaccine was more effective in that population. 

As we consider greater investments in alternative vaccine development processes, it’s important to note, however, that there are 

also challenges with these new cell-based approaches. To help address these challenges, FDA is working to help develop more effective cell lines that can be better scaled through continuous manufacturing. We’re also looking at how we develop a more robust recombinant vaccine manufacturing process to increase yield while 

reducing cost. 

Continuous manufacturing holds great promise for both cellbased and recombinant vaccines because supply could be more easily ramped up on short notice. This would allow us to more rapidly 

address newly emerging strains or strain drift. Getting all the necessary preparatory work done is one limiting step of the egg-based 

processes. 

The FDA can help industry make investments in these new manufacturing technologies and facilitate such a transition. We need to 

develop a science-based framework that includes the regulatory 

57 

tools and guidelines for products to be developed in these systems 

and to be properly evaluated. And, ultimately, our investment will 

provide regulatory clarity for this kind of new technology. That regulatory framework can increase the efficiency and reduce the cost 

of transitioning to this kind of new cell-based and recombinant 

product development manufacturing. 

More immediately, as we prepare for next year’s flu season and 

analyze the data from this year, we’re trying to better understand 

why this year’s vaccine was less effective against H3N2. At FDA’s 

recent advisory committee meeting, the data presented continued 

to suggest that the strains selected for the 2017 and 2018 vaccines 

and used by manufacturers reasonably match the circulating 

strains. This includes the H3N2 strain. 

Although adapting circulating virus strains from manufacture 

can lead to differences between the circulating strains and the one 

used for manufacturing and although those changes could affect 

vaccine effectiveness, the case this year is likely to be much more 

complex. 

And this year is not the first time we’ve seen vaccines be less effective again H3N2. Recent flu vaccines have proven, on average, 

to be only about 33 percent effective against the H3N2 viruses. 

Given this, we’re looking at several factors to better understand 

why effectiveness tends to be lower against this strain. 

As we continue to invest in the future of manufacturing and vaccine technology, we also need to remember the importance of simply ensuring that more people get vaccinated with available vaccines each flu season. And we also must work hard to ensure that 

products used to treat the flu, including antivirals and IV saline, 

are available and that we take steps to address any potential shortages. 

As always, FDA remains committed to communicating and sharing updates with the public about all aspects of our flu response. 

And I look forward to answering your questions today. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Gottlieb follows:] 

58 


30456.041

TESTIMONY 

OF 

SCOTT GOTTLIEB, M.D. 

COMMISSIONER OF FOOD AND DRUGS 

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

"EXAMINING U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS FOR 

AND RESPONSE EFFORTS TO SEASONAL INFLUENZA" 

MARCH 8, 2018 

RELEASE ONLY UPON DELIVERY 
59 


30456.042

Introduction 

Chairman Harper, Ranking Member DeGette, distinguished members of the Subcommittee, I am 

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, Commissioner ofthe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the 

Agency). Thank you for the opportunity to be here today lo discuss FDA's role in the highly 

collaborative effort in preventing influenza through vaccination in the United States. 

Influenza (flu) is a major public health concern. Annually, flu causes illness in a substantial 

proportion of the U.S. population and may result in serious complications, including events 

leading to hospitalization and death. Influenza viruses are highly unpredictable. Each year, they 

can present new challenges for vaccine manufacturers, public health agencies, providers, and 

patients. The current flu season has been especially challenging, with widespread activity that 

has affected all fifty states, resulting in a record number of hospitalizations. 

Although health care providers are still busy taking care of people with influenza this season, 

essential work has started on the production of next year's influenza vaccines. As this process 

moves forward, FDA is committed to continuing to examine the factors that impacted vaccine 

effectiveness from this season. Our goal is to work with other public health agencies to ensure 

that vaccines produced for the next season will have the greatest chance of being effective in 

preventing influenza. 

Influenza viruses continually undergo changes in their genetic makeup and the resulting proteins 

that interact with the immune system. These changes can occur from one season to the next. 

They can also occur within the course of an influenza season. Unlike other vaccines, the 

composition of influenza vaccines must be periodically updated so that they are effective against 

the predominant circulating viruses anticipated in the upcoming influenza season. The strains of 

virus used in vaccine production include two distinct subtypes of influenza A (Hl N I and H3N2) 

and one (for trivalent vaccine) or two (for quadrivalent vaccine) different lineages of influenza B 

(B/Yamagata and BNictoria, which are genetically divergent from each other). 

A Global Process for Virus Strain Selection 

The process of ensuring the timely availability of influenza vaccine in the United States and 

elsewhere is a global, year-round process. Each year, the World Health Organization (WHO) 

convenes technical consultations in February and September to recommend the virus strains for 

inclusion in influenza vaccines for the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, respectively. FDA 

participates in both technical meetings. To identify virus strains likely to cause illness during the 

upcoming influenza season, experts from WHO Collaborating Centers for Influenza (which 

include the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)), the WHO Essential Regulatory 

Laboratories (this includes FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)), and 

other influenza and public health experts study recently circulating influenza viruses and recent 

global disease patterns. In addition, blood samples from individuals receiving the most recent 
60 


30456.043

influenza vaccines are analyzed by the WHO Essential Regulatory Laboratories and WHO 

Collaborating Centers to determine how well antibodies induced by these vaccines react to 

recently isolated viruses. After careful evaluation of the antigenic and genetic characteristics of 

influenza viruses that are circulating and infecting humans across the globe and the ability of 

current vaccines to protect against these viruses, WHO makes recommendations on the 

composition of the influenza vaccines for use in the upcoming influenza season. 

These recommendations are then reviewed by national vaccine regulatory agencies, such as 

FDA, and vaccine manufacturers as they consider the vaccine composition for the upcoming 

season. WHO usually makes its vaccine strain recommendations in February for the upcoming 

influenza season in the Northern Hemisphere and in September for the upcoming influenza 

season in the Southern Hemisphere. The recommendations must be made months in advance of 

the next influenza season. This is to accommodate the time that is required for manufacturing, 

testing, lot release, and distribution of a very large number of vaccine doses consisting of 

antigens derived from three or four different influenza virus strains. 

FDA's Role and the Manufacturing Process 

WHO recommendations, resulting from the technical consultations described above, provide a 

guide to national public health authorities and vaccine manufacturers for the development and 

production of influenza vaccines for the upcoming influenza season. In the U.S., FDA is 

responsible for regulating vaccines. In this role, FDA brings together public health and influenza 

disease experts to recommend which influenza virus strains should be included in FDA-licensed 

vaccines. FDA convenes its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee 

(VRBPAC) each year, typically in late February or early March and within a few weeks after the 

WHO consultation on influenza vaccine composition. The meeting to provide recommendations 

on strain selection for the upcoming 2018-2019 United States influenza season took place on 

March I, 2018. 

The VRBP AC considers the recommendations made by the WHO regarding the composition of 

influenza vaccines for the upcoming influenza season in the Northern Hemisphere. The 

committee also reviews information regarding viruses that have caused human illness in the 

previous year, how these viruses are changing, and disease trends. CDC and other WHO 

Collaborating Centers provide most of the information considered in the course of this review. 

Based on the data available at the time of the meeting, the Advisory Committee makes a 

recommendation for the composition of influenza vaccines licensed by FDA for use in the 

United States during the upcoming season. 

Influenza viruses that grow well in culture, which have been generated and accepted by WHO 

collaborating centers, are provided to the licensed vaccine manufacturers to generate the "seed 

viruses" for manufacturing their influenza vaccines. FDA confirms the antigenic suitability of 

the manufacturer's seed viruses. The manufacturing demands for influenza vaccines are 

2 
61 


30456.044

substantial. No other routine vaccine is produced, FDA-approved, and distributed every year 

across the United States within an approximately six-month time frame. The manufacturing 

timelines are tight and the process of producing influenza vaccines involves many sequential 

steps and overlapping processes. Even with technologic advancements, each of these steps and 

processes still requires time to complete. Given the yearly need for an update to the strains 

included in each licensed flu vaccine, there is limited flexibility in the timelines for influenza 

vaccine production and availability. There is the possibility that advances in manufacturing, as 

well as the adoption of different technologies for the production of antigen, can help compress 

this process and provide greater predictability. Certain technologies could also offer more 

opportunity to adjust the vaccine closer to the influenza season should a new influenza strain 

emerge after production has already begun. 

Vaccine manufacturers must annually submit to FDA a supplement to their license to include the 

updated influenza virus antigens in their vaccine. FDA must review and approve a supplement 

before the updated version of the influenza vaccine containing new virus antigens can be 

distributed. Manufacturing of each antigen to be included in the vaccines occurs sequentially 

over several months, usually from December (produced at risk by manufacturers before the strain 

recommendations are made) until late May. In parallel with vaccine manufacturing, FDA 

develops and calibrates reagents that are provided to the vaccine manufacturers and our 

regulatory counterparts throughout the world. Manufacturers and FDA use these reagents to test 

the vaccines for potency and identity before FDA approves the new formulation of the licensed 

seasonal influenza vaccines for U.S. distribution. 

The vaccines are formulated into standard dosages, filled and finished by the manufacturers into 

final containers such as vials, syringes, and sprayers. Manufacturers submit their vaccine testing 

results, along with samples from each lot, to FDA for "lot release." As FDA releases lots, the 

manufacturers can make these lots commercially available throughout the United States. 

Typically, FDA approves the updated seasonal influenza vaccines with new labeling by the end 

of July. Every year, FDA begins working with manufacturers at the earliest stages of influenza 

vaccine development, and we continue to assist them throughout the production phase. During 

this period, we engage the companies on technical and manufacturing issues and conduct facility 

inspections to ensure compliance with good manufacturing practice, as warranted. 

2017-2018 Influenza Season 

FDA's VRBPAC met on March 9, 2017, to provide recommendations on the composition of the 

influenza vaccine for the 2017-2018 U.S. influenza season. During this meeting, the Advisory 

Committee reviewed and evaluated the surveillance data related to epidemiology and antigenic 

characteristics of recent influenza isolates, serological responses to 2016-2017 vaccines, and the 

availability of candidate strains and reagents. The Committee recommended that the trivalent 

3 
62 


30456.045

influenza vaccines for the U.S. 2017-2018 influenza season be produced with the following: an 

A/Michigan/45/2015 (HlNl) pdm09-1ike virus, an A/Hong Kong /4801/2014 (H3N2)-Iike virus, 

and a B/Brisbane/60/2008-1ike virus (BNictoria lineage). The Committee also recommended 

that quadrivalent influenza vaccines be produced with the above three strains and the following 

additional B strain: a B/Phuket/3073/2013-like virus (B/Yamagata lineage). 

This year, much of the influenza-related illness has been caused by one strain of influenza A 

called H.3N2, with another strain of influenza A called H.!Nl and strains of influenza B 

contributing to lesser extents. CDC recently published the interim estimates of 2017-2018 

seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness in the United States. Overall adjusted vaccine 

effectiveness for IIINl and influenza B strains was not too far off from prior seasons at 67 

percent and 42 percent, respectively. However, overall adjusted effectiveness for H3N2 

influenza was only 25 percent. The effectiveness of the vaccine against H3N2 in children 6 

months to 8 years of age was 51 percent, yet the effectiveness in those 65 years and older was 

only 17 percent. Individuals over 65 years of age always tend to have a lower response rate to 

influenza vaccine, and improving the response in this age group is one of the challenges that we 

must address. 

Reduced effectiveness of vaccination against H3N2 relative to HlNl and influenza B has been 

seen in prior seasons. Scientists at FDA are working with colleagues at other agencies to try to 

understand the reasons for the difference in the effectiveness of the vaccine against H3N2 

relative to the other types of influenza. The work that they are doing includes laboratory and 

epidemiologic investigation. For example, in trying to understand whether one type of influenza 

vaccine performs better than another in individuals 65 years of age and older, they are making 

use of an established collaboration with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). 

As part of this collaboration, our scientists arc looking at the effectiveness of various influenza 

vaccines in preventing hospitalizations for influenza and treatment for influenza-like illness in 

four million individuals for whom information is available in the large database regarding what 

type of influenza vaccine they received. They are using the database to look for differences in 

effectiveness in those receiving egg-based and cell-based vaccines, as well as differences in 

effectiveness in those who were vaccinated with standard-dose versus high-dose influenza 

vaccine and adjuvanted influenza vaccine. The high dose vaccine contains four times as much of 

the influenza antigen as standard vaccines, and the adjuvanted influenza vaccine contains an 

ingredient meant to boost the immune system's response to the vaccine. Difierences observed in 

the effectiveness of differently-produced vaccines against H3N2 may offer important insights 

into why the most widely-used, egg-based vaccines have reduced efficacy against this strain. 

4 
63 


30456.046

Progress in Influenza Vaccine Manufacturing 

Despite difficulties inherent in preparing influenza vaccines, we continue to make progress in our 

preparedness efforts in collaboration with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development 

Authority (BARDA), CDC, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and other stakeholders. 

New influenza vaccines have been licensed in recent years, including cell-based influenza 

vaccines, recombinant protein vaccines, and quadrivalent influenza vaccines. Cell-based and 

recombinant protein influenza vaccines provide alternatives to the traditional egg-based process 

of manufacturing, and provide the potential for a faster vaccine manufacturing process. FDA has 

licensed a cell-based influenza vaccine and a recombinant influenza vaccine. FDA has also 

licensed quadrivalent vaccines that are intended to protect against two influenza A strains (H3N2 

and HlNl) and two influenza B strains. In addition, FDA has approved high-dose and 

adjuvanted vaccines specifically for the elderly population who can require an adjuvant or higher 

exposure to antigen in order to develop an adequate immune response to the influenza vaccine. 

CDC's surveillance efforts to monitor for circulating influenza strains are more extensive than 

ever before. These efforts offer the potential for early detection of emerging influenza viruses. 

The number of candidate vaccine virus strains available to manufacturers has increased greatly 

over the last few years, providing them with more options to increase vaccine yields. FDA, in 

conjunction with NIH, BARD A, and CDC, continues efforts to develop high-yield candidate 

vaccine strains, as well as more modem, faster methods to measure vaccine potency and sterility. 

To further address the challenges presented by the constantly changing nature of influenza 

viruses, scientists in government laboratories, academic institutions, and vaccine manufacturers 

are working to develop new-generation vaccines that might be longer lasting and provide broader 

protection against drifted strains. Ultimately, developing a universal influenza vaccine that 

provides protection against many different strains of flu from year-to-year would be ideal. 

However, the reality of such a vaccine is likely to still be many years away. In the meantime, 

FDA is collaborating with Federal partners and with industry to improve the manufacturing of 

the current generation of influenza vaccines. Advances in manufacturing, including wider 

consideration of cell-based manufacturing, continuous manufacturing, and the use of 

recombinant vaccines, may offer the best near-term opportunity to improve vaccine timeliness 

and effectiveness. Our scientists are interested in looking at whether advanced manufacturing 

technologies, including continuous manufacturing of cell-based and recombinant vaccines, could 

help facilitate much more agile response to changes in influenza strains. Use of continuous 

manufacturing could also have the added benefit of allowing the rapid scale-up and production of 

vaccine in the United States within compact manufacturing facilities. The potential benefits of 

these advancements are also applicable to our ongoing efforts to enhance our nation's 

preparedness for pandemic influenza. 

5 
64 


30456.047

Although these vaccine development efforts are still in early stages, some may have the potential 

to increase and broaden protection against influenza. FDA will continue to work with U.S. 

Government partners, manufacturers, and other stakeholders to facilitate development of new 

vaccines and identify methods that have the potential to speed the manufacturing process for 

existing vaccines. Our goal is to better protect the American public, including those at higher 

risk of complications from influenza such as the very young and the elderly. 

Diagnostics and Antivirals 

Finally, I want to highlight FDA's role in approving rapid diagnostic tests and antiviral therapies. 

Currently, there are 13 rapid flu tests available for marketing in the U.S. These rapid flu tests, 

which are medical devices, include antigen-based tests and nucleic acid-based tests that are 

available for use in primary care. To improve the overall accuracy and reliability of flu testing, 

FDA recently reclassified antigen-based rapid influenza diagnostic tests, which included new 

performance and testing requirements to demonstrate the ability of a rapid flu test to detect 

currently circulating viruses. We expect the new requirements to lower the number of 

misdiagnosed flu infections by promoting the development of new, improved tests that can more 

reliably detect the virus. This will ensure patients and providers are receiving accurate diagnostic 

information without reducing access to reliable tests. 

Currently there are several antiviral drugs approved for prophylaxis and/or for treatment of acute 

uncomplicated influenza, and several others in clinical trials. FDA monitors for shortage, safety, 

and manufacturing issues associated with the available drugs. FDA works closely 

with developers of antiviral drugs to review and advise on development pathways and clinical 

trial designs to enhance understanding ofthc role of these drugs in influenza preparedness and 

treatment. A major goal is to encourage availability of a variety of treatments that can be shown 

to benefit a broader range of patient populations and influenza outbreak strains. 

Conclusion 

In closing, I would like to assure the Committee that FDA will continue to advance policies and 

the science to help improve the overall reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness of the vaccine 

production process. We will apply all the knowledge gained in conjunction with NIH, BARD A, 

CDC, and other Federal partners as we work together with manufacturers to ensure that the best 

possible vaccines are available next season to protect against the flu. 

6 
65 

Mr. HARPER. Thanks to each of you for your opening statements. 

And, you know, this is an incredible panel of witnesses that are 

here today, that cover the entire spectrum of people that are daily 

dealing with this important issue. So thank you for this time, this 

education you’re giving us. 

And so I’m going to recognize myself to ask the first set of questions. And this is for each of you, just for quick responses, if you 

would just reply to this. 

This year has been an especially difficult and severe flu season. 

