Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccine and other benefits

SIXTY-SIXTH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY A66/17
Provisional agenda item 15.2 11 March 2013
Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of
influenza viruses and access to vaccines
and other benefits
Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework 2013 biennial report
Report by the Director-General
1. The attached document EB132/16 was considered and noted by the Executive Board at its
132nd session.1
ACTION BY THE HEALTH ASSEMBLY
2. The Health Assembly is requested to note the report.
1
See the summary record of the ninth meeting of the Executive Board at its 132nd session, section 3.

A66/17
3
EXECUTIVE BOARD EB132/16
132nd session 16 November 2012
Provisional agenda item 8.2
Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of
influenza viruses and access to vaccines
and other benefits
Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework 2013 biennial report
Report by the Director-General
1. In resolution WHA64.5 the World Health Assembly adopted the Pandemic Influenza
Preparedness Framework (“PIP Framework”) on 24 May 2011.
2. Section 7.4.1 of the PIP Framework states that the Director-General shall on a biennial basis
inform the World Health Assembly, through the Executive Board, on the status of, and progress on:
(i) Laboratory and surveillance capacity (see Framework section 6.6);
(ii) Global influenza vaccine production capacity (see Framework sections 6.13.1 and
6.13.2);
(iii) Status of agreements entered into with industry, including information on access to
vaccines, antivirals and other pandemic material (see Framework sections 6.14.3 and 6.14.4);
(iv) Financial report on the use of the partnership contribution (see Framework section
6.14.5);
(v) The experience arising from the use of the definition of PIP biological materials
(see Framework section 4.1).
3. This report presents summary information on the status and progress of these topics. Annexes 1
and 2 to this report provide detail (respectively the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework
(“PIP Framework”) Advisory Group Annual Report to the Director-General Under PIP Framework
Section 7.2.5: 2012 Annual Report; and the Report of the Meeting of the Pandemic Influenza
Preparedness Framework Advisory Group 3–5 October 2012). The Director-General has accepted the
annexed reports and the findings contained therein.

A66/17
4
LABORATORY AND SURVEILLANCE CAPACITY
4. A comprehensive review of this topic can be found in Annex 1, Section 2.1, Section 2.2,
Section 2.3, and Section 2.4.
GLOBAL INFLUENZA VACCINE PRODUCTION CAPACITY
5. Advancing equitable and universal access to influenza vaccines is a crucial ethical element in
both seasonal and pandemic influenza preparedness and response efforts. Since its launch in 2006, the
WHO Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (GAP)
1
has proved to be an effective catalyst for a
significant expansion in influenza vaccine manufacturing. Seasonal vaccine production has increased
from 350 million doses in 2006 to around 900 million doses by 2009.
2
The estimated global annual
capacity for seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine production in 2011 was about 1400 million doses.
3
6. GAP also has facilitated a significant expansion in the manufacturing capacity of influenza
vaccines in both developing and developed countries. As at 1 October 2012, 14 developing-country
manufacturers had received WHO seed grants and technology-transfer support. These initial grants
were leveraged to secure significantly more national and private funding.
7. In July 2011 the Second WHO consultation on the global action plan for influenza vaccines
(GAP) was held at WHO headquarters, Geneva. The consultation brought together more than 100
representatives from national governments, donors, regulatory authorities, WHO technology-transfer
projects, vaccine manufacturers, nongovernmental organizations, and the research community.
Consultation participants reviewed the progress and lessons learnt during the first five years of GAP
and proposed a set of key actions to: (1) increase the use of seasonal influenza vaccine; (2) increase
influenza vaccine production capacity; and (3) promote influenza vaccine research and development.
4
Included among these priority activities were the need for disease-burden data for national authorities
to use in making evidence-based decisions on the introduction of seasonal influenza vaccines,
strengthening disease and virological surveillance and response activities, improving communications,
and support for regulatory research.
STATUS OF AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO WITH INDUSTRY, INCLUDING
INFORMATION ON ACCESS TO VACCINES, ANTIVIRAL MEDICINES AND
OTHER PANDEMIC MATERIAL
8. A comprehensive review of this topic can be found in Annex 1, Section 3; and Annex 2,
paragraphs 12 and 13.
1
See http://www.who.int/influenza_vaccines_pl/.an/en (accessed 15 October 2012).
2
Collin N, de Radiguès X. Vaccine production capacity for seasonal and pandemic (H1N1) 2009 influenza. Vaccine,
2009, 27:5184–5186.
3
WHO, unpublished data.
4
GAP meeting report available at: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2012/9789241564410_eng.pdf.

A66/17
5
FINANCIAL REPORT ON THE USE OF THE PARTNERSHIP CONTRIBUTION
9. A comprehensive review of this topic can be found in Annex 1, Section 3; and Annex 2,
paragraphs 16–21.
EXPERIENCE ARISING FROM THE USE OF THE DEFINITION OF PIP
BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS
10. A comprehensive review of this topic can be found in Annex 2, paragraphs 14 and 15.
ACTION BY THE EXECUTIVE BOARD
11. The Executive Board is invited to note this report.