A lot of lives have been lost, and many people have been hospitalized. Would you get the vaccine and have your loved ones get it 

also? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes. I get the vaccine every year and make sure 

my whole family does. 

Dr. FAUCI. Same here. I got the vaccine this year and every year 

over the last as many years as I can remember, as have my wife 

and three children. 

Dr. BRIGHT. Absolutely. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Absolutely, sir. I go to the pediatrician with my 

children, and the pediatrician gives it to me and gives it to them. 

Mr. HARPER. That’s great. 

All right. If you get the flu after getting the flu vaccine, is having 

gotten the flu vaccine likely to reduce the severity of the illness? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes. There are studies now that have shown reduced severity following immunization even when the disease itself 

isn’t prevented. 

Dr. FAUCI. That is true, and that’s an important point that many 

people don’t appreciate, because they say, ‘‘I did get the flu even 

though I got vaccinated.’’ What they don’t realize, that it is likely— 

not likely, but it is possible that having gotten the flu without the 

vaccine would have wound them up in the hospital, particularly if 

they were someone in the risk groups that are more prone to getting complications. 

Mr. HARPER. Dr. Bright? 

Dr. BRIGHT. Absolutely. There’s data to support that the vaccine, 

even if it’s not the most effective vaccine, still does a lot to reduce 

the severity of illness and reduce hospitalization. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I would just echo those statements. 

Mr. HARPER. Great. 

Now, I’ve heard some concerns that some individuals are worried 

that they may get the flu from the flu vaccine. Is that possible? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. No. The flu vaccine cannot cause the flu. 

Dr. FAUCI. Very few things that you say are impossible, but this 

is impossible. 

Mr. HARPER. OK. 

Dr. BRIGHT. Agreed. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I agree as well, sir. 

Mr. HARPER. That’s great. There are those misconceptions out 

there, that when I had this esteemed group here I wanted to make 

sure that people realize those important facts going forward. 

Dr. Schuchat, if I may talk to you for a moment, this year we’ve 

seen a lot of headlines about the flu vaccine’s reduced effectiveness. 

Later, we’re going to ask questions about why we likely saw reVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:41 Jan 15, 2019 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\115THCONGRESS\115X107FLUPREP\115X107FLUPREPWORKING WAYNE
66 

duced effectiveness in the flu vaccine, but, first, however, I want 

to ask about vaccine effectiveness for children this year. 

You had answered the effectiveness of that was 59 percent effective, much better than it was in adults. But why was it more effective on children than it was, say, older adults? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. We don’t have all the answers, but there are a 

couple of possible explanations. One is children’s immune response 

is often better than adults, particularly better than older adults. 

A second is your response to an influenza vaccine may differ 

when it’s the first time you’ve ever been exposed to influenza or the 

vaccine. You may have a better response. Some people think that 

the first influenza you’re ever exposed to, through the vaccine or 

nature, has a long-term effect on your immune response. 

But we were very pleased to see the better response in children 

this year. 

Mr. HARPER. So how do we communicate that? Why is it especially important for school-age children to get vaccinated? How do 

we communicate that? And, certainly, you would agree that’s true? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes, we have simplified our recommendations for 

children, and now we recommend everybody 6 months and over get 

a flu vaccine every year. The first time you’re getting a flu vaccine, 

if you’re a young child, you’re supposed to get two doses of the vaccine. 

Communication about vaccination has to be multisectoral. We 

think the healthcare provider, pediatricians, are the most important influence on kids getting vaccinated, but we also use trusted 

channels, social media, and other influencers. 

Mr. HARPER. We’ve obviously seen that the number of children 

receiving the flu vaccine has remained steady at just under 60 percent, and the number of adults receiving flu vaccines remains fairly 

steady, between 41 and 43 percent. 

So how do we do that, not just for children but for adults also, 

to communicate to America the importance of being vaccinated 

with a flu vaccine? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes, there is a nuanced message, because being 

open and honest is really important and not promising that the 

vaccine will, you know, cure cancer—although we have a vaccine 

that does that, actually, the HPV vaccine. Sorry. But I think Americans want us to be open and honest about vaccine information. 

We know that flu vaccines can prevent disease and reduce severity, and we know that they can also prevent spread. Children are 

very important in getting flu disease but also in spreading it. And 

so getting higher coverage among children is in the whole public’s 

interest. 

Mr. HARPER. That’s great. Thank you very much. 

The Chair now recognizes Ranking Member DeGette for the purposes of questions. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Fauci, I think everybody on this panel agrees with you when 

you said that we need to get away from the antiquated production 

model, which the egg is. 

And I know the chairman, particularly, appreciated your 

slideshow. He’s new to this subcommittee, so he hasn’t seen it beVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:41 Jan 15, 2019 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\115THCONGRESS\115X107FLUPREP\115X107FLUPREPWORKING WAYNE
67 

fore. And he told me he was a chemistry major, so I’m happy to 

have him to educate me. 

So the recombinant-based vaccine was only 3 percent last year, 

from what I understand. I’m wondering if you can talk to me, what 

the barriers are for moving from the current methods that we have, 

the egg-based methods which are used for the majority, to this cutting-edge vaccine. 

And I’m going to ask everybody else for their opinion, too, on 

that. 

Dr. FAUCI. Yes. I think there are a few barriers, at least two, 

that stand out. One is that there are still scientific challenges to 

get the very best recombinant DNA technology. And there are three 

or four or five in addition to the one that was used in the 3 percent 

from protein sciences, the flu block. There are things that are even 

better than that. 

So we need—and that was part of what I put, Congresswoman 

DeGette, in the strategic plan, that there are scientific gaps in the 

arena of what we call platform technology, is different types of vaccine. That’s the first one, scientific obstacle. 

The second one that’s important is that, whenever you have, as 

Dr. Gottlieb mentioned, whenever you have something that’s timehonored and works and is safe, there is an understanding—fundamental underlying inertia for companies to make a change to something in which they were going to have to make a major investment in resources to switch over from one to the other. Because 

you have one that you know that works—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Sort of. 

Dr. FAUCI [continuing]. One that you know is safe. They’re going 

to have to make an investment. 

But the thing that I think we need to emphasize is that we’ve 

got to go there. We can’t stay stuck in the old technologies. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you. 

Dr. Bright, do you want to add to that? 

Dr. BRIGHT. I think everything Dr. Fauci said is spot-on, I mean, 

but, in addition to those, it’s about the capacity and the yields of 

the new technology. So we’ve had 70 years to optimize the efficiency and the yields for an egg-based vaccine. We’ve had about 5 

years to try to work on optimization of recombinant and cell-based 

vaccines. So it’s remarkable to see the progress that’s being made 

in those companies to improve the efficiency of production and the 

yields of those vaccines. 

Another challenge, however, though, the vaccine is blended together in the marketplace, so there hasn’t been a focus on getting 

the differentiated data set to show the benefit and effectiveness of 

egg-based or non-egg-based vaccines. We all know the benefits of 

non-egg-based vaccines is speed and flexibility. Those are critical 

for a pandemic response. That’s critical if we had to change late 

season for a virus drift. We’re also getting the additional data now 

to understand the true effectiveness difference. 

Ms. DEGETTE. So, Dr. Gottlieb, did you want to add anything? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I agree with my colleagues. 

I’ll just add, you know, with the recombinant processes, one of 

the challenges still is the cell culture and the yield you’re able to 

derive using the recombinant process. And, you know, while we’ve 

68 

commented that we observed better efficacy with the cell-based 

vaccine this year relative to the egg-based vaccine, it is the case 

that in some years we observe better efficacy with the egg-based 

process versus a cell-based process. 

And so I think the underlying message here, from my standpoint, 

is the egg-based process is safe and effective; it works. The challenge with it—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Sort of. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB [continuing]. Is it’s hard to scale—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Right. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB [continuing]. And it’s hard to make a midseason 

change. 

Ms. DEGETTE. And it’s also hard if you have a pandemic flu that 

hits. 

I’m wondering if any of you can—Dr. Schuchat, did you want to 

add? I didn’t want to leave you out. 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes, just to say that the investments in vaccine 

effectiveness studies on a large scale are really worthwhile. It’s 

only recently that we could tell you that the effectiveness against 

H3N2 is less than against H1N1 and B or that children have higher—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Because the studies were—and so, aside from 

funding, I’ll ask any of you—I don’t have much time left—is there 

anything else Congress can do to move this along? Because I remember years ago asking the same questions. I’m glad we’ve made 

some progress, but clearly we’re going to have to get to the gold 

standard. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I mean, if I may just quickly comment, Congresswoman, as part of the President’s budget this year, we did put forward a proposal to try to make investments in continuous manufacturing. That was geared towards this kind of an opportunity—— 

Ms. DEGETTE. Yes. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB [continuing]. To try to establish the regulatory parameters to enable these innovations to come forward. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Yes. 

Anyone else? 

Dr. BRIGHT. And, again, I mean, it does go back to funding in 

some ways, but just to support, to encourage the movement to the 

modernized technologies, in addition to expanding their domestic 

capacities that we have and when we need them. 

Ms. DEGETTE. OK. I think you can say we have got bipartisan 

support for that on this committee. 

Right, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. HARPER. I believe that’s true. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Yes. 

Mr. HARPER. That’s great. 

Ms. DEGETTE. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the chairman of the Energy and 

Commerce Committee, Greg Walden, for the purposes of questions. 

Mr. WALDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, again, thanks to our very distinguished panel of witnesses 

not only for your help in crafting public policy here today but also 

69 

the great work you do every day to improve the lives and the 

health of Americans and, frankly, people around the world. 

Dr. Gottlieb, one of the treatments that’s available for individuals who get the flu is the antivirals. We’ve talked some about that 

today. Are antiviral drugs more effective the earlier they are given? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. They are, Congressman. 

Mr. WALDEN. And how do they work? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. The currently available—— 

Mr. WALDEN. To a layperson. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB [continuing]. Antiviral drug works by blocking a 

different step in the replication cycle of the virus itself than the 

one that the vaccine targets. The vaccine targets the ability of the 

virus to attach to the cell membrane in the lungs. 

Mr. WALDEN. All right. 

And, last week, the FDA issued a press release warning of fraudulent and unapproved flu products. Why did you feel that press release was necessary, to warn consumers to be cautious? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Because we see a lot of efforts online to try to entice consumers to purchase products that we know are fraudulent, 

that are making false claims, false and misleading claims, that are 

claiming to have antiviral and antiflu effects, when, in fact, they 

are not approved for those purposes, including dietary supplements. 

Mr. WALDEN. And if consumers feel like they’ve been defrauded, 

what should they do? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Well, they should certainly—I think any consumer 

that feels they might have used a product that was making an inappropriate or fraudulent claim should certainly contact their medical provider and certainly refer the information to FDA. 

Mr. WALDEN. All right. 

And, recently, as I mentioned in my comments at the beginning, 

a new antiviral drug was approved in Japan, or is in that process, 

that supposedly has the potential to treat the flu in just one dose. 

Are you familiar with that product? And can you talk to us a little bit about whether that’s the case and what we might see here? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. So I’m familiar with the product. I would defer to 

my colleagues on the panel a little bit. 

I will just say that what the sponsor has said publicly is that 

they plan to submit an application at some point this year. And 

they currently have disclosed that they have some studies ongoing 

in the U.S. looking at a high-risk population. 

This is a drug that acts at a different point in the replication 

cycle, mechanistically an earlier stage in replication than the other 

drug that you referenced, so it is differentiated. And the other, you 

know, potential opportunity is that the onset of action appears to 

be earlier than the currently available antiviral. 

I think the bottom-line message is that we are very interested in 

having a spectrum of antiviral drugs that act differently, at different points in the virus. In case the virus itself becomes resistant 

to one approach at targeting the virus, we have backups and we 

have alternative approaches. 

Mr. WALDEN. Very good. 

Other members of the panel want to comment on that specifically? And then I have one other question. 

70 

Dr. BRIGHT. If I can add to that, yes, so BARDA has been engaged with this company developing this drug for quite some time, 

as well as some other companies that we’re supporting to develop 

new classes of antiviral drugs for influenza. 

It’s critical to note that we have not had a new class of antivirals 

approved for influenza in over 20 years. 

Mr. WALDEN. Wow. 

Dr. BRIGHT. We rely on a single class of influenza antivirals now. 

And the virus, as we know, continues to change, and resistance to 

that class of antivirals continues to emerge. And it’s very concerning in avian influenza viruses, such as pandemic strains H5N1, 

H7N9, to see these high levels of resistance emerging to that class 

of drugs. 

So it’s remarkable that this company took the lead in developing 

a new class of antiviral drug. It has attributes of a single dose. Instead of 5 days at twice-a-day dosing, it brings down the viral load 

in the patient very rapidly, faster than the currently approved 

antiviral drugs. And it has this new mechanism of action, so if a 

virus becomes resistant to the only approved class of drugs we have 

now, this drug would still work. And it could also be used potentially in combination with the existing class of drugs. 

Another thing exciting about this drug is that they’ve partnered 

now with a U.S.-based company. That U.S.-based company has 

taken the lead in bringing that to the FDA for discussions and consideration for approval in the United States. And their plans are 

to transfer the knowledge and the capability to manufacture that 

drug in the United States in the near term. 

So, again, it’s one of about a dozen or a half-dozen promising candidates with new mechanisms of action, several of those supported 

by BARDA, and even monoclonal antibodies, to make better treatments for flu. 

Mr. WALDEN. Yes, Dr. Fauci? 

Dr. FAUCI. So I can’t help myself on this, Mr. Chairman, for the 

benefit of Chairman Harper, is that Rick Bright said that this is 

very extraordinary, that the company did this. However, the first 

recognition of this particular mechanism was in a paper from 1979 

in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences—— 

Mr. WALDEN. Who authored that? 

Dr. FAUCI [continuing]. By the National Institutes of Health. 

OK? It’s entitled, ‘‘Transfer of 5′-terminal cap of globin mRNA to 

influenza viral complementary RNA during transcription.’’ 

So it just goes to show you, I mean, that basic science is the root 

of everything we do, even something that 20 years later turns into 

a product made by a Japanese company. 

Thank you. 

Mr. WALDEN. We’ll let you—that’s good. You know? And that’s 

part of why we did 21st Century Cures, to continue that funding 

and that cycle and all. 

I was hoping to ask a question about domestic manufacturing of 

vaccines and threats and opportunities, but my time has expired, 

and maybe we can get some of that as the hearing continues. 

Thank you again for your good work and for being here. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. 

71 

The Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from Illinois, Ms. 

Schakowsky, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I want to thank you, Dr. Fauci, for that addendum and the information. I think it’s really important to appreciate how much our researchers and the Federal Government contribute to addressing these. 

So I have some basic questions as just an ordinary consumer and 

person. I think, Dr. Schuchat, you might be the person to ask. Can 

you tell us generally how easy it is to spread the flu virus person 

to person? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes. It varies by strains, but, of course, this is 

one of the more infectious or contagious viruses that we have. And 

so, in a household, spread is frequent. In a school, spread is frequent. 

It can be spread through respiratory droplets or through fomites, 

sort of, on your hand. That’s why you’ve seen us so many times say 

cover your nose when you cough or sneeze and don’t touch your 

eyes or mouth after you’re—you know, with your hands—you know, 

sort of, wash your hands frequently. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. And how long is a person contagious with the 

flu? Is it possible for a person to be contagious and not know it? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. You can be contagious before you develop symptoms, and usually we say about 24 or 48 hours after the fever goes 

down. Again, with influenza, it varies by virus and by year. But 

that’s sort of the general facts. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Twenty-four hours to 48 hours after the fever. 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. After the fever goes down. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Goes down. Right. 

So the CDC recommends that people stay home for 24 hours 

after their fever breaks. But I wanted to point out, according to the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics, 28 percent of workers have no access 

at all to paid sick leave. And this is particularly a problem for 

those in the lowest-wage jobs. One-third of lower-paid workers, including those who work in fields such as food preparation, have no 

paid sick leave. And, in fact, the United States is the only industrialized country in the world without paid sick leave. 

I leave this to anyone, really. Can you explain why it’s important 

for people to stay home when they’re sick? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. We’re really trying to limit the spread of the 

virus. And so staying home while you’re sick will help you heal but 

also keep you from the spreading to others. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. So, in 2016, the National Bureau of Economic 

Research found that if paid sick leave were mandated it would prevent 100 flu-like infections per week for every 100,000 people. So, 

when people can stay home when they’re sick, people are less likely 

to get the flu. 

So I know this is not your jurisdiction, but I think it’s just important to note that some of the cautions that we suggest for people 

are really hard to abide by if you are depending on that paycheck 

for that day. I think we need to think about it. It’s a public health 

issue. Paid sick leave is a public health issue. 

I wanted to also note that Heather Holland in Texas, a Texas 

mother, 38 years old, died because she could not afford the co-pay 

72 

for Tamiflu, which was $116. And she had insurance, so this was 

a co-pay. 

So, first of all, Tamiflu, would it have helped her if she took it in time? And what do we say about that? $116 for a low-income 

family is a lot of money even when insured. 

Can someone comment on that? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes, I can just say that, in response to the spot 

shortage of antiviral medicines this year, we worked closely with 

manufacturers and pharmacies and insurers, and we learned that 

there was actually plenty of supply, but much of what was available was brand product rather than the generics, the newer 

generics. 

We did, in the midst of the season, get some agreement by pharmacies or the pharmacy benefit managers and insurers to offer the 

brand as either generic or preferred brand, which would give a 

lower co-pay. 

But, of course, you know, that’s a very, very sad story. We don’t 

know that antivirals will cure a person. The best data suggest they 

shorten the course of illness. And, of course, being able to start 

them quickly is what we think helps reduce the severe complications. 

Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. So, then, in conclusion, let me just say, paid 

sick leave and affordable pharmaceuticals, very important issues 

that we need to grapple with as we put in context this flu virus. 

Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. 

The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 

Griffith, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It’s been 

very informative. I appreciate all the testimony. You all are doing 

some great things. 

I will tell you that it’s kind of interesting and it was timely, on 

February 28, just a week or so ago, I got an email from a constituent who apparently keeps up with a lot of these issues. And 

he started talking in his email about NanoFlu and what was going 

on and how we might be able to push that particular product forward. 

And one of the things that he raised in his comments that I 

thought was very interesting, he says that they are planning—they 

have already done phase 1, so I guess we are coming to you, Dr. 

Gottlieb. But he said they have already done phase 1 human trials, 

they don’t plan to do phase 2 until the third quarter of 2018 because, obviously, you want the flu to be out there to a certain extent in order to be able to test it. 

And he said, you know, I don’t—and I’m going to quote from his 

email: I do not understand why the FDA and CDC do not push a 

vaccine like this ahead. It would seem to me they might push for 

phase 2 in Australia this year and possibly a phase 3 this year in 

the U.S. That could make the vaccine available for flu season starting in the fall of 2019. 

If the Government is really serious about speeding up the slow 

approval process and reducing health costs, a process like this 

would help to do it. And I ask the question because it makes some 

sense. Why are we using the Australian flu season to start testing 

73 

some of these new ideas? You’ve indicated—several of you have— 

that there may be 20 or 30 or 40 new products out there, and 

wouldn’t we be able to shorten that time period, particularly in the 

live trials, if we did some of it here and some of it there where they 

have the opposite seasons and a different flu season as well? 

So I’ll start with you and welcome anybody’s comments. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I’ll just kind of briefly, Congressman, I’m not sure 

I’m familiar with the product. I think this is a recombinant vaccine 

that you’re referring to. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. I believe that it is, too. I’m not well enough versed 

in it to say, but yes—and it’s been tested mostly, comparing it to 

the vaccine for senior adults. But since I’m apparently rapidly approaching that category, very interested. I turn 60 later this 

month. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I will just say, it is not uncommon to see products 

tested in the southern hemisphere, so I’m not sure what the particular circumstance here is, but that is a common phenomenon 

with new products. You’ll see them tested there to help accelerate 

the development process. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. So I can tell Paster Jones that you all are not 

against it? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. You could pass on to anyone that we are willing 

to actively engage with any sponsor that is developing an innovative product in this space. 

Dr. FAUCI. Mr. Griffith, it’s not a testing in Australia versus 

here. The product that your constituency was referring to is the 

nanoparticle that has gone into phase 1, the one I showed you the 

model of. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Right. 

Dr. FAUCI. The reason it’s not going to go into phase 2 from the 

standpoint of until the end of the year is really a production capability, it’s what Dr. Gottlieb referred to when he said what we 

haven’t gotten efficient yet is the yield of this. 

So we don’t have enough GMP product to start a phase 2 until 

the end of 2018. It’s not that we—that the FDA is holding us up 

or anything, it’s just that we don’t have enough product. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Well, I really appreciate that. Dr. Bright, did you 

want to weigh in? 

Dr. BRIGHT. I was going to weigh in and say that it’s very typical. When you develop any new vaccine, it’s difficult and takes 

time. When you develop an influenza vaccine, you have to time it 

with an outbreak of influenza. So as long as it’s under a USIND, 

we are very flexible in allowing the companies to get the data and 

conduct clinical studies wherever flu might be in the world, as long 

as it’s following that IND process. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Well, that’s great. And I appreciate you all helping 

me answer that question. And I know that Mr. Jones, who I spoke 

with yesterday, makes sure I could say his name in public, he’ll be 

very pleased to hear that as well. 

Let me ask this, because the chairman brought it up just—and 

if you all can get to it briefly, the domestic supply and the threat 

of maybe having our supply mostly offshore of our flu vaccines. And 

it doesn’t matter to me who wants to respond to that. I guess that 

would be ASPR, is that correct? 

74 

Dr. BRIGHT. We work very hard—it’s a very important question. 

We worked very hard over the last years and invested great sums 

of money to make sure that we can develop these vaccine and get 

them licensed. It is critical now that we expand that domestic manufacturing capacity, so not only they are able to meet a seasonal 

market demand, but they are also available when we need them for 

a pandemic. And in a pandemic situation we know we cannot import vaccines from other countries easily. So the domestic manufacturing capability for these modern technologies for recombinant 

cell-based is absolutely critical to our national security. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. And I appreciate that and my time is just about 

up. But I would say, could you please let us know what we can do 

to assist in trying to get more onshore production? 

And I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. Castor, for 5 minutes. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all the 

witnesses for being here and everything you do to help keep Americans healthy and safe. We’re now exiting peak flu season, but we’re 

entering allergy season. And what I’ve learned over the past decade 

is that our allergy seasons are longer and more intense, we have 

hotter days. Back home in Florida the pollen is already raging. 

What advice do you give to families with children and others in 

vulnerable populations that are on alert because of the intensity of 

the flu season as they begin to deal with allergies? When is the appropriate time to head right to the doctor’s office and get checked 

out if you have a flu? Is it the onset of fever? Dr. Fauci? 

Dr. FAUCI. If the question you’re asking is the overlap between 

the two, how do you know which one it is, well, the recommendations that we get from the CDC, and I’ll yield to Dr. Schuchat in 

a second, but what we say is that if you have symptoms that persist, number one, that’s certainly something you want to go to a 

physician for. 

If you have a situation where you look like you’re recovering and 

then you have a relapse, it could possibly be a bacterial infection. 

But, importantly, if you fall into one of the risk categories—elderly, 

underlying disease like heart disease, chronic lung disease, diabetes, obesity, pregnancy, child from birth to 4 years old—you should 

not hesitate to see a physician because that’s the group that really 

would benefit from getting an antiviral drug like Tamiflu. 

And that’s the reason why the CDC recommends that we do that, 

and, Ann, you might want to—— 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes, and I would just say that even though we’re 

pleased that the peak of the season seems to have passed, there’s 

still a lot of flu out there. And the B strains are more common 

right now than they were a few weeks ago. So we certainly look 

for fever with flu or flu-like illness. 

But as Dr. Fauci did describe, the warning signs, things like getting better and then getting worse is a warning sign, difficulty 

breathing, a very high persistent fever. For children, you know, not 

being very responsive or being hard to wake up. Those are really 

important things to—— 

Ms. CASTOR. You know, and I continued to hear the refrain from 

folks that don’t get a flu shot that they don’t get it because last 

75 

time they got it, it made them sick, and that’s the reason that they 

don’t get the flu shot. 

What do you say to them? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. You know, the influenza vaccines don’t cause flu. 

There can be some feeling of not feeling that well, but in general 

we give flu vaccines during a season where there is a lot of other 

stuff out there, and so the symptoms are rarely related to the vaccine itself. 

Dr. FAUCI. We had a season this year, because before we had the 

peak of flu, there was a lot of parainfluenza and even respiratory 

syncytial virus among adults that we were seeing, at least at our 

clinical center at the NIH. So that was before the onset of the flu. 

And people were saying, well, I already got the flu, therefore I don’t 

need the vaccine. Well, they are wrong on two accounts. One, because they likely did not have the flu, they had something else. 

And even if you have the flu, you should still get a vaccine because 

there are other components in the vaccine that could protect you 

against the other flu that is circulating besides just H3N2. 

Dr. BRIGHT. And if I might add. This is an area for innovation 

that is just screaming out to give patients more information, more 

knowledge about what they might be exposed to in the home. And 

that’s one of the reasons that we’re trying to drive diagnostics out 

of centralized laboratories into the homes of the patients so they 

have actionable information to be able to distinguish that they 

have a bacterial infection or a viral inflection or flu or some other 

area. So they can take responsible action to get treated sooner and 

to take actions to reduce the spread of that virus. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you. And preliminary estimates are that this 

year’s flu vaccine shows 36 percent effectiveness. I want to hear 

more about how we assess vaccine effectiveness to better understand this measure. 

Dr. Schuchat, how do we test for vaccine effectiveness, and what 

does it mean that the vaccine is 36 percent effective? And is it true 

that this effectiveness was different for different age groups? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Yes. We have a multistate, multisite network 

that tests vaccine effectiveness, and they evaluate people who come 

in with symptoms consistent with influenza, do laboratory testing 

of them. Those who have confirmed laboratory-proven influenza are 

enrolled as cases, and those who have those symptoms but didn’t 

have laboratory-confirmed influenza are enrolled as controls. We 

compare vaccination history verified with the records in them, and 

then do sort of math to calculate what the vaccine effectiveness is 

against particular types and particular age groups. 

The larger the sample, the more we can look at ages and narrow 

categories and look at the different types. We do interim estimates 

in January and February each year, and then end-of-season estimates. If we had a larger sample, a larger network, we would be 

able to more reliably look at the age groups, but potentially also 

look at different types of vaccine like the cell-based or the eggbased. 

Ms. CASTOR. And I guess your overriding message is, no matter 

what percentage you come up with, it benefits you, and your neighbors, and your family to get your flu shot? 

76 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. The flu vaccine is the best way to protect yourself 

and your family against influenza. And some protection is better 

than no protection. 

Ms. CASTOR. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Dr. Burgess, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BURGESS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. While we’re on the 

commercial to get your flu shot, I want to thank Dr. Fauci personally because he told me in December I better get it, and I did, and 

I didn’t get the flu this year. So I thank you for that. And it has 

been a tough year back in Texas. 

Dr. Bright, you said that there had not been a new antiviral introduced in the past 20 years. Did I understand that correctly? 

Dr. BRIGHT. That is true. Well, 1999 with the approval of 

oseltamivir and zanamivir. 

Mr. BURGESS. So let me—I guess this question is for Dr. Fauci 

and Dr. Gottlieb, Dr. Fauci as far as the scientific side, Dr. Gottlieb 

as far as the regulatory side. Why is this so difficult? A virus is 

a pretty simple organism, nowhere near as sophisticated as a mammalian cell. It seems like selective toxicity, you talk about it a little 

bit in that—in that paper that you showed us. It seems like that 

should be pretty straightforward. 

Dr. FAUCI. It seems that way, but—and you’re right, there are 

targets in the replication cycle, polymerase and other—pronase and 

other inhibitors that we have for that. The interesting thing is that 

we—even though we’re doing the fundamental basic research to examine that, we have not had an overwhelming amount of interest 

on the part of companies, which is the reason why BARDA has 

been so important in helping to chaperone the companies along to 

get involved in this. 

So it really is, you’re right, it isn’t a completely insurmountable 

scientific problem. It has a replication cycle. Remember, when we 

pull all of that effort into looking at the various aspects of the replication cycle of HIV, we came up with now a total of 30 effective 

drugs. There’s no reason why, with the right scientific and industry 

interest in it, that we couldn’t do to same thing. And I just yield 

to my colleagues to my left to amplify that. 

Mr. BURGESS. Well, Dr. Gottlieb, then I assume that on the regulatory side that is something—that is work you’d be prepared to 

take up? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Well, absolutely. And I think there’s a lot of interest in seeing differentiated products put forward that can address 

the flu for a whole host of reasons, not least of which is the strategic rationale of having that available. I will just comment that, 

you know, the standards for approval are relatively straightforward, and I think the agency would show a lot of interest and 

a lot of high level attention to products that were put forward to 

try to address both pandemic flu as well as the seasonal flu. 

I will comment, that there have been safety issues associated 

with products that have been in early stages of development in the 

past. But one of the bigger challenges, quite frankly, and this is a 

little bit outside of my remit, but they have been commercial challenges. Just the ability to get a commercial return on a property 

to target the seasonal flu. 

77 

And I will remind the committee that at the time that the agency 

approved Tamiflu, the agency was roundly criticized by many outside groups, not by Congress, but by outside groups, for that approval, who commented that a drug that diminished flu symptoms 

by 1.42 days wasn’t something the agency ought to be approving. 

And so our mindset has changed around this, but in some quarters not entirely. 

Mr. BURGESS. That’s an incredibly important point. I was in 

practice at that time, and that did temper your judgment about 

writing this prescription, regardless of cost. If it’s really only marginally effective, why put someone through the potential side-effects that possibly would occur. 

Dr. Bright, you provide the market that Dr. Fauci referenced is 

not readily available, so it’s hard to incent companies to take these 

challenges on. But you provide the market, right? You’re going to 

be the one—the bulk purchaser of this stuff? 

Dr. BRIGHT. Well, the marketplace for antivirals for seasonal flu 

is the marketplace. And I don’t think there’s full appreciation and 

recognition of the impact and benefit that one could receive from 

getting an antiviral drug in a timely manner when they are infected with influenza. 

We had a new antiviral, same class from the Tamiflu, approved 

by a company, BioCryst, called Peramivir, just a few years ago, and 

there’s still very little up-take of that new antiviral drug. And it 

is a single-dose, IV-administered drug. So there is hesitancy in the 

marketplace to develop new antiviral drugs, even with benefits and 

reducing viral load and saving the—reducing the severity of illness, 

if the marketplace and the patients and the healthcare system 

doesn’t understand and appreciate the power of that drug. 

Mr. BURGESS. Let me just ask you a related question. You talked 

about bringing down the viral load. Kind of encountered when 

Ebola was causing all of the problems, the rapid reduction of the 

viral load caused kind of a Herxheimer reaction in some patients, 

and that caused some concern. Is that—is that something, a phenomenon with which you are concerned with these types of medications? 

Dr. BRIGHT. We haven’t seen that with the influenza antiviral 

drugs. Reduction of viral load, we believe would lead to less transmission. We believe it would lead to less severe illness in influenza 

antivirals. 

Mr. BURGESS. Yes, Dr. Fauci. 

Dr. FAUCI. And in Ebola, that was more a viremia, as opposed 

to what you see with influenza, which is mostly a local reaction in 

the lung. So you would you not expect a Herxheimers with that. 

Mr. BURGESS. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And welcome to our panelists. Data from the National Immunization Survey found that 

fewer than half of children and adults were vaccinated by November of this current flu season. Only about 40 percent of people 6 

months and older received the flu vaccine. These numbers appear 

to be just about what they were in the last couple of flu seasons. 

I’m just interested in hearing from this panel about why you beVerDate Mar 15 2010 13:41 Jan 15, 2019 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 I:\115THCONGRESS\115X107FLUPREP\115X107FLUPREPWORKING WAYNE
78 

lieve these numbers continue to be in that realm, and just how do 

you approach that as an organization? 

Dr. Schuchat, the data show that nearly 60 percent of Americans 

did not take advantage of that flu vaccination, is that an accurate 

number? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. You know, the numbers that you’re citing are 

from November, and those are our early results. By the end of the 

season, what we’ve seen in the last several years, is that about 48 

percent of Americans get the flu vaccine, it’s much higher in children, about 59 percent, and 43 or so in adults. There’s a lot of 

mixed messages. And when we—the thing with influenza, when we 

have a year like this where it’s so severe, everybody actually knows 

how bad it can be, but then there’s also questions about whether 

the vaccine is helpful or not. 

It’s really important for the clinicians and for us in public health 

to remind people that the vaccine has provided protection, particularly in children, and that getting the vaccine each year is worthwhile. 

Mr. TONKO. And, Dr. Schuchat, again, and Dr. Gottlieb, perhaps, 

what have your organizations been doing to improve the rate, if 

anything? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Right. We do quite a bit of research on communication. We’ve done, I think, more than 30 studies to test messages over the past 18 years to try to understand what motivates 

individuals, as well as what influences clinicians in giving a strong 

recommendation. One of the biggest factors for patients is a strong 

recommendation from their doctor. 

We’ve seen an increase in OB/GYNs recommending the vaccine 

and more women who were pregnant getting the flu vaccine each 

year, really after they saw how severe it was in 2009 when you 

were pregnant and got influenza. But we’ve probably hit a wall 

right now. And after this season, there’s a lot of concern that—we 

don’t know how the medical community or public is going to react, 

so we’re out there doing research right now and testing messages 

for next fall. 

We do use multiple channels in doing communication about vaccine, both traditional channels and social media, trying to find 

influencers and address the myths that people have. 

Mr. TONKO. Uh-huh. And Dr. Gottlieb. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I would just comment, I think the CDC has the 

most robust platform for communicating, but we not only echo the 

CDC recommends and their statements, but put out a number of 

our own to try to build on that. I think one of the things we did 

this season in particular was try to be very transparent about what 

we were learning about the vaccine effectiveness as we learned it. 

To continue to remind providers, in particular, and consumers, that 

this vaccine still had efficacy, and it had efficacy in particular 

against H1N1 and the B virus, which tend to peak later in the season. 

So even if people perceived it as being less efficacious against 

H3N2, there was still a lot of value in getting vaccinated because 

later in the season you tend to see an upswing in the H1N1 and 

B virus, as we’re seeing right now. And the vaccine was actually 

quite effective against those strains. 

79 

Mr. TONKO. And in terms of the 100 percent number that, obviously, is something that sounds like you shoot for, how important 

is it to reach that? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. With many vaccines, there’s direct protection, but 

also indirect protection and, at a certain level, the higher proportion of the population that’s vaccinated, they may actually be helping others not get sick. So, in particular, I think the pediatric vaccination is important for the children, it’s also important for the 

adults that often get flu from their kids or from their grandkids. 

Mr. TONKO. Representative Castor touched on this a bit. This 

season we saw many new reports focused on the fact that the vaccine was only 36 percent effective. In addition, some inaccurate and 

misleading social media posts have warned people against vaccinating themselves or their children. 