A66/17
7
ANNEX 1
PANDEMIC INFLUENZA PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK (“PIP FRAMEWORK”)
ADVISORY GROUP ANNUAL REPORT TO THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL
UNDER PIP FRAMEWORK SECTION 7.2.5
2012 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS1
Page
Executive summary................................................................................................................................. 8
1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................10
2. Virus sharing................................................................................................................................11
2.1 Necessary technical capacities of GISRS..........................................................................11
2.2 Operational functioning of GISRS ....................................................................................12
2.3 WHO GISRS influenza pandemic preparedness priorities, guidelines
and best practices (e.g. vaccine stockpiles, capacity building)..........................................14
2.4 Increasing and enhancing surveillance for H5N1 and other influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential ............................................................................18
2.5 Sharing of influenza viruses with pandemic potential.......................................................19
2.6 Virus sharing: summary and recommendations.................................................................21
3. Benefit sharing.............................................................................................................................22
3.1 Access to vaccines and other benefits ...............................................................................22
3.2 Use of financial contributions: the Partnership Contribution ............................................22
3.3 Benefit sharing: summary and recommendations..............................................................23
4. Governance ..................................................................................................................................23
4.1 Appointment and composition of the first PIP Advisory Group .......................................23
4.2 Meetings and recommendations of the Advisory Group...................................................24
4.3 Governance: summary and recommendations...................................................................25
Appendix 1 Index of topics covered in the Annual Report...................................................................26
Appendix 2 Functions and technical capacities of GISRS laboratories ................................................27
Appendix 3 Synopsis of Recommendations from the Advisory Group to the Director-General
on Potential uses of PIP Partnership Contribution resources for pandemic
preparedness and response................................................................................................28
Appendix 4 Advisory Group members..................................................................................................30
1
Web-only supplementary annex. PIP Framework-related tasks/activities.

A66/17 Annex 1
8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This is the first Annual Report of the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework (“PIP
Framework”) Advisory Group since adoption of the Framework by the Sixty-fourth World Health
Assembly on 24 May 2011. The Report covers the 12 month period beginning in May 2011 up to May
2012. The Report is organized into three substantive sections: virus sharing, benefit sharing and
governance.
Virus sharing
This initial Report provides essential context about the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response
System (GISRS) and its key roles and responsibilities in surveillance, preparedness and response. The
Advisory Group noted multiple examples of the collaborative work of WHO and Member States to
strengthen laboratory and disease surveillance capacity for detection and risk assessment of influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential. The continued sharing of viruses enables the development of
candidate vaccine viruses with pandemic potential and reference reagents – critically important tools
when a pandemic virus emerges. The Influenza Virus Traceability Mechanism (IVTM) has increased
the transparency of GISRS activities and the sharing of viruses with human pandemic potential and
other PIP biological materials. The Advisory Group noted other areas of work that contribute to
pandemic preparedness, including efforts to strengthen regulatory capacity, vaccine deployment
capacity, an H5N1 vaccine stockpile, and laboratory and disease surveillance for influenza viruses
with human pandemic potential.
Gaps remain, however, as many countries still lack basic capacities for laboratory and disease
surveillance, shipping of influenza viruses, and the regulation and deployment of influenza vaccines
during a pandemic. Sharing of PIP biological materials is critical for health security and must
continue. As provided for in the PIP Framework, any non-GISRS recipient of PIP biological materials
must assess what benefits it can contribute based on its nature and capacity and enter into a binding
contract, or Standard Material Transfer Agreement 2 (SMTA 2), with WHO. However, work on the
SMTA 2s is at an early stage.
Benefit sharing
The PIP Framework aims to ensure that benefits arising from the sharing of PIP biological materials
are made more accessible and available to countries based on public health risk and need. In this
regard, WHO has initiated discussions with four large influenza vaccine manufacturers to commence
the process to sign the first SMTA 2s; the transition to sharing of PIP biological materials with
non-GISRS entities that have concluded a SMTA 2 needs to happen as quickly as possible.
The Framework provides for influenza vaccine, diagnostic and pharmaceutical manufacturers that use
the WHO GISRS to make an annual contribution to WHO. Pursuant to Section 6.14.3 of the
Framework, these payments, termed the “Partnership Contribution”, are to commence in 2012 in the
amount of approximately US$ 28 million. The Advisory Group recommended to the Director-General
that 70% be used for pandemic preparedness and 30% for pandemic response. Of the approximately
US$ 20 million per year for pandemic preparedness activities, the Advisory Group recommended that
70% be used to build and/or strengthen surveillance and laboratory capacity; 10% to conduct disease
burden studies; 10% to strengthen regulatory capacity and thereby improve access and effective
deployment of pandemic vaccines and antiviral medicines; and 10% to strengthen risk
communications. The Advisory Group proposed a general approach, including factors to consider, for
selecting countries to receive Partnership Contribution resources in each of these areas and requested
that the PIP Secretariat develop a method by which factors will be applied in the selection of countries.

Annex 1 A66/17
9
Governance
The Director-General appointed 18 members of the PIP Advisory Group in 2011 upon receipt of
nominations from Regional Directors. In accordance with the PIP Framework, there are three
members from each of WHO’s six regions, representing developed and developing countries, affected
countries, and a skill mix of policy-makers, public health experts and influenza experts. The Advisory
Group, over the course of its first three meetings, has made recommendations to the Director-General
on several key elements of the PIP Framework including: the Partnership Contribution, the urgency to
commence SMTA 2 negotiations, and an interim approach for the sharing of PIP biological materials
with entities outside GISRS pending the conclusion of SMTA 2s. The Advisory Group anticipates
that, as operationalization of the Framework advances, subsequent Annual Reports will focus more on
these key elements.

A66/17 Annex 1
10
1. INTRODUCTION
The PIP Framework became effective on 24 May 2011 when it was adopted by the Sixty-fourth World
Health Assembly. It provides a global framework for the sharing of influenza viruses with human
pandemic potential and the sharing of benefits arising from such sharing. Implementation of this
Framework is integral to increasing global pandemic influenza preparedness and improving response
measures for the next pandemic.
As one of the three components of the Framework’s oversight mechanism, the Advisory Group
monitors the implementation of the Framework and provides evidence-based reporting, assessment
and recommendations regarding its functioning.1
Section 7.2.5 of the PIP Framework requires the
Advisory Group to present an Annual Report to the Director-General on its evaluation of the
implementation of the Framework.
This is the first Annual Report of the Advisory Group since adoption of the PIP Framework. It covers
the 12 month period beginning in May 2011 up to May 2012. The 2013 Annual Report will cover the
period May 2012 to October 2013. Thereafter, Annual Reports will cover a 12-month period
commencing 1 October and ending 30 September of the following year. To ensure that the data are
up-to-date, there may be a need for an Addendum prior to the Director-General’s submittal of the
Report to the Executive Board in January.
In developing the Report, the Advisory Group was mindful that the Framework specifies the Annual
Report should cover 7 areas:2
(1) necessary technical capacities of the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response
System (GISRS);
(2) operational functioning of WHO GISRS;
(3) WHO GISRS influenza pandemic preparedness priorities, guidelines and best practices
(e.g. vaccine stockpiles, capacity building);
(4) increasing and enhancing surveillance for H5N1 and other influenza viruses with human
pandemic potential;
(5) the Influenza Virus Traceability Mechanism (IVTM);
(6) the sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccines and other benefits;
(7) use of financial and non-financial contributions.
Appendix 1 details where information about these areas can be found in the report.
It is important to note that certain key elements of the Framework, e.g. conclusion of Standard
Material Transfer Agreement 2s (SMTA 2s) and receipt and use of Partnership Contribution resources,
are at an early stage; therefore, few data for these areas are available at this time. The Advisory Group
anticipates that, as operationalization of the Framework advances, subsequent Annual Reports will
focus more on these key elements.
1
See PIP Framework Section 7.2 and Annex 3.
2
See PIP Framework Section 7.2.5 and Annex 3, Section 2.6.

Annex 1 A66/17
11
This initial Annual Report serves as a “baseline” as it provides essential context about GISRS and its
key roles and responsibilities. The Report highlights activities during the 12-month period that have
improved and strengthened GISRS in accordance with the Framework’s objective and scope. In this
regard, it must be remembered that the Framework applies to influenza A(H5N1) and other influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential. It does not apply to seasonal influenza viruses or other
non-influenza pathogens.1
Organization and method
The Report is organized into three substantive sections: virus sharing, benefit sharing and governance
with supporting appendices. A supplementary annex will be available on the WHO web site that
details PIP Framework-related tasks/activities.
The content of the Report is based on existing data in WHO reports or databases; specific data
collections or surveys were not undertaken. Country-specific data and analyses were aggregated for
inclusion in the Report.
Information and data for the Report were provided by several clusters at WHO headquarters, WHO
regional offices and WHO GISRS laboratories, notably Collaborating Centres. Some information was
self-reported by Member States.
2. VIRUS SHARING
2.1 Necessary technical capacities of GISRS
This section of the Annual Report focuses on the structure and function of GISRS and its necessary
technical capacities. This descriptive information provides essential context for the subsequent
assessment of the operational functioning of GISRS.
The core of WHO GISRS is an international network of influenza laboratories under the coordination
of WHO.2
The WHO GISRS laboratories work collectively to: (a) monitor the evolution of influenza
viruses and provide risk assessment and recommendations in areas including laboratory diagnostics,
vaccines and antivirals; and (b) serve as a global alert mechanism for the emergence of influenza
viruses with pandemic potential.3
GISRS is comprised of four complementary categories of laboratories as detailed below. The network
regularly expands to include new laboratories, or categories of laboratories, as needed.
• 138 National Influenza Centres (NICs) in 108 countries4
• 6 WHO Collaborating Centres (WHO CCs)
1
See PIP Framework Section 3.
2
The laboratory network was formerly known as the Global Influenza Surveillance Network (GISN). The new name
of the system came into effect following the adoption of the PIP Framework on 24 May 2011.
3
See http://www.who.int/influenza/gisrs_laboratory/en/.
4
The number of NICs up to 1 May 2012 was 138; from 1 May to 5 October 2012, two additional NICs were
recognized: one in Bahrain and one in Mauritius bringing the total to 140 NICs in 110 countries.