Dr. Schuchat, does CDC have any way of tracking how these 

media sources impact the number of people who are actually vaccinated? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. We do assess attitudes periodically and try to understand whether there are rumors that are resonating or not. You 

know, when we do research on ‘‘why didn’t you get vaccinated for 

influenza?’’ we hear more often about the—well, ‘‘I heard that’s not 

an effective vaccine’’ rather than concerns about safety or concerns 

about cost. But I think that it varies for each vaccine what the barriers are or what the concerns are. 

We work hard through our messaging, but also through partners 

and others to get the word out. You know, sometimes the faithbased community can reach a lot of people in some areas. There 

are mommy bloggers that are influential in some circles. Friends 

and family can be influential. Our most critical audience are clinicians and healthcare providers because doctors, nurses, pharmacists have a lot of influence on people’s behavior. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you very much. Anyone else that wants to 

comment on that? If not, I yield back and thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Indiana, Mrs. Brooks, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all 

the panelists for being here, and thank you for your service. As the 

panel here may or may not know, Congresswoman Eshoo and I recently started a biodefense caucus. I would encourage all of the 

Members here to consider joining our caucus. And this is in a leadup to the hopeful reauthorization of PAHPA. But I want to go back 

a little bit because during the 21st Century Cures debate, we did 

get signed into law the return of contracting of authority to 

BARDA. 

And I’m curious, Dr. Bright, this was something—we wanted it 

restored, it was in the original passage when BARDA was created, 

but it’s my understanding there’s been some hesitation by the contracting office to move the contracting back over to BARDA. Has 

that contracting authority yet been properly restored use since it 

was authorized and passed into law under 21st Century Cures? 

Dr. BRIGHT. Thank you for the question, and we are so grateful 

for 21st Century Cures to include that in the law that passed. It’s 

critically important. It has not been finalized yet, but it’s important 

80 

to know that it is part of an overall realignment of the entire ASPR 

organization, and we look forward to the full implementation of 

that very soon. 

Mrs. BROOKS. And what is the holdup? 

Dr. BRIGHT. The holdup is the alignment with the overall realignment of ASPR. So it’s fully intended that Dr. Kadlec, our 

ASPR and I, are in full alignment to implement this as quickly as 

possible. We anticipate it will be done in a matter of months. 

Mrs. BROOKS. OK. We’ll continue to ask questions until we hear 

that what was authorized in the 21st Century Cures has been implemented. 

I do have a question, though, in the original PAHPA, it’s my understanding that BARDA was also given other transaction authority to reduce regulatory burden on the Federal contracting process 

that could both inhibit innovation and our preparedness. Is BARDA 

able to use that other authority that was in the original—in the 

original PAHPA bill? 

Dr. BRIGHT. BARDA has been using other transactional authorities. Now, we have six of those in place with different industry entities. The process of getting the other transactional authorities is 

still—a process is going to outside senior procurement executive 

that we’re working on improving the effectiveness and efficiency of 

that process now with our ASPR, but we are finding ways to utilize 

that OTA, other transactional authority, effectively. 

Mrs. BROOKS. OK. Thank you. Sorry, you’re on the hot seat 

today, however, with the reauthorization of PAHPA coming—due to 

expire in September, talk to me about the administration’s fiscal 

year 2019 request of $250 million for pandemic influenza. 

Can you explain, at BARDA, authorization of pan flu program, 

BARDA, I assume is beneficial, assuming it is authorized or reauthorized, would you agree? 

Dr. BRIGHT. It’s absolutely essential, yes. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Can you share with us how those funds would be 

used to prepare for the next influenza pandemic? 

Dr. BRIGHT. I described for you a lot of the work that has been 

done already with the investment that we’ve been provided and 

supplemental funds, and those funds are all obligated. And we’ve 

made great strides with our industry partners to make our country 

better prepared for pandemic influenza, but there is a lot of work 

still to be done. 

As I said, we need to expand the access and availability of the 

vaccines we created so they are useful and available for all ages. 

We still need to develop additional antiviral drugs. We need more 

drugs, more treatment options to treat people who are severely ill 

and hospitalized with influenza. And we need to do a better job 

with our diagnostics as well. We need to make sure the diagnostics 

are in the hands of the people who need them so they can get treated sooner and they can take responsible actions to reduce the 

spread of that virus. All of that work is yet to be done. 

In the context of still sustaining what we’ve built, we have to 

sustain the infrastructure, that is our response capability for pandemic in our Nation. So in the context of sustaining and filling the 

gaps, that’s how we would support and use those funds. 

81 

Mrs. BROOKS. And in my 47 seconds left, can you talk about the 

importance of sustained and robust funding? Sustained being the 

critical word here, and why is that so critically important? 

Dr. BRIGHT. The sustainment of the funding, because we rely on 

these facilities of these companies to be available and producing a 

vaccine that is warm based, so when we need it, we need it quickly, 

that they have the staff in place and the capabilities in place, and 

that the FDA is able to continue reviewing and approving that facility. 

It’s important that we don’t let our eye off the ball for 

sustainment. If the factories close, we have no response, we gain 

nothing. At the same time we must sustain our momentum in conducting and supporting the phase 2 and phase 3 clinical studies for 

additional recombinant-based technologies for vaccines, for the 

platform-based technologies in the regional manufacturing process 

across our country so we can rely on those quickly when he would 

need them for a pandemic. 

Mrs. BROOKS. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. The Chair will now 

recognize the gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Walters, for 5 

minutes. 

Mrs. WALTERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. California was hit 

particularly hard this year by the flu season. In my home of Orange County, especially suffered with well over twice the number 

of flu cases compared to last year. Orange County had at least a 

dozen influenza-related deaths in individuals under the age of 65. 

Yet, we all know that seniors are particularly susceptible to the flu. 

The CDC states that at least 75 percent of flu-related deaths occur 

in people 65 and older. 

My district is home to a large retirement population so I am especially concerned about the health of this group during flu season. 

While the overall flu vaccine effectiveness rate for this year is 36 

percent, the effectiveness rate can vary depending on age group. 

For instance, last year the overall effectiveness rate was 40 percent, and the effectiveness rate for seniors was only 25 percent. 

One would suspect the vaccine effectiveness rate is lower for vulnerable populations like seniors, but I notice that the 2016–2017 

vaccine effectiveness rate was much more effective for children, another vulnerable population. Some of my colleagues have asked 

what accounts for the variability in flu vaccine effectiveness among 

age groups, what can be done to improve vaccine effectiveness for 

seniors? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. I can begin. There have been efforts to develop 

different influenza vaccine products, particularly for seniors and 

others with weaker immune systems. One such approach is a highdose product that has been licensed. Another approach is 

adjuvanted. A key strategy that we have at CDC is to make sure 

that patients and clinicians know that people at high risk for complications, including seniors, get promptly treated with antivirals if 

they do get sick. But the immune system does age, and we think 

that the frailer, elderly have a poor response to many vaccines, including flu. 

Dr. FAUCI. Whenever we have a situation, for example, when we 

are making a vaccine for a possible pandemic, we always test it not 

82 

only in healthy adults, but we also test it in the elderly to make 

sure that the dose and the regimen that we have gives a comparable response that a younger person would have. So that’s part 

of the testing. And as Dr. Schuchat said, the two major areas or 

the higher dose, which is recommended for seniors, it’s a much 

higher dose than the dose that you give to a healthy young person, 

as well as using adjuvants, which is a product that is not a vaccine 

but boosts the response to the vaccine. 

Dr. BRIGHT. If I could add, too. This is a lesson from pandemic 

influenza vaccine development that we can transition to seasonal 

influenza vaccine development. We know in a pandemic vaccine we 

have to have higher doses of antigen and we have to have adjuvants in those vaccines that makes them immunogenic and effective across all age groups. 

I recently in the last two weeks visited the senior leadership of 

each of the licensed influenza vaccine manufacturers for the United 

States, and talked to them about this challenge about what their 

thoughts and strategies and how we can improve the effectiveness 

of our existing vaccines while we wait for the universal flu vaccine. 

Each of them is poised and strategic in thinking about ways to add 

the adjuvant and increase the dose of their vaccine. They are all 

partnered and interested in utilizing cell-based and recombinantbased vaccines as well to try to improve the effectiveness over the 

egg-based vaccines. 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. I’ll just comment very briefly, Congresswoman. 

We’re actively looking at data as to the relative effectiveness of the 

vaccine with the MF59 adjuvant and the high does vaccine in elderly patients relative to the normal vaccine, the regular-dose vaccine with the 15 micrograms of antigen. 

I think if we do observe differences between the high-dose vaccine—the efficacy of the high does vaccine or the vaccine with the 

adjuvant in it relative to the regular seasonal flu vaccine. It could 

offer some clues as to why the vaccine overall was less effective 

against H3N2. We will have that data available, hopefully, shortly. 

We’re working very closely with CMS to drive those results and we 

are going to make it available as soon as we have it. 

Mrs. WALTERS. OK. And, Dr. Schuchat, in 2009, the FDA approved a high-dose version of the flu vaccine for elderly individuals. 

There is a study that indicates the high-dose vaccine was 24.2 percent more effective in preventing the flu in adults aged 65 and 

older, as compared to the standard-dose vaccine. 

Can you elaborate on whether the high-dose vaccine would significantly reduce flu-related deaths among seniors? 

Dr. SCHUCHAT. Even a 20-some percent superior response is still 

not, you know, 100 hundred percent, because of the weaker immune response that seniors get. We have the market of the higherdose product has been increasing since it became available. CDC 

doesn’t recommend a preference for the high-dose over the regulardose vaccine. One of the things we found is that the vaccine that 

they have at the doctors’ office or the pharmacy is the one that you 

should get because there may not be the other product if you’re 

looking for it. 

83 

But I think the additional studies that FDA is doing with CMS, 

and we’ve done with CMS in the past, have helped us build this 

evidence base of what’s the best way to protect seniors. 

Mrs. WALTERS. Thank you, and I’m out of time. Thank you. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentlewoman yields back. The Chair will now 

recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Green, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you and the ranking member for allowing me to wave on. I am an alumni of this 

subcommittee. And thank you for allowing me to be here. I want 

to thank the Chair for holding this hearing on the current flu season. 

The 2017–2018 flu season has been one of the worst in recent 

years, resulting in tens of thousands of hospitalizations, and likely 

thousands of flu-related deaths around the county. There has been 

some advances in both vaccine technology and in antiviral drugs, 

which hopefully can both reduce the number of people who get the 

flu and help those who do get it to recover more quickly. 

I understand there’s a new vaccine production method based on 

recombinant protein technology that makes it less likely for a vaccine to mutate, as it is being grown. Dr. Bright, BARDA has supported development of several vaccines based on this technology, as 

well as the development of cell-based vaccines and antigen sparing 

vaccines. Can you explain why BARDA has chosen to support research on these vaccine production methods rather than the eggbased production methods? 

Dr. BRIGHT. Thank you for that question. We primarily focus on 

supporting those new modern technologies to be able to respond 

faster and more effectively to a pandemic response. We know that 

we can cut out steps necessary to make a vaccine in the egg. You 

don’t need a virus to grow—to produce vaccines in the recombinant 

system. You can start from a gene sequence and rapidly go into 

production of your vaccine. This affords us great flexibility and 

great speed compared to egg-based vaccines. 

We’re learning now that investments in those new technologies 

might also offer advantages of a potentially more effective flu vaccine. What’s critical to know about this, too, is it’s one thing to license those vaccines and make them available, but if they’re not 

available in sufficient supply and don’t have the capacity to 

produce it, then they are not penetrating the marketplace, and 

those companies are frail and are vulnerable, at risk of going out 

of business after huge investment, if that vaccine is not used. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. Commissioner Gottlieb, preliminary data 

suggests that some of the newer vaccines such as high-dose vaccines may offer greater protection. Is there enough data on these 

vaccines for the FDA to recommended these vaccines over others? 

If not, what type of data would the FDA need to make such a recommendation? 

Dr. GOTTLIEB. Congressman, we’re still evaluating, at least from 

this season, some of the data relative to the high-dose vaccine and 

the vaccine with the adjuvant to see its relative effectiveness 

against H3N2. And when we start to speculate around different 

theories around why the vaccine overall—and vaccines historically 

might be—have been less efficacious against H3N2. One of the 

theories that you would put on the table, certainly, is perhaps you 

84 

might require a higher dose of antigen in order to have an adequate immune response against H3N2. 

So it’s something that we’re going to need to consider among 

many other possibilities on why historically we haven’t seen a robust immune response from the—against H3N2 from vaccines generally, when we look back around past seasons. The one thing we 

did observe so far this season was that the vaccine produced in 

cells, the cell-based vaccines, we had about 20 million doses produced in cells this year. Those do appear to be—to have provided 

more protection on a relative basis of around 20 percent than the 

egg-based vaccines. And, again, we aren’t sure of the reasons why, 

but it does lead to some hypotheses around why maybe generally 

speaking we haven’t seen as much—as robust response against 

H3N2 historically as we’d like. 

Mr. GREEN. I know there are a number of new antivirals in the 

pipeline, including some that may treat the virus at the beginning 

of the life cycle. Dr. Bright, can you explain why these drugs differ 

from those currently on the market, and how they might help us 

treat the flu in a new way? 

Dr. BRIGHT. Absolutely. I think that’s important to recognize. 

The one class of drug that we have that’s effective on the market 

today is called a neuraminidase inhibitor. It binds to an active 

pocket of a surface protein of the virus and it really blocks the 

virus after it’s already replicated from breaking away from an infected cell and going on to infect other cells. 

These new antiviral drugs are working on the replication cycle 

of the virus before it reproduces itself and buds away. Because they 

work in a different part of the virus life cycle, they also can be effective if the virus mutates and becomes resistant to the single 

class of drug that we have available in the market today. So it’s 

critical that we have these different approaches to antiviral drugs. 

Mr. GREEN. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I know I’m out of time 

and your courtesies, I have some other questions that I’d like to 

submit if it’s allowed. 

And thank our panel for being here today. We’re looking for that 

light at the end of the tunnel, and I just appreciate each of you all 

partnering with each other to deal with it. Obviously, the flu is terrible, but you know there are a lot of other bugs out there that 

we’d like to deal with, too. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HARPER. The gentleman yields back. And I will remind Members that they do have 10 business days to submit questions for the 

record, and I ask the witnesses to agree to respond promptly 

should you get additional questions in writing. 

I want to thank you for your time being here today. It’s very informative. And, Dr. Fauci, I enjoyed the slide presentation, I felt 

like I should get some college credit for that—to see that. 

Dr. FAUCI. You got it. 

Mr. HARPER. But to visualize that and to see how it’s better to 

attack the stem instead of the head, and actually give you a good 

visual was very informative. And, you know, one day we’ll be in 

here and we’ll be discussing that effective universal flu vaccine 

that we know we all desire to see. And I was going to say, I hope 

we continue to take steps, even if they are nanoparticle steps, to 

85 

get to that conclusion. But, again, thanks each of you for being 

here. The subcommittee hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR. 

Mr. Chairman, since 2010, influenza has caused millions of illnesses, hundreds of 

thousands of hospitalizations, and perhaps as many as 56,000 deaths throughout 

the country. This is a very serious issue that should concern all of us who play a 

role in advancing public health. 

Right now, we are in the middle of a particularly bad flu season. According to the 

CDC, more than 23,000 people have been hospitalized this season, mostly due to the 

H3N2 strain of flu. Tragically, more than 100 children have already died this year. 

Seasonal flu is particularly challenging for our public health agencies to address. 

Flu viruses tend to mutate and change constantly, and we do not yet have the ability to predict in advance how severe a flu season will be, when it will peak, or what 

flu strains will dominate. There are also many things that we still do not know 

about why the flu vaccine is more effective for certain people, and how someone’s 

health status may affect the body’s immune response. 

I am encouraged by the recent initiative announced by NIH which intends to 

study these very issues, with the goal of producing a universal flu vaccine that is 

effective against a broader range of flu strains. I know that the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) is supporting vital research 

in this area, as well. 

This is all critically important. And while we wait for the results of this research, 

we know that there is one thing we can all do to help stop the spread of the flu— 

we can all get vaccinated. 

Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, flu and other immunizations are required to 

be covered by health insurance without any copayments or coinsurance. It is free, 

and it is as easy as going to the pharmacy around the corner. So there is no good 

reason for Americans not to get a flu shot. 

Annual flu vaccination continues to be the best method for preventing flu and its 

potentially severe complications in both children and adults. Getting the flu vaccine 

reduces flu-associated illness and adverse health outcomes. 

This is true even in a year where the flu vaccine is less effective. For example, 

during the 2014–15 flu season, the vaccine was only 20 percent effective at preventing infection. Nonetheless, that vaccine formulation still prevented an estimated 

1.6 million illnesses, nearly 50,000 influenza-associated hospitalizations and an estimated 1,500 deaths. 

Moreover, flu shots do not only protect the vaccinated. Vaccinating yourself not 

only increases the odds that you won’t get sick this season, but also protects everyone you come in contact with, such as your older parents, or your sister’s new baby. 

Unfortunately, up to 60 percent of Americans were not vaccinated against the flu 

this year. I look forward to hearing from CDC about what strategies have improved 

vaccination rates in the past, and how we can continue to increase the rates going 

forward. 

Additionally, the fact that the vaccine was only 36 percent effective this year 

highlights the need to improve our vaccine manufacturing process, as well as our 

ability to treat patients if they do become infected. 

I look forward to hearing from today’s witnesses about new technologies and initiatives to enhance the effectiveness of vaccines and of antiviral medications. 

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming today. The work your agencies are 

doing is a key part of our Nation’s flu preparedness efforts. I look forward to hearing 

from each of you about what your agencies are doing to improve flu vaccine effectiveness, vaccination rates, and influenza treatment methods. 