A66/17 Annex 1
12
• 4 WHO Essential Regulatory Laboratories (WHO ERLs)
• 12 WHO H5 Reference Laboratories (WHO H5 Ref Labs)
Appendix 2 describes the functions and technical capacities for each category of laboratory.
The GISRS is a voluntary network in which member laboratories agree to work under category-
specific Terms of Reference (TORs), for their work with influenza viruses with human pandemic
potential.1
The TORs specify that laboratories must comply with the standard conditions under which
PIP biological materials2
may be transferred both within and out of GISRS pursuant to SMTAs;3
the
use of the IVTM, i.e. an electronic, internet-based system to record the movements of PIP biological
materials; and other terms and conditions that address, inter alia, laboratory analyses, biosafety and
biosecurity, intellectual property rights, research and publications. The TORs for work with seasonal
influenza viruses are not a part of the PIP Framework.
2.2 Operational functioning of GISRS
This section of the Annual Report assesses how GISRS operates in practice to carry out some of its
key roles, responsibilities and functions as specified under the Framework’s TORs. Whenever
possible, findings are limited to influenza viruses with human pandemic potential. However, since the
majority of influenza viruses reported to GISRS are seasonal viruses, it is not possible in all instances
to report data restricted to influenza viruses with human pandemic potential.
Laboratory capacity
Under their PIP Framework’s TORs, NICs collect specimens from suspected cases of H5N1 or other
unusual influenza viral infections, perform laboratory diagnosis, and ship specimens or virus isolates
to a WHO CC or WHO H5 Ref lab for advanced virological analysis.
During May 2011–May 2012, WHO CCs performed detailed analyses to characterize a total of
205 isolates of influenza A(H5N1) from 7 different countries.
The Advisory Group notes that analysis of H5N1 or other influenza viruses with human pandemic
potential represents only a small portion of the more than 1.1 million total specimens that GISRS
laboratories processed during this period of time. Diagnosing influenza requires special reagents that
are updated regularly. During the report period, NICs and other influenza laboratories in 130 different
countries, areas or territories had access to, without charge, reagents developed by the Atlanta WHO
CC to test for seasonal and other influenza viruses, including those with human pandemic potential.
Efficient and timely transport of specimens or virus isolates may be hampered by logistical challenges
in some countries that can delay diagnosis, virus characterization and risk assessment. In addition,
countries do not always have financial resources necessary to ship virus samples from NICs or other
1
Annex 4 of the PIP Framework establishes Guiding Principles for the development of TORs for WHO GISRS
laboratories that are applicable to H5N1 and other human pandemic influenza viruses. Annex 5 details the TORS for each
category of laboratory in GISRS.
2
See PIP Framework Section 4.1 for a definition of PIP biological materials.
3
The PIP Framework contains two types of SMTAs which are binding contracts. SMTA 1 establishes the conditions
which apply to transfer of PIP biological materials among members of GISRS. SMTA 2 establishes the conditions which
apply to transfer of PIP biological materials from a GISRS laboratory to an entity outside GISRS.

Annex 1 A66/17
13
national laboratories to WHO CCs and other reference laboratories for advanced analysis and
characterization. During the reporting period, the WHO Shipping Fund Project was used to ship
viruses from 78 laboratories in 69 countries at a cost of US$ 210,605. Despite the Project’s
significance in facilitating virus sharing in a timely manner, due to reduced donor funding, the Project
can now support only half the number of shipments compared to prior years.
Transport of infectious substances requires qualified local staff that undergo formal training and
certification in the proper handling and packaging of infectious substances for international shipment;
WHO headquarters and regional offices work collaboratively to support such training. Training is
done on an ongoing basis as certificates are valid for only 24 months. From May 2011 to May 2012,
53 laboratory staff from 46 countries were trained and certified (14 from the Eastern Mediterranean
Region, 29 from the European Region and 10 from the South-East Asia Region).
Assessment of laboratory capacity
Few data were available to assess laboratory capacity specifically for H5N1 and other influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential. However, data were available to assess two aspects of overall
laboratory-related capacity:
• quality of laboratory testing performance
• good laboratory practice.
NICs use the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) as the principal method for diagnosis and surveillance
of seasonal influenza viruses and viruses with human pandemic potential. WHO, working with the H5
Reference Laboratory and NIC in China, Hong Kong Special Administration Region, initiated an
external quality assessment project (EQAP) in 2007 to monitor the quality and comparability of the
performance of PCR testing among participating laboratories. Participation in the project is voluntary.
Of 159 NICs and other laboratories that participated in the June–July 2011 EQAP, 124 (78%) returned
correct results for all 12 samples which included a mix of seasonal and A(H5N1) viruses. The majority
of laboratories correctly identified 9 or more of the 12 samples (Table 1);1
89% of laboratories
reported correct results for all samples containing influenza A(H5N1).
Table 1. Performance of participating laboratories in external quality assessment, June–July 2011
Number of correct results
(N=12 samples tested)
Number of laboratories
(N=159 participating laboratories)
12 (100%) samples correct 124 (78%)
<9 (<75%) samples correct 8 (5%)
1
Detection of influenza virus subtype A by polymerase chain reaction: WHO external quality assessment project
summary analysis, 2011. Weekly Epidemiological Record 2012;87:29–36. Available at:
http://www.who.int/wer/2012/wer8703/en/index.html.

A66/17 Annex 1
14
A good laboratory practice (GLP) survey was undertaken in 2012 among laboratories enrolled in the
WHO EQAP. The survey consisted of 38 questions that examined organization and personnel; facility
design, specimen handling, equipment and consumables; pre-examination procedures; examination
procedures; post-examination procedures and result reporting; quality assurance; and safety. When
compared to the GLP survey of 2010, improvements were seen in a number of areas (Table 2).
Table 2. Results of good laboratory practice surveys, 2010 and 2012
Survey item 2010 results
(% of 142laboratories)
2012 results
(% of 148 laboratories)
Training for new staff 92% 97%
On-job training 63% 70%
Validation of reagents for molecular diagnosis 67% 61%
Evaluation of test and primers/probes for
molecular diagnosis
59% 78%
Conduct internal audits 54% 62%
Unidirectional workflow for molecular
diagnosis
45% 86%
Regular equipment maintenance 87% 100%
Standard operating procedures (SOPs) for
molecular diagnosis
94% 97%
Staff safety guidelines 92% 97%
Staff health programme 78% 85%
2.3 WHO GISRS influenza pandemic preparedness priorities, guidelines and best
practices (e.g. vaccine stockpiles, capacity building)
This section of the Annual Report provides information about other pandemic preparedness activities
that GISRS conducted during the reporting period. Pandemic preparedness activities led by groups
other than GISRS are also described.
GISRS: laboratory pandemic preparedness
Influenza vaccines are the most effective measure to mitigate the potential impact of an influenza
pandemic as most people will be susceptible to infection with the newly emerged virus. The
development of candidate vaccine viruses and associated reference reagents is an important part of
pandemic preparedness. During May 2011–May 2012, GISRS developed and made available the
following candidate vaccine viruses and reference reagents for pandemic preparedness:1
• A(H5N1): 4 new candidate vaccine viruses and 3 new reference reagents
• A(H9N2): 1 new candidate vaccine virus
1
During May 2011–May 2012, there were 8 summaries published on the status of development and the availability of
candidate vaccine viruses and potency testing reagents for A(H5N1) (available at:
http://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/candidates_reagents/a_h5n1/en/index.html); 2 for A(H9N2) (available at:
http://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/candidates_reagents/a_h9n2/en/index.html); and 2 for A(H3N2)v (available at:
http://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/candidates_reagents/variant_a_h3n2/en/index.html).

Annex 1 A66/17
15
• A(H3N2)v: 3 new candidate vaccine viruses.
Summary reviews of the antigenic and genetic characteristics of A(H5N1) and A(H9N2) and the
current status of the development of new candidate vaccine viruses for potential use for human
vaccine development are available following the vaccine composition meetings for northern and
southern hemispheres in February and September of each year.1
GISRS regularly works to develop or update existing laboratory guidelines and best practices. These
activities are often applicable to both seasonal influenza viruses and viruses with human pandemic
potential. A brief synopsis of relevant activities during May 2011–May 2012 follows.
• Improving influenza vaccine virus selection: To explore ways to improve the influenza
vaccine virus selection process for both seasonal influenza viruses and viruses with human
pandemic potential, WHO held an informal consultation in December 2011. Participants
included WHO CCs and ERLs, NICs, national regulatory authorities, research, academic and
veterinary laboratories, institutions and organizations, and human influenza vaccine
manufacturers. The major areas of focus were the extent, timeliness and quality of virological
and epidemiological surveillance data; the development and application of new assays and
new modeling approaches; the relationship between virus characteristics and vaccine efficacy;
and regulatory considerations.
• Standardization of terminology for the variant A(H3N2) virus recently infecting
humans: Since July 2011, increasing numbers of human cases of infection with a variant
influenza A(H3N2) virus have been detected in the United States of America (USA). No
reports have been received from other Member States. This virus has different virological
characteristics from current circulating seasonal influenza viruses in humans. In order to
improve communications and avoid confusion, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (FAO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and WHO
established a working group of experts to standardize the terminology for variant influenza
viruses. The joint recommendation was A(H3N2)v, where “v” stands for “variant”.
• Updated unified nomenclature system for the highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza
viruses: In October 2011 the WHO⁄OIE ⁄FAO H5N1 Evolution Working Group published an
updated unified nomenclature system for highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H5N1) viruses.
A unified system facilitates the interpretation of sequence/surveillance data from different
laboratories. Since the previous update in 2009, H5N1 viruses have continued to evolve and
diversify as they spread and infect animals and humans. The 2011 recommendations were
based on detailed analyses and comparisons for nearly 3000 H5N1 virus gene sequences.2
• Recommendations on laboratory methods for antiviral susceptibility surveillance: Over
the last ten years antiviral drugs have become an important intervention for the treatment and
prophylaxis of influenza virus infection. In countries where antiviral drugs are licensed,
national guidance on their use in clinical management is developed and updated. Use and
stockpiling of antiviral drugs is a key component of the pandemic preparedness plans of many
countries. For these reasons, monitoring of antiviral susceptibility of influenza viruses
through laboratory surveillance is an increasingly important need. An Expert Working Group
1
See http://www.who.int/influenza/vaccines/virus/characteristics_virus_vaccines/en/index.html.
2
See http://www.who.int/influenza/gisrs_laboratory/h5n1_nomenclature/en/index.html.