86 


30456.048

E ~c U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

~ COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE EST. 1795 

March 6, 2018 

TO: Members, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

FROM: Committee Majority Staff 

RE: Hearing entitled "Examining the U.S. Public Health Preparedness for and 

Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

I. Introduction 

The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations will hold a hearing on Thursday, 

March 8, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. The hearing is entitled 

"Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

The Subcommittee will examine the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' efforts to 

combat seasonal influenza, develop an effective influenza vaccine, and to prepare a long-term 

strategy to improve seasonal influenza preparedness. 

II. Witnesses 

• Anne Schuchat, M.D. (RADM, USPHS), Acting Director, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 

• Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 

National Institutes ofHealth, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 

• Rick A. Bright, Ph.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, 

Director of the Biomedical Advances Research and Development Authority, Office of the 

Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, U.S. Department of Health and 

Human Services; and 

• Scott Gottlieb, M.D., Commissioner of Food and Drugs, U.S. Food and Drug 

Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

III. Background 

A. Overview of Seasonal Influenza in the United States 

Influenza (the "flu") is a contagious respiratory illness caused by different virus strains 

and can range in severity from mild to deadly. In both its seasonal and pandemic forms, 

influenza is an ongoing public health concern and is a leading cause of death in the United 
87 


30456.049

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 2 

States. 1 The number of illnesses, hospitalizations, and deaths per year can vary depending on 

several factors, including but not limited to, the severity of the flu season, characteristics of the 

prevalent viruses, and the effectiveness of the vaccine. The Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) estimates that, on an annual basis since 20 I 0, influenza has resulted in 

between 9.2 million and 60.8 million illnesses, 140,000 and 710,000 hospitalizations, and 12,000 

and 56,000 deaths.2 As noted in CDC's 2018 Congressional Budget Justification, a 2007 study 

estimated that more than $10 billion is spent each year in direct medical costs for hospitalizations 

and outpatient visits from seasonal influenza-related complications.3 

Although CDC estimates the number of flu-associated deaths, CDC does not calculate the 

exact number of individuals that die each year from the seasonal flu. 4 The agency cannot 

calculate this number for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to the fact that: (I) states 

are not required to report individual seasonal flu cases or deaths of people aged 18 years and 

older to CDC; (2) many influenza-related deaths, such as from pneumonia, may not include any 

mention of influenza on the death certificate; (3) it can be difficult to identify which cases to 

include in an analysis since many patients (especially the elderly) may die from pneumonia 

unrelated to influenza; and (4) most people who die from seasonal flu-related complications are 

not tested for flu or they seek medical care when flu can no longer be detected. Given the 

difficulties in calculating the precise number of flu-related deaths, researchers use a variety of 

modeling techniques to estimate deaths. CDC looks at two categories of underlying cause of 

death information listed on death certificates to estimate the number of flu-associated deaths: (I) 

pneumonia and influenza (P&l) causes; and (2) respiratory and circulatory (R&C) causes. 5 

1 Seasonal flu is an outbreak that follows predictable seasonal patterns. Pandemic flu is a worldwide outbreak of a 

new form of flu virus, which can spread easily from person to person because most people have little to no 

immunity. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, How is Pandemic Flu Different from Seasonal Flu? (last 

updated Dec. 9, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/flu!pandemic-resourceslbasics/about.html. 2 Based on 2015 data, CDC estimated that the number of deaths in 2015 caused by influenza and pneumonia was 

57,062. U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for 

Health Statistics, Health, United States, 2016, With Chart book on Long-term Trends in Health (20 16), 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/datalhus/husl6.pdf#019; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Estimated Influenza 

Illnesses, Medical Visits, Hospitalizations, and Deaths Averted by Vaccination in the United States (last updated 

Apr. 19, 2017), https://www.cdc.gov/flu!about/discase/2015-16.htm; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 

Estimating Seasonal Influenza-Associated Deaths in the United States-Questions and Answers (last updated Jan. 

29, 20!8), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-related_deaths.htm; Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, Death' and Mortality (last updated May 3, 20 !7), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm; Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, Seasonal Influenza-Associated Hospitalizations in the United States (last 

updated at Dec. 9, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qaihospital.htm. 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FY 2018 Congressional Justification, at 46 (20 18), 

https://www.cdc.govlbudget/documents/ty2018/ty-20 !8-cdc-congressional-justification.pdf; See also Molinari, et 

a!., The annual impact of seasonal influenza in the US: measuring disease burden and costs, VACCINE Volume 25 

Issue 27 (Jun. 28, 2007). 4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Estimating Seasonal Influenza-Associated Deaths in the United 

States--Questions and Answers (last updated Jan. 29, 2018), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flurelated deaths.htm. 5 Id. -
88 


30456.050

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 3 

While the flu may result in death or hospitalization, most individuals that get the flu only 

have a mild illness and will recover in less than two weeks. 6 Examples of flu-related 

complications include bronchitis, pneumonia, ear infections, sinus infections, and worsening of 

chronic health conditions. Those individuals that are at high risk for developing flu-related 

complications include, but are not limited to, children younger than 5 years of age, adults 65 

years of age and older, pregnant women, residents of long-term care facilities, American Indians 

and Alaska Natives, and individuals with certain medical conditions.7 Although individuals aged 

65 and older are more likely to receive the flu vaccine than younger adults, hospitalization rates 

for the flu are likely to be highest among the elderly. For example, for the 2014-2015 flu season, 

38 percent ofpeop1e aged 18-64 years old received the vaccination while 66.7 percent of people 

aged 65 years and older received the vaccination. 8 About 75 percent of the estimated 

hospitalizations for the 2014-2015 flu season, however, occurred in individuals aged 65 years 

and older.9 

Overall, seasonal influenza has significant health and economic impacts, with a 

cumulative impact as serious as a pandemic. According to the World Health Organization 

(WHO), annual seasonal influenza epidemics result in about 3 million to 5 million cases of 

severe illness and about 250,000 to 500,000 deaths worldwide, which is likely an 

underestimation. As noted in a 2012 report by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and 

Policy, "[t]hese figures indicate that the cumulative health impact of seasonal influenza over the 

last century rivals the potentially explosive, but time-limited, impact of the four pandemics of the 

past 1 00 years." 10 

B. Types of Influenza and Influenza Detection 

The influenza virus is made up of single-stranded ribonucleic acid (RNA) segments that 

are coated by a nucleoprotein. 11 The four types of influenza viruses (A, B, C, and D) are 

primarily distinguished by their different main nucleoproteins. 12 Influenza types A, B, and C 

have the capacity to infect humans whereas influenza type D primarily infects cattle and is not 

6 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, People at High Risk of Developing Flu-Related Complications (last 

updated Jan. 23, 20 18), https://www.cdc.gov/flulabout/diseasc/highrisk.htm. 

7 !d. 

8 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Flu Vaccination Coverage, United States, 2014-15 Influenza Season 

(last updated Jun. 23, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/flulfluvaxview/coverage-1415estimales.htm#age-group-adu!ts. 9 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Estimated Influenza Illnesses and Hospitalizations Averted by 

Vaccination- United States, 2014-15 Influenza Season (last updated Feb. 17, 2017), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/20 14-15 .htm. 1

° Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, University of Minnesota, The Compelling Need for GameChanging Influenza Vaccines: An Analysis of the Influenza Vaccine Enterprise and Recommendations for the 

Future, at II (October 20 12). 11 University of Pittsbnrgh Schools of the Health Sciences, 50-year-old flu virus model revamped, revealing 

pandemic prediction possibilities, SCIENCE DAILY (Jul. 13, 2017), 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170713154853.htm; Nara Lee, et al., Genome-wide analysis of 

influenza viral RNA and nucleoprotein association, NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH Volume 45, Issue 15 (Sept. 6, 2017). 12 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Types of Influenza Viruses (last updated Sept. 27, 2017), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flulabout/viruses/types.htm. 
89 


30456.051

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page4 

known to infect or cause illness in humans. 13 Influenza types A and B are the two main types of 

viruses that cause seasonal epidemics and typically pose the most serious public health threat. 

Influenza type C infections are not believed to cause epidemics and instead typically cause mild 

respiratory illness.I 4 

The CDC adheres to an internationally accepted naming convention for influenza viruses 

that was accepted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1979.I 5 Each influenza virus is 

named according to: (1) the antigenic type (e.g., A, B, C); (2) the host of origin for viruses that 

did not originate in humans (e.g., swine, chicken, etc. (no host of origin designation is provided 

for human-origin viruses)); (3) geographical origin (e.g., Denver, Taiwan, etc.); (4) strain 

number (e.g., 15, 7, etc.); (5) year of isolation (e.g., 2009, etc.); and (6) the hemagglutinin (H) 

and neuraminidase (N) antigen in parentheses for influenza type A viruses (e.g., (H1N1) 

(influenza types Band C do not receive these subtype classifications)).I 6 

Recently, influenza strains have grown increasingly complex and have been distributed 

more broadly across the globe. In February 2015, the WHO noted that the world needed to be 

concerned about the diversity and geographical distribution of influenza viruses: 

The current global influenza situation is characterized by a number of trends that 

must be closely monitored. These include: an increase in the variety of animal 

influenza viruses co-circulating and exchanging genetic material, giving rise to 

novel strains ... The diversity and geographical distribution of influenza viruses 

currently circulating in wild and domestic birds are unprecedented since the advent 

of modern tools for virus detection and characterization. The world needs to be 

concerned. I? 

The news of this array of genetic forms of influenza is partly a result of improved 

surveillance measures. IS Many scientists, however, believe that the pace of evolution in 

influenza is speeding up because of human movement and trade along the Asian flyway, giving 

more opportunities for various types of flu to comingle, mix their RNA genetic material, and 

form novel strains. I

9 This in turn is making it harder for scientists to predict which forms of 

influenza are likely to hit human populations during certain seasons, accurately predict what type 

of vaccine is likely to be effective for that season, and anticipate the movement of flu viruses 

from wild birds to domestic fowl, fowl to humans, humans to swine, and swine back to humans. 

13 Id. 

14 Jd. 

15 Id. 

16Id. 

17 World Health Organization, Warning signals from the volatile world of influenza viruses (Feb. 20 15), 

http://www. who. intlinfluenzalpublications/wamingsignals20 1502/ en/. 18 LaurenS. Polansky, et al., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Improved Global Capacity for Influenza 

Surveillance, EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES Volume 22, Number 6 (June 2016). 19 Laurie Garrett, The Year of the Flu, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (Feb. 4, 2015), https:/lwww.cfr.org/expertbrief/year-flu. 
90 


30456.052

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 5 

The consequences from the emergence of so many novel viruses "for animal and human health 

are unpredictable yet potentially ominous."20 

Moreover, the influenza viruses constantly change through antigenic drift and antigenic 

shift.21 Antigenic drift refers to small changes in the genes of influenza viruses that happen 

continually over time as the virus replicates. 22 Antigenic shift occurs when there is an abrupt, 

significant change in the influenza A virus resulting in a new H and/or new H and N proteins. 

Because the Hand N antigens can undergo antigenic shifts or drifts and mutate frequently, 

influenza type A typically causes the most severe outbreaks. Indeed, new influenza type A 

viruses are constantly emerging from animal reservoirs, and there has been a tenfold increase in 

the number of human infections with different novel influenza A viruses since the 1990s. 23 One 

specific subtype of influenza type A, H3N2, has a faster mutation rate than H1Nl or influenza B 

viruses, and this fast mutation rate can make it even more difficult to make an effective vaccine 

during some flu seasons.24 For example, during the 2014-2015 flu season, the prevalent strain 

ofH3N2 was different than the strain used during the season's vaccine development25 

Because of the potential for changes in the circulating influenza viruses, close monitoring 

of influenza viruses is required to evaluate the potential impact of the seasonal flu on public 

health. CDC uses different tests to characterize influenza viruses, including genomic sequencing 

and Hemagglutinin Inhibition Assay (HAI/I·II assay).26 For samples collected and submitted to 

U.S. laboratories from October!, 2017 to February 17,2018, CDC has antigcnically or 

genetically characterized 1,599 influenza viruses, including 350 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 

viruses, 779 influenza A(H3N2) viruses, and 470 influenza B viruses.27 For H3N2, the analysis 

for the 2017-2018 flu season "revealed extensive generic diversity with multiple 

clades/subclades co-circulating."28 

20 World Health Organization, supra note 17. 21 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, How the Flu Virus Can Change: "Drift" and "Shift." (last updated 

Sept. 27, 20 17), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/viruses/change.htm. 22 /d. 23 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine, Rapid Medical Countermeasure Response to Infectious 

Diseases, Workshop Summary, at 48 (Oct. 12, 2015), https://www.nap.edu/read/21809/chapter/6?tenn=1990#48. 24 Helen Branswell, 'The problem child ofseasona/flu'· Beware this winter's virus, STAT NEWS (Jan. 8, 2018), 

https://www.statnews.com/20 18/0 l/08/flu-virus-h3n2/. 25 Laurie Garrett, The Year of the Flu, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS (Feb. 4, 2015), https:/lwww.cfr.org/expertbrieflyear-flu; Hearing before the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce, "U.S. 

Public Health Preparedness for Seasonal Influenza: Has the Response Improved?" (Nov. 19, 2015). ,.!d. 

27 Jd. Some researchers have found that the H3N2 virus poses significant health risks and results in more fatalities 

and hospitalizations than other influenza viruses. Dan Gray, 2018 Flu Season Off to a Strong, Potentially 

Dangerous Start, HEAI.THLINE (Jan. 3, 20 18), https://www.healthline.com/health-news/2018-flu-season-potentiallydangerous-start# I. 28 Laurie Garrett, supra note 25. 
91 


30456.053

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 6 

C. Seasonal Flu Vaccine: Development and Effectiveness 

i. Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Development 

The flu vaccine must be reformulated on an annual basis to protect against strains 

expected to be most prevalent that year since circulating influenza virus strains constantly 

change.29 Each year, public health experts, including those from the Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA), WHO, and CDC, study influenza virus samples and global disease 

patterns to identify virus strains likely to cause the most illness during the upcoming season. 30 In 

collaboration with other partners, WHO recommends the specific vaccine viruses that should be 

included in the next season's influenza vaccines in the northern hemisphere every February 

(WHO made recommendations for the 2018-2019 flu season on February 22, 2018). 31 The FDA 

then selects the strains for inclusion in the annual influenza virus that is sold and distributed in 

the United States based on that information and the recommendations of FDA's Vaccines and 

Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBAC). 32 

Most flu vaccines are injectable and include inactivated influenza vaccines and 

recombinant influenza vaccines. 33 Typically, the influenza vaccine protects against three or four 

different flu viruses.34 There arc three different production technologies approved by the FDA 

for injectable influenza vaccines: (I) egg-based flu vaccine; (2) cell-based flu vaccine; and (3) 

recombinant flu vaccine.35 The egg-based manufacturing process, which has been used for more 

than seventy years and takes about 22 to 24 weeks to produce, is the most common way that flu 

vaccines are manufactured in the U.S. The cell-based production process, approved by FDA in 

2012, takes about 16 to 17 weeks to manufacture the vaccine. The recombinant flu vaccine 

manufacturing process, approved by FDA in 2013, can produce flu vaccines in the shortest 

amount of time at about 12 to 15 weeks. 

29 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Selecting Viruses for the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine (last updated 

May 4, 20 16), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/season/vaccine-selection.htm. 30 In the northern hemisphere, seasonal influenza may begin as early as August and generally diminishes by April. 

Typically, influenza activity peaks between December and February in the United States but may peak later in the 

season. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Estimated Influenza Illnesses, Medical Visits, Hospitalizations, 

and Deaths Averted by Vaccination in the United States (last updated Apr. 19, 2017), 

h!tps:l/www .cdc.gov!flu/about/disease/20 l5-16.htm. 31 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Selecting Viruses for the Seasonal Influenza Vaccine, supra note 29. 32 Robert Lowes, First Quadrivalent Flu Vaccine Approved, Debuts Fal/2013, MEDSCAPE (Mar. 1, 2012), 

https:l/www.medscape.com/viewarticle/759517. 

33 Immunization Action Coalition, Influenza Vaccine Products for the 2017-2018 Influenza Season (last visited Mar. 

2, 2018) http://www.immunize.org/catg.dlp4072.pdf. 34 The trivalent influenza vaccine protects against three different influenza viruses (including an influenza A(HlNl) 

virus, an influenza A(H3N2) virus and one influenza B virus) and the quadrivalent influenza vaccine protects against 

four influenza viruses (including an influenza A(H IN I) virus, an influenza A(H3N2) virus and two influenza B 

viruses). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Quadrivalentinfluenza Vaccine (last updated Dec. 14, 2017), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/quadrivalent.htm. 

35 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, How Influenza (Flu) Vaccines are Made (last updated Nov. 7, 2016), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/how-fluvaccine-made.htm. 
92 


30456.054

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 7 

In 2003, FDA approved a nasal spray flu vaccine-called FluMist-that includes a live 

attenuated influenza vaccine for certain ages.36 Because data from observational studies showed 

low effectiveness of FluMist Quadrivalent against a specific strain of the influenza virus in the 

United States during the 2013-2014 and 2015-2016 flu seasons, however, CDC's Advisory 

Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not recommend that the live attenuated 

vaccine be used by individuals for the past few years.37 In February 2018, ACIP recommended 

that the live attenuated influenza vaccine be included on the 2018-2019 influenza vaccination 

schedule for individuals for whom it is appropriate.38 

For the 2017-2018 flu season, manufacturers estimated that they would provide about 

151 million to 166 million doses of injectable vaccine in the United States, and as of February 9, 

2018, about 154.7 million doses of the seasonal influenza vaccine had been distributed.39 About 

119 million doses of the influenza vaccine were expected to be quadrivalent flu vaccine. 40 

According to the CDC, about 15 to 20 percent of the supply of flu vaccine for the 2017-2018 flu 

season was manufactured through non-egg based manufacturing and about 80 to 85 percent was 

manufactured through the egg-based manufacturing process. 41 

ii. Seasonal Influenza Prevention and Vaccine Effectiveness 

The primary method for preventing influenza is annual vaccination. According to the 

CDC's 2018 Congressional Budget Justification, vaccination prevented approximately 5.1 

million influenza illnesses, 2.5 million influenza-associated medical visits, and 71,000 influenzaassociated hospitalizations during the 2015-2016 influenza season42 Similarly, a 2015 study 

published in the journal Vaccine showed that the seasonal flu vaccine prevented more than 

40,000 flu-associated deaths in the United States from 2005-2006 through 2013-2014.43 

36 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA Iiformation Regarding FluMist Quadrivalent Vaccine (last updated 

Jan. 26, 20 18), https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines!V accines/ ApprovedProducts/ucm508761.htm. 37 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Prevention and Control of Seasonallrifluenza with Vaccines, 

Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices-United States, 2016-17 Influenza Season 

(Aug. 26, 20 16), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/rr/rr6505al.htm#T1_down. 38 Molly Walker, ACIP Reinstates F/uMistfor 2018-2019 Flu Season, MEDSCAPE (Feb. 21, 2018), 

https:/ /www. medpagetoday .com/meetingcoverage/acip/71298. 39 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Supply & Distribution (last updated Feb. 