A66/17 Annex 1
16
on Antiviral Susceptibility for WHO GISRS, therefore, was established to develop practical
guidance for NICs setting up surveillance of antiviral susceptibility; to provide
recommendations on the appropriate antiviral surveillance strategy; and to develop guidance
on interpretation of laboratory antiviral susceptibility surveillance data. At their first meeting
in November 2011, the expert Working Group reviewed and developed practical guidance for
NICs on current laboratory methodologies for testing the antiviral susceptibility of influenza
viruses to current antivirals.
• Protocols for A(H5N1) testing: The continuous evolution of A(H5N1) genetic clades makes
it critical to regularly review, update and validate H5 primers and protocols. The WHO PCR
working group meets annually to make recommendations for the GISRS network on the use
of PCR in the surveillance and diagnosis of influenza.1
Currently, the most commonly used
protocol in the network is the H5 assays provided by the WHO CC in Atlanta, USA;
18 countries use protocols provided by other WHO CCs and reference laboratories.
• Updated seasonal influenza TORs for NICs: The NIC TORs are in the process of being
updated for seasonal influenza viruses.
Regulatory capacity
During the reporting period WHO organized 20 country-level training programmes and workshops for
national regulatory authorities and held a global training on lot release procedures for national control
laboratory staff new to influenza vaccine manufacturing.
Representatives from 34 countries attended the WHO cosponsored Workshop on International
Regulatory Capacity Enhancement for Influenza Vaccines, 8–10 June 2011, São Paulo, Brazil and
proposed a number of priorities and next steps for enhancing regulatory capacity for influenza
vaccines including support to:2
• designate a percentage of grants provided to countries for developing vaccine manufacturing
capacity be set aside for national regulatory authority (NRA) capacity building;
• strengthen regional regulatory partnerships, approaches and networks, particularly models
that address the regulatory needs of developing countries;
• enhance post-marketing surveillance and monitoring of adverse events following
immunization in countries with and without influenza vaccine manufacturing capacity;
• strengthen the evaluation of clinical trial data for regulatory registration;
• support WHO regulatory capacity building initiatives and recommendations including the
NRA Strengthening Programme, the Vaccine Prequalification Programme, the NRA Strategic
Forum of Regulatory Agencies for Vaccines, the Global Learning Opportunities for Vaccine
Quality, and the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines.
1
The report of the 4th meeting of the WHO working group on polymerase chain reaction protocols for detecting
subtype influenza A viruses is available at:
http://www.who.int/influenza/gisrs_laboratory/pcr_4thworking_group_meeting_report/en/index.html.
2
Workshop report available at: http://www.who.int/immunization_standards/national_regulatory_authorities
/wirceiv_report_18jan2012.pdf.

Annex 1 A66/17
17
These and other proposals from the Workshop helped to inform the Second WHO Consultation on the
Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (GAP), 12–14 July 2011 Geneva. The consultation report
noted that “strengthening of national and other regulatory agencies to promote the timely and efficient
assessment and approval of locally manufactured or imported influenza vaccines will require a long-
term strategy and strong political commitment”.1
Vaccine deployment capacity
WHO finalized in 2012 its Guidance on Development and Implementation of a National Deployment
and Vaccination Plan for Pandemic Influenza Vaccines.2
It is designed for public and private sector
officials at all levels with responsibility for planning and managing deployment and vaccination
operations. The initial draft was completed and field-tested shortly before the start of the 2009 (H1N1)
pandemic. Countries used the Guidance to develop their pandemic national deployment and
vaccination plans (NDVPs). It was revised in 2010–2011, incorporating experience and lessons
learned from the pandemic at global, regional and country levels, as well as key recommendations
from global and regional workshops on NDVP implementation.
The guidance and accompanying planning tools can assist countries to develop, assess and update their
NDVPs. The guidance covers all the processes and structures that need to be functional for vaccine
deployment, and operations before and during a pandemic. A sample template for drafting an NDVP is
included. In addition, a checklist to assist in the assessment of NDVPs has been developed and
included in a supplementary document.
H5N1 vaccine stockpile
An international stockpile of 150 million doses of H5N1 vaccine was established in 2008 through
pledges from two manufacturers. In response to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, these two manufacturers
agreed to convert their H5N1 pledges into H1N1 pandemic vaccine. They also increased their pledges
to a total of 160 million doses. Of the 78 million doses of pandemic H1N1 vaccine that WHO
deployed to low- and middle-income countries, 40 million doses came from the H5N1 vaccine
stockpile. This reduced the remaining number of pledged pandemic vaccine doses to 120 million.
Manufacturers subsequently agreed to reconvert the 120 million doses of pledged pandemic vaccine
back to H5N1 vaccine, or other pandemic influenza vaccine, if needed.
The Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) Working Group on Influenza Vaccines and
Immunizations was tasked in February 2011 to reconsider options for the nature, deployment and
storage of the 120 million doses of pledged pandemic H5N1 vaccine. The Working Group proposed
three options and considered that a virtual stockpile with a small physical stockpile of filled doses of
H5N1 vaccine for outbreak control may provide flexibility, minimum costs and simplify the logistics
of storage. Discussions are ongoing to explore other options and technical aspects of implementing the
various options for the final recommendations to SAGE.
1
GAP consultation report available at: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2012/9789241564410_eng.pdf.
2
Guidance available at: http://www.who.int/influenza_vaccines_plan/resources/deployment/en/.