15, 2018), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/index.htm. For the 2017-2018 season, 13 influenza vaccine products 

were approved by 6 different manufacturers. Out of these 13 influenza vaccine products, 9 were egg-based 

trivalent/quadrivalcnt inactive influenza vaccine (injectable), 2 were trivalentlquadrivalent recombinant 

hemagglutinin influenza vaccine (injectable), 1 was a cell culture-based vaccine quadrivalent inactivated influenza 

vaccine, and 1 was live attenuated influenza vaccine (CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices did 

not recommend use of this vaccine for the 2017-18 flu season). One of the nine egg-based triva1entlquadrivalent 

inactive influenza vaccines (injectable) was an adjuvanted trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. Immunization 

Action Coalition, supra note 33. 4

° Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Quadrivalent Irifluenza Vaccine (last updated Dec. 14, 20 17), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protectlvaccine/quadrivalent.htm. 

41 U.S. House of Representatives, Comm. on Energy and Commerce, Subcomm. on Oversight and Investigations, 

!15th Cong., Committee Staff Phone Briefing with the U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services (Mar. 1, 2018). 42 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FY 2018 Congressional Budget Justification, supra note 3, at 47. 43 lvo Foppa, eta!., Deaths averted by influenza vaccination in the US. during the seasons 2005106 through 

2013114, VACCINE Volume 33 (June 12, 2015), www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410XI5002315. 
93 


30456.055

Majority Memorandwn for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 8 

Likewise, according to a 2017 study published by the CDC in the journal Pediatrics, the 

influenza vaccine reduced the risk of flu-associated death by half for children with underlying 

high-risk medical conditions and by nearly two-thirds for healthy children.44 

Indeed, research indicates that even if the flu vaccine fails to protect an individual against 

being infected with the flu, the vaccine may help reduce severe outcomes.45 According to CDC 

estimates, approximately 80 percent of flu-associated deaths in children in past flu seasons have 

occurred in children who were not vaccinated.46 Likewise, a 2017 study by the CDC showed 

that receiving the flu vaccine reduced severe outcomes in hospitalized patients by reducing 

deaths, reducing intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, reducing ICU length of stay, and reducing 

overall duration of hospitalization among hospital patients.47 The study found that vaccinated 

adults were 52 to 70 percent less likely to die than unvaccinated flu-hospitalized patients and 

experienced additional benefits. 48 

CDC estimates the effectiveness of the flu vaccine every year, and by effectiveness, CDC 

means the rate at which the vaccine prevents a person from getting sick with the flu and going to 

the doctor (the effectiveness rate does not, however, account for other potential benefits from 

receiving the flu vaccine such as helping reduce severe outcomes if an individual gets the flu). 49 

Recent studies show that seasonal flu vaccination typically has an effectiveness rate in the range 

of 40 to 60 percent. 50 According to CDC, the overall, adjusted vaccine effectiveness estimates 

for influenza seasons from 2005 to 2018 ranged from 10 to 60 percent. 5

1 

CDC's Adjusted Vaccine 

Effectiveness Estimates52 

Adjusted Overall Vaccine 

Year Effectiveness 

2004-2005 10% 

2005-2006 21% 

2006-2007 52% 

2007-2008 37% 

2008-2009 41% 

44 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC Study Finds Flu Vaccine Saves Children ·s Lives (Apr. 3, 2017), 

https://www .cdc.gov /media!re leases/20 17/p0403-flu-vaccine. htm I. 45 !d. 

46 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Estimating Seasonallnfiuenza-Associated Deaths in the United 

States-Questions and Answers (last updated Jan. 29, 20 18), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flurelated deaths.htm. 47 Cent;;rs for Disease Control and Prevention, New CDC Study Shows Flu Vaccine Reduces Severe Outcomes in 

Hospitalized Patients (May 25, 2017). 48 /d. 49 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Frequently Asked Flu Questions 2017-2018 Influenza Season (last 

updated Mar. 1, 2018), https:/lwww.cdc.gov/flulabout/seasonlflu-season-20 17-2018.htm. 50 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Vaccine Effectiveness-How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work? (last 

updated Oct. 3, 20 17), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qalvaccineeffect.htm. 51 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness, 2005-2018 (last updated 

Feb. 15, 20 18), https://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/effectiveness-studies.htm. 52 ld. 
94 


30456.056

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page9 

2009-2010 56% 

2010-2011 60% 

2011-2012 47% 

2012-2013 49% 

2013-2014 52% 

2014-2015 19% 

2015-2016 48% 

2016-2017 40% 

2017-2018 36% 

Vaccine effectiveness can differ depending on the age of the individual that received the 

vaccination. For example, for the 2016-2017 flu season, the vaccine was 61 percent effective for 

individuals aged 6 months to 8 years, 19 percent effective for individuals aged 18 to 49 years, 

and 25 percent effective for people aged 65 years and older. 5

3 Similarly, preliminary data shows 

that the vaccine effectiveness for all virus types for the 2017-2018 flu season differed by age 

group-statistically significant protection was found among children aged 6 months through 8 

years (a vaccine effectiveness rate of 59 percent was found) and adults aged 18 to 49 years old (a 

vaccine effectiveness rate of33 percent was found) 54 CDC's analysis of the preliminary data 

did not find any statistically significant protection in other age groups. 55 

Moreover, vaccine effectiveness also differs across different subtypes of influenza. 

Research shows that the flu vaccine typically is more effective against influenza B and influenza 

A(H!Nl) viruses than influenza A(H3N2) viruses. 5

6 Some researchers have raised concerns 

about the decline in effectiveness of the annual influenza vaccine, especially for the H3N2 

virus.57 A 2016 meta-analysis of 56 past studies published in PubMed and Em base found that, 

on average, the seasonal flu vaccine was 33 percent effective against the H3N2 virus, 54 percent 

effective against influenza B, 61 percent effective against the H 1 N I pdm09 virus, and 67 percent 

effective against HI Nl. 58 During the 2017-2018 flu season in the United States, preliminary 

data shows that while the flu vaccine had an overall vaccine effectiveness rate of 36 percent, 

vaccine effectiveness for all ages was 25 percent against type A(H3N2) viruses, 67 percent 

against influenza A(H1Nl)pdm09 viruses, and 42 percent effective against influenza B virus 

infection. 59 

53 Robert Lowes, Flu Vaccine Efficacy Slips from Prior Estimate, CDC Says, MEDSCAPE (June 23, 2017), 

https://www.medscape.com/viewartic1e/882075. 

54 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Interim Estimates o/2017-18 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine 

Effectiveness- United States, February 2018 (Feb. 16, 2018), 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/vo1umes/67/wr/mm6706a2.htm#contribAff. 

55 !d. 

56 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Vaccine Effectiveness-How Well Does the Flu Vaccine Work? (last 

updated Oct. 3, 20 17), https:J/www.cdc.gov/flu/about!qa/vaccineeffect.htm. 57 Nicholas C. Wu, A structural explanation/or the low effectiveness of the seasonal influenza H3N2 vaccine, PLOS 

PATHOGENS (Oct. 23, 2017), http://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/artic1e?id=l O.l37l/journal.ppat.1006682. 58 Edward A. Belongia, et al., Variable influenza vaccine effectiveness by subtype: a systematic review and metaanalysis of test-negative design studies, THE LANCET Volume 16 (Aug. 2016); See also Sarah Zhang, Scientists 

Found a Flu Vaccine- Now They Have to FL< It, WIRED (Oct. 9, 2015), http://www.wired.com/20 15/l O/scientistspinpoint-flu-vaccine-flaw-h3n2/. 

59 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Interim Estimates of 2017-I 8 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine 

Effectiveness- United States, February 2018, supra note 55. 
95 


30456.057

Majority Memorandwn for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 10 

There are many different factors that may contribute to reduced vaccine effectiveness for 

the influenza, including but not limited to: (1) antigenic differences between the circulating strain 

and the strain used to create the vaccine caused by antigenic drift and antigenic shift; (2) egg 

adaptation; and (3) other factors such as immune history60 and some individuals potentially 

requiring a higher amount of certain antigens, such as H3N2, to elicit a proper immune response 

to that particular strain of the influenza. The protective benefit from receiving the flu vaccine 

typically is decreased if the primary circulating influenza viruses are different from the viruses 

that were used to make the vaccine for that season.61 As previously mentioned, influenza viruses 

are continuously changing through antigenic drift and antigenic shift, and these changes can 

therefore impact the efficacy of the seasonal flu vaccine if the majority of the circulating viruses 

become different than those used for the vaccine. Even if antigenic drift occurs, however, the 

vaccine may provide protective benefit if the circulating influenza virus is only mildly or 

moderately different than the virus used for the vaccine. If the small genetic changes that occur 

through antigenic drift accumulate over time and result in a virus that looks different to a 

person's immune system, the antibodies created against older viruses may no longer recognize 

the "newer" virus, and the person may no longer be protccted.62 

While vaccine effectiveness is generally interpreted in the context of vaccine 

match/mismatch to circulating strains that have mutated to explain reduced protection, egg 

adaptation may also contribute to lower effectiveness of the vaccine-especially for certain 

strains of the virus such as H3N2.63 More specifically, as human influenza viruses adapt to grow 

in eggs during the manufacturing process, genetic changes may occur in the viruses referred to as 

"egg-adapted changes."64 These egg-adapted changes can have important consequences for an 

individual's immune response to vaccination such as causing an individual to produce antibodies 

that are less effective at preventing illness caused by the specific flu viruses in circulation.65 In 

2014, a study funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research found that, during the 2012-

2013 flu season, the low vaccine effectiveness was related to mutations in the egg-adapted H3N2 

vaccine strain rather than antigenic drift in circulating viruses. 66 Likewise, for the 2017-2018 flu 

season, some experts have expressed concern that the flu vaccine's reduced effectiveness against 

60 A recent study found that immune history with the influenza influences an individual's response to the flu 

vaccine. Matt Wood, Immune history influences effectiveness of flu vaccine. study find<, UCHICAGONEWS (Feb. 20, 

20 I 8), https://news .uch ieago.edu/artic le/20 18/02/20/immune-h istory-influences-effectiveness-flu-vaccine-studyfinds. 

61 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Flu Vaccine Effectiveness: Questions and Answers/or Health 

Professionals (last updated Jan. 29, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/flu!professionals/vaccinationleffectivenessqa.htm. 62 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, How the Flu Virus Can Change: "Drift" and "Shift," (last updated 

Sept. 27, 2017), https://www.cdc.gov/flu!about!viruses/change.htm. 63 Nicholas C. Wu, supra note 58. 64 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Antigenic Characterization (last updated Sept. 27, 2017), available at 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu!professionals/laboratory/antigenic.htm. 

65 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cell-Based Flu Vaccines (last updated Nov. 7, 2016), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu!protect!vaccine/cell-based.htm. 

66 Danuta Skowronski, et al., Low 2012-13/njluenza vaccine Effectiveness Associated with Mutation in the EggAdapted H3N2 Vaccine Strain Not Antigenic Drift in Circulating Viruses, PLOS (Mar. 25, 2014), 

http://jouma1s.plos.org/plos.org/plosone/artic1e?id~ 10.13 71/joumal.pone0092153. 
96 


30456.058

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 11 

H3N2 may be caused in part by egg adaptation67 According to a February 15,2018 statement 

by FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., the commonly used egg-based manufacturing 

process may not have produced a vaccine that was as effective against H3N2 as the cell-based 

manufacturing process: 

A preliminary analysis ofCMS data indicates that this year, the cell-based influenza 

vaccine appears to have somewhat better effectiveness in preventing influenza than 

the egg-based vaccine. Scientists at the FDA, CDC, and NIH are working diligently 

to fully understand the basis for this finding, so that all of next year's vaccines can 

provide better protection in preventing the flu. Better understanding why the cellbased vaccine offered better protection against H3N2 this season, when compared 

to the egg-based vaccine, may offer important clues to help improve the production 

of a more effective H3N2 vaccine for next season.68 

Similarly, CDC also recently said "we're hoping this year to find out whether or not 

there's a performance difference between cell-based vaccines and the egg-based vaccines."69 

More recently, on February 26, 2018, Dr. Gottlieb indicated that the FDA did not believe 

that the reduced effectiveness of the 2017-2018 seasonal vaccine against H3N2 was caused by 

public health authorities choosing the wrong strain ofH3N2 when starting the process of making 

the 2017-2018 seasonal influenza vaccine. Dr. Gottlieb stated that "so far the data we have 

suggests that the viruses provided by reference laboratories to manufacturers to make this year's 

vaccines do reasonably match the circulating flu strains that are causing most of the illnesses."70 

Dr. Gottlieb provided several reasons that might explain the limited effectiveness of the 2017-

2018 seasonal influenza vaccine against H3N2: 

One theory is that people might require a higher amount of H3N2 antigen to elicit 

a proper immune response to that particular strain of influenza. As I noted 

previously, the work conducted with CMS shows a preliminary finding that 

suggests the cell-based influenza vaccine might be somewhat more effective than 

the egg-based vaccine. We are working to follow up on that finding. We're also 

combing through the data to see if there are other reasons for why this season's 

vaccines were less effective against H3N2. 71 

67 Lisa Schnirring, University of Minnesota, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, WHO changes 2 

strains for 2018-19 flu vaccine (Feb. 22, 20 18), http://www .cidrap.umn.edulnews-perspective/20 18102/whochanges-2-strains-20 18-19-flu-vaccine. 68 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. on the efficacy of 

the 2017-2018 influenza vaccine (Feb. 15, 2018), 

https:llwww.fda.gov/NewsEvents!Newsroom/PressAnnouncementslucm597077.htm. 

69 Maggie Fox, Why next year'sflu vaccine will be lousy, too, NBC NEWS (Feb. 23, 2018), 

https:llwww.nbcnews.comlhealth/health-newslwhy-next-year-s-flu-vaccine-wil1-be-lousy-too-n850641. 

70 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D .. on FDA's ongoing 

efforts to help improve effectiveness of influenza vaccines (Feb. 26, 20 18), 

https:llwww. fda. gov IN ewsEvents!Newsroom/PressAnnouncementslucm5983 17 .htm. 

71 !d. 
97 


30456.059

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 12 

The FDA anticipates that by better understanding why the effectiveness of the influenza 

vaccine tends to be lower against H3N2, FDA can hopefully enhance vaccine effectiveness. 

iii. Vaccine Coverage 

Since 2010, ACIP has recommended annual vaccinations for everyone aged 6 months or 

older.72 From the 20 I 0-2011 to 2016-2017 flu seasons, an average of 56.5 percent of children 

(aged 6 months to 17 years) and 41.7 percent of adults were vaccinated each year. 73 Data from 

the 2015-2016 season showed that 59.3 percent of children and 41.7 percent of adults were 

vaccinated. 74 For 2016-2017 season, 59 percent of children and 43.3 percent of adults were 

vaccinated. 75 The estimate for this season, as ofNovember 2017, was that 38.6 percent of all 

persons 6 months and older received the flu vaccine (this early estimate of flu season vaccination 

coverage is similar to coverage at the same time last flu season for all persons 6 months and 

older). 76 

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) supports efforts to increase annual 

vaccination and continuously engages in efforts to improve public awareness and provider 

knowledge about influenza and the importance of vaccination. 77 As part of the Healthy People 

2020 initiative, HHS has set a goal for states to vaccinate 70 percent of their population. 

According to experts, vaccination rates need to be generally above 70 percent for "herd 

immunity" effects-which limit the spread and protect those without immunity-to become 

apparent. 

D. Development of a Universal Flu Vaccine 

One long-term goal to improve preparedness for and response to the influenza is to 

develop a universal vaccine that would provide long-lasting immunity against multiple strains of 

the influenza. The goal is to eliminate the need for individuals to receive an annual seasonal flu 

vaccine and to provide protection against newly emerging flu strains. The Biomedical Advanced 

Research and Development Authority (BARDA) within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Preparedness and Response in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is 

coordinating a broad-interagency partnership to support the development of improved influenza 

vaccines, including a universal flu vaccine. 78 In June 2017, the National Institute of Allergy and 

Infectious Disease (NIAID) held a workshop entitled "Pathway to a Universal Influenza 

Vaccine" to identify and develop criteria that would define a universal influenza vaccine, discuss 

knowledge gaps in the search for this vaccine, and to identify research strategies to address these 

72 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FY 2018 Congressional Budget Justification, supra note 3, at 18. 73 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Flu Vaccination Coverage, United States, 2016-17 Influenza Season 

(last updated Sept. 28, 20 17), https://www.cdc.govlflulfluvaxview/coverage-l617estimates.htm. 