A66/17 Annex 1
18
Revision of pandemic preparedness guidelines
The revision of the pandemic preparedness and response guidance has commenced, with various
background documents being produced. WHO is developing a multisectoral, all-hazards, generic
approach to preparedness, which is expected to form the basis for the influenza guidance document. A
discussion paper on revision of the pandemic phases has been circulated for engagement with internal
and external stakeholders.
In addition, the WHO European Regional Office (EURO) has gathered experiences of the pandemic to
contribute to the drafting of a EURO-ECDC (European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention)
planning guide. These and lessons from other WHO regions and Member States worldwide will be
incorporated into the revised global guidance. It is intended that the new guidance will be largely
completed over a one-year period.
2.4 Increasing and enhancing surveillance for H5N1 and other influenza viruses with
human pandemic potential
Maintaining and improving the GISRS network for surveillance of seasonal influenza is critical for
response capacity during a pandemic. This section of the Annual Report provides information about
activities undertaken during May 2011–May 2012 to enhance both laboratory and disease surveillance
for H5N1 and other influenza viruses with human pandemic potential.
Laboratory surveillance
Strengthening GISRS, through efforts to build capacity at country level, is integral to robust pandemic
preparedness and response. Efforts are ongoing to increase the number of NICs. During
May 2011–May 2012, 2 new NICs were recognized: one in Doha, Qatar in March 2012 and one in
Amman, Jordan in April 2012. However, gaps in the network remain as many countries, particularly in
the African Region, do not have a NIC. Oftentimes, lack of a NIC correlates with lack of overall
capacity for surveillance and response to influenza. The network regularly expands to include new
laboratories or categories of laboratories, as needed. For instance, a new category of Collaborating
Centres working at the human-animal interface is under development.
The Guiding Principles that underpin the TORs for GISRS laboratories call for sharing of experience
and provision of capacity strengthening to Member States; WHO CCs in particular provide training
and laboratory support to NICs, especially in developing countries, on laboratory techniques and
skills. During May 2011–May 2012, more than 50 training courses and onsite capacity building
activities were organized and/or supported by WHO regions, WHO CCs and ERLs for countries in all
six WHO regions. Training included laboratory management; strengthening capacity for detection,
diagnosis, and monitoring; serology; data management and basic epidemiological analysis;
bioinformatics on molecular evolution; sequencing; antiviral susceptibility testing; and licensing for
transport of infectious substances.
Disease surveillance
During the reporting period a total of 51 confirmed human cases of H5N1 were reported to WHO from
six countries.1
1
See http://www.who.int/influenza/human_animal_interface/H5N1_cumulative_table_archives/en/ for the number of
confirmed human cases for avian influenza A(H5N1) reported to WHO.

Annex 1 A66/17
19
Surveillance for human infections with influenza A(H5N1) and emerging viruses with human
pandemic potential requires systematic, good quality routine surveillance for influenza-related disease.
The 2009 pandemic revealed multiple gaps in global influenza surveillance capacity. To address these
gaps, WHO embarked on a multistep process to revise global influenza surveillance guidelines; this
process formally commenced with the Global Consultation on Influenza Surveillance Standards held
in Geneva in March 2011. An interim document, WHO Interim Global Epidemiological Surveillance
Standards for Influenza (July 2012), has been posted for review.1
2.5 Sharing of influenza viruses with pandemic potential
Influenza Virus Traceability Mechanism (IVTM)
In November 2007, the Intergovernmental Meeting on Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Sharing of
influenza viruses and access to vaccines and other benefits requested that WHO develop a system to
track all influenza viruses with human pandemic potential contributed by Member States to the WHO
GISRS. In response to this request, an Interim Virus Tracking System (IVTS) was implemented in
January 2008. The IVTS was replaced by the IVTM which was initially launched in December 2010;
its use became obligatory upon adoption of the PIP Framework on 24 May 2011.2
The IVTM is an electronic, internet-based system for tracking the transfer and movement of PIP
biological materials into, within and out of the WHO GISRS. It documents the sharing of influenza
viruses with pandemic potential in a transparent manner; users can trace the geographic transfer of
such influenza viruses and view the Derivation Tree for the same.
Review of IVTM records indicates that during May 2011 to May 2012 a total of 120 shipments of PIP
biological materials were sent and recorded in the IVTM; 72 (60%) of these 120 shipments were sent
to 38 non-GISRS laboratories.3
During this same period, a total of 82 human or animal viruses with
pandemic potential (i.e. A(H5N1), A(H3N2)v, and A(H9N2) viruses) were recorded in the IVTM by
eight different countries.
The IVTM, while an important tool for recording virus sharing, is a relatively new tool for both
GISRS users and public users, alike. WHO has developed and pilot-tested training modules to
familiarize users with the IVTM: one is for public users to assist them in “how to” search the IVTM
database; a second training module assists registered GISRS laboratory users in “how to” use the
IVTM system to record receipt and transfers of PIP biological materials. Future plans include
increasing awareness among registered users and WHO Regional and IHR National Focal Points about
reporting to IVTM; and providing hands-on support to complement the “how to” tutorial series to
enhance the timely sharing of PIP biological materials via the IVTM. Improvements in the information
technology (IT) platform are also planned; they will take into account feedback and lessons learned
from registered and public users.
1
WHO Interim Global Epidemiological Surveillance Standards for Influenza (July 2012) is available at:
http://www.who.int/influenza/resources/documents/INFSURVMANUAL.pdf.
2
Information in the IVTM is available at: http://www.who.int/influenza/pip/ivtm/en/.
3
Some shipments included more than one PIP biological material.