741d. 

75 1d. 76 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Early-Season Flu Vaccination Coverage, United States, 

November 2017 (last updated Dec. 9, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/flulfluvaxview/nifs-estimates-nov2017.htm. 77 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FY 2018 Congressional Justification, supra note 3, at 46. 78 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Influenza Vaccine Advances-Questions and Answers (last updated 

Sept. 28, 2016), https:/lwww.cdc.govlflu/about/qa/advanccs.htm. 
98 


30456.060

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 13 

gaps. 79 Following the workshop, NIAID published a strategic plan in February 2018 to 

"reinvigorate pursuit of a universal influenza vaccine."80 

E. Pandemic Influenza 

An influenza pandemic can occur when a novel, non-human influenza virus becomes able 

to spread efficiently through human-to-human transmission. The viruses circulate in birds or 

other animals, so there is little to no immunity against these viruses among people. According to 

CDC, pandemics rarely occur and past pandemics include the 2009 Pandemic (H1Nl virus), the 

1968 Pandemic (Il3N2 virus), the 1957-1958 Pandemic (H2N2 virus), and the 1918 Pandemic 

(H!Nl virus). 81 

HHS maintains a Pandemic Influenza Plan that was developed in 2005. 82 The 

Committee wrote to HHS in April2017 asking about the status of the updated plan. 83 HHS 

subsequently released the updated plan in June 2017 84 The Pandemic Influenza Plan acts "as a 

blueprint for all HHS pandemic influenza preparedness planning and response activities."85 In 

the 2017 update, HHS notes that one of the improvements in the agency's preparedness and 

response activities for pandemic influenza over the past decade is that "HHS efforts in pandemic 

influenza preparedness now are closely aligned with seasonal influenza activities, harnessing 

expanded surveillance, laboratory, vaccine, and antiviral drug resistance monitoring capacity."86 

According to the 20 17 update: 

[T]he continually changing nature of influenza viruses that can lead to mismatches 

between vaccine strains and circulating viruses, as seen during the 2014-2015 

influenza season, remind us that pandemic and seasonal influenza planning and 

improvement efforts are interdependent. Both rely on a strong and sustainable 

public health system infrastructure that can rapidly detect, and respond to, changes 

in circulating influenza viruses. Many of the activities that HHS and its partners 

79 National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, Experts Outline Pathway to a 

Universal Influenza Vaccine (Oct. 17, 20 17), https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/experts-outline-pathwayuniversal-influenza-vaccine. 

80 Emily J. Erbelding, eta!., A Universallnjluenza Vaccine: The Strategic Plan for the National Institute of Allergy 

and Infectious Diseases (Mar. 20 18). 81 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Past Pandemics (last updated Nov. 2, 2017), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/hasics/past-pandemics.html. 

82 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Pandemic Influenza Plans (last updated Jun. 22, 2017), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/planning-preparedness/national-strategy-planning.html. 

83 Letter from the Hon. Greg Walden, Chairman, H. Comm. on Energy & Commerce, eta/., to Hon. Thomas Price, 

M.D., Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Services (Apr. 20. 20 17). https:/!archivesenergycommerce. house. gov/s ites!republ icans. energycommerce. house. gov!files/ documents/20 170420 HHS. pdf In 

response to Questions for the Record from the Subcommittee's November 20 15 hearing on seasonal influenza, HHS 

told the Committee that it expected to release the updated plan by the end of2016. !d. 84 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Pandemic Influenza Plans (last updated Jun. 22, 20 17), 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/planning-preparedness/national-strategy-planning.html. 

85 U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Serv., HHS Pandemic Influenza Plan, at 2 (Nov. 2005), 

http://www.flu.gov/planning-preparedness/federal/hhspandemicinfluenzaplan.pdf. 

86 U.S. Dep't of Health and Human Services, Pandemic Influenza Plan, 2017 Update (Jun. 2017), 

https://www .cdc.gov /flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pan-flu-report-20 17v2. pdf. 
99 


30456.061

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 14 

undertake each year to understand and mitigate the impact of seasonal influenza are 

critical to a pandemic response both domestically and globally. 87 

F. Improvements in U.S. Response to Seasonal Influenza 

After the 2014-2015 vaccine mismatch, then HHS Secretary Sylvia Burwell, through her 

counselors, requested that I-IHS experts recommend actions to mitigate the seasonal influenza 

mismatch problem. On May 6, 2015, a memorandum of influenza process improvements was 

sent to Secretary Burwell. In November 2015, I-IHS held a table top exercise with HHS agencies 

and vaccine manufacturers, to solicit their individual opinions. The exercise outcome is 

expected to inform an HHS action plan for rapid development and manufacturing of a revised 

seasonal influenza vaccine as a strain change or a separate monovalent vaccine. On November 

19,2015, the Subcommittee held a hearing on whether the public health response to seasonal 

influenza had improved.88 The Subcommittee will follow-up on the status ofHHS actions. 

Among the key actions taken to improve seasonal flu preparedness and examined at the 

hearing were: 

• Technological improvements. Vaccine manufacturers were in the process of adopting 

several process improvements for pandemic vaccine. HHS anticipated asking that 

these improvements also be applied to seasonal influenza vaccine manufacturing. 

Application of these improvements to seasonal influenza could save four to six weeks 

in the manufacturing and formulation process. If successful, strain selection 

decisions could be made with surveillance information closer to the beginning of the 

influenza season. 

• Use of the Influenza Risk Assessment Tool (!RAT). HHS uses the !RAT for decisions 

to make limited amounts of vaccine in response to emerging, potentially-pandemic 

strains. The HHS Influenza Risk Management Group, using the IRA T as a model, 

was working to develop a risk assessment method within the next 15 months to guide 

recommendations about whether to change seasonal vaccine strain composition 

between the WHO recommendation and June. 

• Monovalent rescue vaccine. Recent discussions at the Flu Risk Management Meeting 

(FRMM), which is coordinated by the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Preparedness and Response (ASPR), have included considerations to determine that 

circumstances under which a monovalent rescue vaccine would be pursued due to a 

drifted seasonal influenza strain. Factors that could impact that decision include 

manufacturing capabilities and disease severity. In 1986, FDA approved a 

monovalent influenza vaccine to supplement the trivalent influenza vaccine to address 

87 !d. at 10. 88 Hearing before the U.S. House of Reps., Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, 

"U.S. Public Health Preparedness for Seasonal Influenza: Has the Response Improved?" (Nov. 19, 2015). 
100 


30456.062

Majority Memorandum for March 8, 2018, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing 

Page 15 

a drift of the H1Nl strain.89 Approximately 7 million doses of the 1986 monovalent 

vaccine were manufactured or distributed late in 1986.90 

• Late season change to tri- or quadrivalent vaccine. HHS had taken a series of steps 

to increase the probability that a late season change to tri- or quadrivalent vaccine 

could be made. These changes would also enable faster production of a monovalent 

vaccine should it be needed. Some of these key steps include: FDA making more 

potency assay reagents to facilitate the production of new vaccines, CDC (with 

WHO) helping improve availability of additional vaccine viruses, CDC (with WHO) 

enhancing global surveillance of circulating human and avian influenza viruses. 

• Increased communication. More frequent and comprehensive communication with 

HHS leadership and FDA had been implemented, and FDA had done likewise with 

the Chair of its Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory. 

IV. Issues 

The following issues may be examined at the hearing: 

• How has public health preparedness for the seasonal influenza improved in recent years? 

• What challenges do public health authorities face when developing the seasonal influenza 

vaccine? 

• How can better and more effective influenza vaccines be manufactured? Are there 

concerns with the egg-based manufacturing process? 

• What guidance would be effective in helping increase the use of antiviral medications 

and reduce the use of antibiotics in the treatment for influenza? Do we need more 

treatments for the flu? 

V. Staff Contacts 

If you have any questions regarding the hearing, please contact Natalie Turner, Alan 

Slobodin, or Jcn Barbian of the Committee staff at (202) 225-2927. 

89 Letter from Thomas A. Kraus, FDA Associate Commissioner for Legislation to The Honorable Fred Upton, 

Chairman, House Energy and Commerce Committee, eta!. (April 8, 20 15). 9

° Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 37 CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 469 (Aug. 12, 

1988). 
101 


30456.063

GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Dr. Anne Schuchat 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

C!Congtt55 of tbt WnitdJ $tate5 ~ous-e of 1\epresentatibescoMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN House OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority (202} 225-2927 

Minority i202) 225-3641 

March 28, 2018 

Acting Principal Deputy Director 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

1600 Clifton Road 

Atlanta, GA 30329 

Dear Dr. Schuchat: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on 

March 8, 2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for 

and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Wednesday April II, 2018. Your responses should 

be mailed to Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to 

Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

Gregg 

&.,_ 

Harper 

~ Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

Attachment 
102 


30456.064

Schuchat March 2018 Hearing QFRS: 

Rep. Harper 

Ql. What specific steps is CDC taking to examine whether the different manufacturing processes (i.e. cellbased, recombinant-based, and egg-based) for the flu vaccine have an impact on the flu vaccine 

effectiveness? What additional data do we need to make this comparison? 

Al. 

CDC supports the U.S. Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network, which currently consists of five study sites across 

the United States that measure flu vaccines' effectiveness at preventing outpatient medical visits due to 

laboratory-confirmed influenza. The VE network allows CDC to measure the benefits of seasonal flu vaccination 

each flu season. CDC plans to work with existing network partners next year to conduct some limited additional 

studies to assess the relative effectiveness of different vaccine products. In the past similar such studies have 

successfully compared live attenuated vaccine vs inactivated vaccine in children, quadravalent (four components 

that protect against four flu viruses) and trivalent vaccines (three components), and high dose vaccines to 

standard dose vaccines. 

In order to better evaluate the impact of different manufacturing processes on VE on a broader and more 

consistent scale, CDC would need to expand the VE network, such as by adding enrollees to existing outpatient 

VE network sites and increasing the number of study sites. These findings will provide additional important 

information to researchers and manufacturers working to develop more effective vaccines.-By increasing the 

breadth and depth of vaccine effectiveness monitoring to gather additional comparative effectiveness data in 

support of the development of more effective vaccines, CDC would be able to generate evidence that could 

affect future policy. 

Q2. A high-dose vaccine has been available for several years, but CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization 

Practices (ACIP) has not expressed a preference for the high-dose vaccine for seniors. During the March 8, 

2018 hearing, Dr. Schuchat testified that one reason CDC has not expressed a preference is because: "the 

vaccine that they have at the doctors' office or the pharmacy is the one that you should get because there 

may not be the other product if you're looking for it." Is this the main reason the CDC and ACIP have not 

expressed a preference for the high-dose flu vaccine in seniors? If not, why haven't CDC and ACIP expressed a 

preference that the elderly receive the high-dose flu vaccine? What data is needed to get CDC to the point of 

expressing a preference for the high-dose vaccine for seniors? Since there are several studies that show a 

high-dose vaccine is about 20 percent more effective than the standard-dose vaccine in seniors, how does the 

CDC's no preference posture save more lives than would be saved by expressing a preference for the highdose vaccine for seniors? 

A2. 

There are several reasons why a preferential recommendation is not currently in place. Where more than one 

vaccine exists for a given disease, preferential recommendations for one vaccine over another generally require 

strong, generalizable evidence of superior effectiveness. Influenza is unique in that vaccine effectiveness varies 

with a number of different factors, and is not the same from one season to another. In recent years, studies 

have been conducted comparing the benefits for older adults of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine, 

adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine, and recombinant influenza vaccine to standard-dose, unadjuvanted 

influenza vaccines. For each of these three vaccines, there is at least some evidence of better effectiveness than 

standard-dose inactivated vaccine, with the most evidence available for the high dose vaccine. To date, 

however, there are no data comparing the effectiveness ofthese three vaccines to one another, and so it is not 
103 


30456.065

possible to draw conclusions as to which is the most effective. Moreover, it is not possible to know whether the 

findings of such studies, which are generally performed over only one or two seasons, will be similar across 

multiple influenza seasons. For example, in one two-season study comparing high-dose and standard-dose 

vaccines, improved efficacy of the high dose vaccine was seen only during one season. In addition, preferential 

recommendations may discourage vaccination in settings where it is difficult to find a specific vaccine type. ACIP 

routinely reviews vaccine data from manufacturers and academic researchers, and will continue to review 

information on this topic as it becomes available. CDC continues to gather and compile data on this topic to 

inform ACIP recommendations. 

Q3. During the March, 2018 hearing, CDC testified that about 48% of Americans get the flu vaccine each year. 

More children than adults typically get vaccinated, with about 59 percent of children typically receiving the flu 

vaccine. 

a. Do all pediatrician offices carry pediatric doses of the flu vaccine for the entire flu season? 

CDC monitors vaccine distribution data nationally and estimates that more than 154 million doses of flu 

vaccine have been shipped nationwide. CDC also purchases and distributes influenza vaccine for the 

public sector and, on a monthly basis, provides state health departments with an updated status on 

public doses ordered for providers. CDC, however, does not track the individual vaccine usage at the 

provider level. 

In the private sector, there are two tools to support influenza vaccination for providers and the 

public. First, anyone can use the Flu Vaccine Finder on CDC's website 

(https://www.cdc.gov/flu/freeresources/flu-finder-widget.html) to find providers of flu vaccine based 

on geographic location. Second, the National Adult and Influenza Immunization Summit hosts the 

Influenza Vaccine Tracking Availability System, a resource for providers looking to purchase influenza 

vaccine. 

b. Do all pharmacies carry pediatric doses of the flu vaccine throughout the entire flu season? 

CDC does not have direct visibility into vaccine supply of private sector pharmacies as our focus is on the 

public sector through connection with state, city, and territorial health departments. Again, anyone can 

use the Flu Vaccine Finder on CDC's website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/freeresources/flu-finderwidget.html) to find providers of flu vaccine based on geographic location. 

c. Is CDC aware of any difficulties parents have encountered when trying to have their child get the 

flu vaccine? 

CDC is not aware of any difficulties that parents may have encountered when trying to have their child 

immunized with the flu vaccine. CDC works closely with immunization programs at all state health 

departments and our awardees did not communicate any difficulties regarding vaccine availability for 

children; however, as stated above, there are additional options available for CDC immunization 

awardees to obtain additional influenza vaccine, if needed. 
104 


30456.066

Q4. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) recently recommended that FluMist be used 

during the 2018-2019 season. Why did the advisory panel decide to recommend FluMist for the 2018-2019 

season? 

In 2016, based on CDC data from the 2013-14 and 2015-16 seasons, the ACIP recommended that live attenuated 

inactivated virus (LAIV), or FluMist, not be used due to concerns over poor effectiveness against influenza A 

H1N1 viruses. During the February 2018 ACIP meeting, information presented to the Committee that indicated 

that the probable cause of poor effectiveness of a certain component of the vaccine had been identified. The 

manufacturer has updated this vaccine component, and data suggest that the problem may have been 

addressed with this change. The effectiveness of the LAIV containing the new component may not be known 

until the next H1Nl-predominant influenza season occurs. It will thus continue to be important for CDC to 

monitor influenza vaccine effectiveness. 

QS. Has there been any analysis of whether insurance reimbursement policies and other practices impacts 

the rate of vaccination or spread of influenza? Do insurance reimbursement policies differ depending on 

whether the vaccine was manufactured through egg-based process, cell-based process, or recombinant-based 

process? 

AS. All flu vaccines are covered by insurance since they are recommended by the Advisory Committee on 

Immunization Practices (ACIP). CDC is unaware of any difference in reimbursement policies based on which 

process was used to manufacture the flu vaccine. 

Rep. Carter: 

Q1. This is the 100th anniversary of the 1918 pandemic influenza that infected about 500 million people 

worldwide, killing 20 to 50 million. Since then, we have made significant improvements in technologies to 

treat and prevent flu, but a pandemic flu is still a real threat. Can you discuss our level of preparedness as a 

country and what more could be done to better equip our public health infrastructure to respond to an 

outbreak of influenza? 

Al. 

CDC and its public health partners must continue to be vigilant and prepare for the emergence of the next 

influenza pandemic, while working to minimize the burden of seasonal influenza, which causes significant 

disease burden in the U.S. each year. CDC's seasonal and pandemic prevention and response work is synergistic. 

Better preparedness and response for seasonal influenza results in better pandemic preparedness and vice 

versa. 

CDC has made significant progress and improvements in methods and technologies to diagnose, treat, and 

prevent influenza, but because of the dynamic and evolving nature of flu viruses, a future flu pandemic is 

inevitable. Developments since the 1918 influenza pandemic include major advances in medicine, technology, 

and public health. We now have vaccines to prevent flu, antiviral drugs (which are the main treatment for flu), 

and a global influenza surveillance system with 114 World Health Organization member states that constantly 

monitor flu activity. In addition, CDC is one of six WHO Influenza Collaborating Centers that conduct research 

and convene vaccine composition meetings twice a year to make recommendations on viruses to be included in 

seasonal, as well as pre-pandemic, influenza vaccines. There is also a much better understanding of the use of 

non-pharmaceutical interventions that help slow the spread of flu, such as social distancing, respiratory and 

cough etiquette and hand hygiene. These advances in pandemic preparedness and response are critical, but 

there is still much to do to improve pandemic readiness. CDC tracks influenza virus activity in the US with strong 
105 


30456.067

epidemiologic and virologic surveillance systems and has made great progress developing global capacity to 

detect novel influenza when it emerges. 

Despite these advances, surveillance and laboratory infrastructure is lacking in many developing countries. 

Assisting countries to develop such surveillance capacity, and to create and exercise robust pandemic plans will 

mitigate pandemic impact on Americans, as will improving surveillance of flu viruses in animals. In addition, 

more broadly effective tools to prevent and treat flu (i.e. vaccine and antivirals) are needed, as well as surge 

capacity strategies for medical settings, supplies, and personnel. The 1918 pandemic centenary gives us an 

opportunity to explore the historic impact of this event and also reminds us that influenza is unpredictable and 

has the potential to cause devastating harm. CDC is committed to protecting Americans and the global 

community by preparing for and responding to future flu pandemics. An effective response will save lives and 

diminish the potential for social and economic turmoil. 
106 


30456.068

GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

<!Congrt~% of tbc mnttcb ~tate~ 

J!)ouse of ~epresentatibes 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci 

Majority (202) 225-2927 

Minority (202) 225-3641 

March 28, 2018 

Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases 

National Institutes of Health 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

9000 Rockville Pike 

Bethesda, MD 20892 

Dear Dr. Fauci: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on 

March 8, 2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for 

and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Wednesday April 11, 2018. Your responses should 

be mailed to Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 and c-mailed in Word format to 

Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

Gregg 

&,.,_ 

Harper 

~ Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

Attachment 
107 


30456.069

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Hearing: "Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for and Response Efforts to 

Seasonal Influenza" 

March 8, 2018 

Questions for the Record for Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Director, 

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

l. What specific steps is NIH taking to examine whether the different manufacturing 

processes (i.e., cell-based, recombinant-based, and egg-based) for the flu vaccine have an 

impact on the flu vaccine's effectiveness? What additional data do we need to make this 

comparison? 

NIH Response: 

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a component of the National 

Institutes of Health (NIH), maintains a robust influenza research program that includes efforts to 

improve upon existing seasonal influenza vaccines. A key goal of the recently released NIAID 

Strategic Plan for the Development of a Universal Influenza Vaccine is to precisely characterize 

how the development of immunity to influenza virus occurs and how best to tailor vaccination 

responses to achieve it. These NIAID efforts will include supporting the development and study 

of different vaccine candidate designs that may utilize novel manufacturing processes. 

Each year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention collects data about seasonal influenza 

vaccination via the U.S. Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network. The VE Network helps 

estimate the influenza vaccine's effectiveness at preventing outpatient medical visits due to 

laboratory-confirmed influenza. Though NIAID is not part of the VE Network and cannot 

comment on its data needs, N!AID does support research to better understand how different 

manufacturing processes may have an impact on the effectiveness of various influenza vaccine 

formulations. This research can help to understand why a particular vaccine may be more or less 

effective, as determined by the VE Network, during a particular influenza season. For example, 

N lAID-supported investigators recently determined that an influenza vaccine virus produced in 

eggs exhibited a mutation that may have resulted in reduced vaccine effectiveness during the 

2016-2017 influenza season. This study also showed that a recombinant-based influenza vaccine 

approved for use during the 2016-2017 influenza season did not exhibit this mutation and elicited 

a more robust immune response in vaccine recipients. 

NIAID also is supporting research to help avoid challenges associated with egg-based production 

of influenza vaccines, such as the egg-specific mutation described above. This research includes 

studies to improve current manufacturing processes and to develop novel influenza vaccine 

production approaches. For example, NTAID scientists have devised a method to manufacture an 

experimental whole virus inactivated influenza vaccine using a cell-based system, rather than 

eggs. This would provide another alternative to currently licensed egg-based and cell-based 

1 
108 


30456.070

influenza vaccines. NIAID researchers are developing an additional cell-based system for whole 

virus influenza vaccine candidates to try to determine which system is ·more efficient (both in 

terms of manufacturing time and cost). NIAID will continue to support efforts to improve 

vaccine manufacturing processes and vaccine efficacy. Data from these NIAID-supported 

studies will help inform the design of better influenza vaccines. 

It is important to note that the ability of an influenza vaccine to elicit an immune response may 

be affected by factors that are not associated with the vaccine virus or the manufacturing process. 

For example, a recent NIAID-supported study found that the low vaccine effectiveness observed 

during the 2012-2013 influenza season was attributed to low immunogenicity in a subset of the 

population, not to viral mutations acquired during the manufacturing process. NIAID continues 

to support fundamental immunological research to better understand the immune response to 

influenza vaccination. This work includes studies exploring why some individuals respond 

poorly to influenza vaccines, as well as how influenza exposures and vaccinations shape an 

individual's immune response. 

2. Adjuvants are boosters that can be used in flu vaccine to enhance the immune response in 

certain populations that tend to respond poorly to vaccination, such as the elderly. Seasonal 

flu vaccines are administered with adjuvants licensed for use in other countries for targeted 

populations, such as the elderly. Adjuvants have been used in other vaccines licensed for the 

U.S. market-such as in vaccines against tetanus. What further research is needed about the 

use of adjuvants in the seasonal flu vaccine? 

NIH Response: 

NIAID maintains a strong vaccine adjuvant program that supports the discovery and development of 

novel adjuvants capable of safely enhancing the efficacy of seasonal, pandemic, and universal influenza 

vaccines in various populations including the elderly, newborns and infants, and pregnant women. 

NIAID-supported investigators have tested several promising experimental adjuvants for influenza 

vaccines that have induced protection against influenza infection in animal models. A number of these 

adjuvant-vaccine combinations also are being tested in early stage clinical trials. 

In collaboration with industry partners, including small businesses, NIAID continues to support research 

to evaluate novel adjuvants with licensed seasonal influenza vaccines to enhance vaccine effectiveness. 

In addition, NIAID is developing a clinical trial to evaluate the use of a topical adjuvant cream to boost 

immune responses to an H5 influenza vaccine. This topical adjuvant cream has shown promise in 

boosting immune responses to seasonal influenza vaccines. NIAID also collaborates with the Biomedical 

Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and industry partners to evaluate adjuvants to 

improve immune responses to avian H5 and H7 influenza vaccines and to enable dose-sparing regimens 

of these vaccines. 

NIAID will continue to support research to understand how adjuvants augment immune responses. This 

research is critical to the goal of enhancing influenza vaccine effectiveness, particularly in individuals that 

respond poorly to seasonal inf1uenza vaccination. 

2 
109 


30456.071

3. What actions could Congress take that could help expedite research for the universal flu 

vaccine? 

NIH Response: 

NIAID is appreciative of Congress' longstanding support for influenza virus research. Through activities 

such as public hearings, Congress continues to play an essential role in raising awareness of the need for a 

universal influenza vaccine. In addition, Congress, through the passage of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2018 (P.L. 115-141 ), provided an additional $40 million to NIAID for universal 

influenza vaccine research that will expedite studies of: I) transmission, natural history, and pathogenesis 

of influenza infection; 2) influenza immunity and factors correlated with immune protection; and 3) 

vaccine approaches to elicit broad, protective immune responses. Additional sustained financial resources 

will be required to develop such an important advance in the fight against influenza. 

The Honorable Earl "Buddy" Carter 

l. I am aware of a great deal of ongoing work on the next generation of flu vaccines. This 

includes in my home state of Georgia where there is a partnership between the University 

of Georgia and Sanofi to develop a broadly protective flu vaccine that would be effective 

against influenza natural mutation over time. Can you talk about the role of the NIH in 

supporting early stage research and the importance of public/private partnerships in the 

development of next-generation flu vaccines? 

NIH Response: 

Early stage research, from basic research to applied research and preclinical and early clinical studies, is 

an essential component of the NIH's mission and a critical part of the development of new tools to treat 

and prevent disease. For example, a recent analysis found that out of the 210 new drugs approved by the 

Food and Drug Administration from 2010 through 2016, NIH contributed to every single one. In more 

than 90 percent of these cases, the NIH-supported research was early stage science that provided 

foundational information for development of the drug. In a recent influenza-related case, it was an 

NIAID investment in basic research nearly 40 years ago that enabled the development of the novel 

influenza antiviral Xofluza (baloxavir marboxil), which was approved for use in Japan in early 2018. 

Support for early stage research also creates tremendous opportunities for NIAID to work with public and 

private partners to translate basic scientific findings into interventions for patients. NIAID's Partnerships 

Program, which encourages new research collaborations between experts from academia and industry, has 

stimulated research and development of vaccines with broad activity against a range of influenza viruses. 

N!AID also participates in interagency public-private partnerships with agencies such as BARDA and 

supports datahases such as the Immune Epitope Database and ImmPort, which facilitate the broader 

research community's influenza vaccine development efforts. NlAID will continue to collaborate with 

government, academic, and industry partners to develop the next generation of vaccines against influenza. 

3 
110 

[Dr. Bright did not answer submitted questions for the record by 

the time of printing.] 


30456.072

GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

Dr. Rick A. Bright 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

C!Congress of tbe mtnfteb ~tates 

j!,lou!5c of l\cpte!5cntatil:lc!5 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 Majority {202) 225-2927 

Minority 1202)225-3641 

March 28,2018 

Director, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 

200 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20201 

Dear Dr. Bright: 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on 

March 8, 2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for 

and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Wednesday April!!, 2018. Your responses should 

be mailed to Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to 

Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

&.,. 

Gregg Harper 

~ Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

Attachment 
111 


30456.073

Attachment-Additional Questions for the Record 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

1. Some studies have shown that the cell-based and recombinant-based flu vaccines are 

more effective than the egg-based flu vaccine. One challenge, however, in comparing the 

effectiveness of flu vaccines manufactured through different processes is that the vaccine 

is blended together in the market and we therefore do not have differentiated data sets to 

show the benefit and effectiveness of egg-based or non-egg-based vaccines. 

a. What, if any, data is available to evaluate whether vaccines manufactured through 

different technologies are more effective? Is all the available data being 

analyzed? 

b. What additional data do we need and how can this data be obtained? 

2. During the March 8, 2018 hearing, BARD A testified that we have not had a new class of 

antivirals approved for influenza in more than 20 years. What, if anything, should we be 

doing to incentivize the development of new antivirals for the flu? 

3. On November 19,2015, the Subcommittee held a hearing on HHS actions being taken to 

improve the public health response to influenza. In 2015, HHS repmied that it would ask 

vaccine manufacturers that were adopting process improvements for a pandemic vaccine 

to also apply such improvements to seasonal influenza vaccine manufacturing. Did HHS 

make such a request to the manufacturers? If so, have these process improvements been 

adopted for seasonal influenza vaccine manufacturing? 

4. Does BARD A have the resources needed to keep the vaccines in the stockpile updated? 

Are we transitioning to cell-based or recombinant flu vaccines in the stockpile? If so, at 

what rate? 

The Honorable Morgan Griffith 

I. In 20 II, FDA issued an Advisory to alert drug manufacturing to the presence of glass 

fragments in injectable drugs contained in glass vials. Industry experts inform me that 

this phenomenon is due the delamination of glass from the inner surface of the vial. This 

problem has led to many recalls because FDA believes that these glass fragments have 

the potential to cause harm to patients. I know that BARD A, CDC, FDA and NIH work 

tirelessly to ensure our influenza vaccine stockpile is safe and secure, but: 

a. Have you seen any evidence of glass fragments due to delamination or evidence 

of glass particles in influenza vaccines contained in glass vials after the vaccines 

are manufactured and included within the national vaccine stockpile? 

b. If you have seen such evidence, what can be done to address the problem? 
112 


30456.074

GREG WALDEN, OREGON 

CHAIRMAN 

FRANK PALLONE, JR., NEW JERSEY 

RANKING MEMBER 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

(!Congress of tbr mtnfteb ~tates 

~ouse of ~epresentatil:lcs 

COMMITIEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

2125 RAYBURN HousE OFFICE BuiLDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6115 

The Honorable Scott Gottlieb, MD 

Commissioner 

U.S. Food and Drug Administration 

10903 New Hampshire Avenue 

Silver Spring, MD 20993 

Dear Dr. Gottlieb: 

Majority (202} 225-2927 

Minority (202) 225-3641 

March 28,2018 

Thank you for appearing before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on 

March 8, 2018, to testify at the hearing entitled "Examining U.S. Public Health Preparedness for 

and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." 

To facilitate the printing of the hearing record, please respond to these questions with a 

transmittal letter by the close of business on Wednesday, April!!, 20!8. Your responses should 

be mailed to Ali Fulling, Legislative Clerk, Committee on Energy and Commerce, 2125 Rayburn 

House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515 and e-mailed in Word format to 

Ali.Fulling@mail.house.gov. 

Thank you again for your time and effort preparing and delivering testimony before the 

Subcommittee. 

Sincerely, 

&.,_~ Gregg Harper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

cc: The Honorable Diana DeGette, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and 

Investigations 

Attachment 
113 


30456.075

U.S. FOOD & DRUG ADMINISTRATION 

TI1e Honorable Gregg Harper 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Harper: 

JUL 2 3 20!8 

Thank you for providing the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) with the 

opportunity to testify at the March 8, 2018, hearing before the Committee on Energy and 

Commerce, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, entitled "Examining U.S. Public 

Health Preparedness for and Response Efforts to Seasonal Influenza." This letter is a response 

for the record to questions posed by the committee. 

If you have further questions, please let us know. 

U.S. Food & Drug Admnistration 

10903 New Hampshire Avenue 

Silver Spring, MD 20993 

www.fda.gov 

Associate Commissioner 

for Legislative Affairs 
114 


30456.076

Page 2 - The Honorable Gregg Harper 

Your questions are restated below in bold, followed by FDA's response. 

The Honorable Gregg Harper 

1. During the March 8, 2018 hearing, FDA indicated that in some years we have 

observed better efficacy with the egg-based vaccine than the cell-based 

process. What years have we seen more efficacy with the egg-based vaccine 

and what was the basis for this finding? 

The cell-based influenza vaccine was first approved for use on November 20, 2012. Based 

on the best scientific infonnation available, it is believed that the efficacy of the egg-based 

and cell-based vaccines could vary in relationship to one another depending on the 

circulating influenza strains or other factors related to the production process. However, 

because the cell-based vaccine has been more widely administered over only the past few 

years, robust data regarding its efficacy versus the egg-based vaccine prior to the 2017-2018 

season are not available. 

2. While the flu vaccine helps prevent individuals from getting the flu and may 

even reduce the severity of the illness in those individuals that do get the flu, 

there is always room for improvement. This year the vaccine had a reduced 

level o'f effectiveness, especially in certain age groups and against the deadliest 

strain of the flu virus, H3N2. On February 15,2018, FDA issued a statement 

indicating that "a preliminary analysis of CMS data Indicates that this year, 

the cell-based influenza vaccine appears to have somewhat better effectiveness 

in preventing influenza than the egg-based vaccine" 1 and that "scientists at 

the FDA, CDC, and NIH are working diligently to fully understand the basis 

for this finding. " 2 

a. When did FDA have reason to believe that the cell-based manufacturing 

process for the flu vaccine might have better effectiveness than the eggbased manufacturing process? 

As you may know, no other routine vaccine is produced, FDA-approved, and distributed 

every year across the United States within an approximately six-month time frame. 

Vaccine manufacturers annually submit to FDA a supplement to their license to include 

the updated influenza virus antigens in their vaccine. FDA must review and approve a 

supplement before the updated version of the influenza vaccine containing new virus 

antigens can be distributed. Manufacturing of each antigen to be included in the vaccines 

occurs sequentially over several months, usually from December (produced at risk by 

manufacturers before the strain recommendations are made) until late May. In parallel 

with vaccine manufacturing, FDA develops and calibrates reagents that are provided to 

the vaccine manufacturers and our regulatory counterparts throughout the world. 

1 U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on the efficacy of the 20 17· 

2018 influenza vaccine (Feb. 15, 2018; updated Feb. 16, 2018), 

https:ll•ovwfda.gov!NewsEvents/Newsroom!PressAnnoltncements!ucm597077.htm. 

2 Jd. 
115 

Æ 


30456.077

Page 3-The Honorable Gregg Harper 

Typically, FDA approves the updated seasonal influenza vaccines with new labeling by 

the end of July. 

For the 2017-2018 influenza season, FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products 

Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) met on March 9, 2017, to provide recommendations on 

the composition of the influenza vaccine. During this meeting, VRBPAC reviewed and 

evaluated the surveillance data related to epidemiology and antigenic characteristics of 

recent influenza isolates, serological responses to 2016-2017 vaccines, and the 

availability of candidate strains and reagents. By January of2018, it was clear that the 

influenza season was severe, and that H3N2 was the predominant circulating strain. 

Based on preliminary reports from the Southern Hemisphere 2017 influenza season that 

indicated lower than desirable effectiveness of the influenza vaccine against H3N2, the 

FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) collaborated with the 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to examine relative vaccine 

effectiveness compared to egg based inactivated vaccines . This work was initiated in 

late January 2018, and by mid-February, preliminary results were available indicating 

that the cell-based vaccine was about 20 percent more effective relative to the egg-based 

standard-dose quadrivalent and trivalent influenza vaccines. 

b. How much more effective is the cell-based influenza vaccine than the eggbased vaccine according to the preliminary data? 

FDA and CMS used data on Medicare beneficiaries ages 2:65 years who received an eggbased or cell-cultured influenza vaccination from August 6, 2017 through January 4, 

2018 to estimate the relative effectiveness of the influenza vaccines as measured by 

hospitalization or emergency room visits for influenza. Among this group, the data 

available as of March 2018 suggested that the cell-based vaccine was about 20 percent 

more effective relative to the egg-based standard-dose quadrivalent and trivalent 

influenza vaccines in this population. 

c. Does FDA believe that egg-adaptation was a possible factor in the reduced 

effectiveness of the vaccine this year? 

Yes. The data presented by CDC at FDA's March I, 2018, VRBPAC meeting, and 

discussed in the June 8, 2018 MMWR, indicates that egg adaptation may have 

contributed to the reduced effectiveness of the 2017-2018 seasonal influenza egg-based 

vaccine. Egg adaptation is the process by which a candidate virus is passaged through 

eggs in order to optimize its production yield.