A66/17 Annex 1
20
Public-access databases
During the reporting period, genetic sequence data for 46 influenza A(H5N1) isolates from five
different countries and five A(H3N2)v isolates from a single country were shared through
public-access databases. No genetic sequence data for H7 or H9 influenza viruses were deposited in a
public-access database during this period.
Interim process for sharing PIP biological materials
Since adoption of the PIP Framework in May 2011, GISRS laboratories have received requests for PIP
biological materials from entities outside GISRS. Direct application of Article 4.3 of SMTA 1 would
have resulted in complete cessation of sharing PIP biological materials until WHO and recipients
concluded SMTA 2 agreements. In view of this, WHO shared with the Advisory Group during its
February 2012 meeting an interim approach for transferring PIP biological materials that had been
developed and implemented. The Advisory Group, noted that sharing of PIP biological materials is
critical for health security and must continue. However, for the sake of benefit sharing, the incentive to
conclude SMTA 2s cannot be lost. The Advisory Group recommended:
• the Secretariat should elaborate a practical, balanced and uniform approach for the transitional
period to obtain recognition from recipients of PIP biological materials outside GISRS that
they will enter into discussions with WHO on a SMTA 2;
• if a SMTA 2 is not concluded with the recipient within six months after the beginning of
negotiations, no further PIP biological materials will be transferred to that recipient.1
The Director-General acknowledged the advice provided by the Advisory Group in the matter of the
“Interim Approach” and communicated to the Advisory Group in May 2012 her proposed way
forward to address their concerns as follows:
• The Director-General recognizes the urgency to efficiently conclude SMTA 2s with
non-GISRS recipients of PIP biological materials (PIPBM).
• As such, the recommendation to define a time limit to complete individual negotiations on
SMTA 2s is reasonable.
• The Interim Approach, however, needs to take into consideration the reality that there are still
significantly different levels of understanding of the PIP Framework among recipients of
PIPBM that are outside GISRS.
• The Director-General therefore believes that an interim, stepwise approach, consistent with
the Advisory Group’s advice, will best enable WHO to conclude SMTA 2s and thereby
achieve the public health objectives of the PIP Framework.
• To this end, the Director-General proposes the following Interim Approach:
– Step 1 – Discussions: An informal period of time to allow WHO and individual
non-GISRS recipients of PIPBM to exchange information with each other and gain
knowledge about the PIP Framework, as appropriate;
1
See: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA65/A65_19-en.pdf.

Annex 1 A66/17
21
– Step 2 – Negotiations: The formal period of negotiations that will start with the exchange
of negotiating documents. The Secretariat will send the party a “Notice of Commencement
of SMTA 2 Negotiations” to record the date of commencement and the anticipated date of
conclusion which should be no longer than 6 months. The Secretariat will regularly update
the Advisory Group on the progress in negotiations.
– If an SMTA 2 is not concluded within six months after the beginning of negotiations the
recipient should expect no further transfers of PIPBM. The Director-General will bring the
matter to the attention of the PIP Advisory Group and request advice on when and under
what conditions transfers of PIPBM might resume for that recipient.
• This Interim Approach may be reviewed as necessary to take into account the experience
arising from its application, notably the need for time-bound discussions under Step 1.
An Information Note with this Interim Approach was dispatched to all GISRS laboratories for their
information and action on 23 May 2012.
2.6 Virus sharing: summary and recommendations
The work of WHO GISRS laboratories underpins global influenza surveillance, prevention,
preparedness and response. The Advisory Group has noted multiple examples of the collaborative
work of WHO and Member States to strengthen laboratory and disease surveillance capacity for
detection and risk assessment of influenza viruses with human pandemic potential. The continued
sharing of viruses enables the development of candidate vaccine viruses with pandemic potential and
reference reagents – critically important tools when a pandemic virus emerges. The IVTM has
increased the transparency of GISRS activities and increased the transparency of the sharing of viruses
with human pandemic potential. The Advisory Group has additionally noted other areas of work that
contribute to pandemic preparedness, including efforts to strengthen regulatory capacity, vaccine
deployment capacity, an H5N1 vaccine stockpile, and laboratory and disease surveillance for influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential.
Many gaps remain, however. The Advisory Group is aware that many countries still lack basic
capacities for laboratory and disease surveillance, shipping of influenza viruses, and the regulation and
deployment of influenza vaccines during a pandemic. Sharing of PIP biological materials is critical for
health security and must continue. However, the transition to sharing these materials with outside
entities that have concluded a SMTA 2 needs to happen as quickly as possible.
Recommendations
(1) Information supplied for this Report continues to support the Advisory Group’s prior
recommendation that Partnership Contribution resources focus initially on pandemic
preparedness.1
1
See Annex 3 of this report for a synopsis of recommendations from the Advisory Group to the Director-General on
potential uses of PIP Partnership Contribution resources for pandemic preparedness and response.

A66/17 Annex 1
22
(2) The Advisory Group has recommended previously that a self-assessment of GISRS with
respect to its role, function and capacities in connection with the Framework be undertaken. The
Advisory Group notes that this will be undertaken in 2013 subject to the availability of funds.1
(3) The Advisory Group recommends that WHO seek support from Member States and other
stakeholders to supplement resources for the WHO Shipping Fund Project and the conduct of
training programmes to certify staff in the shipping of infectious substances. The 2009 pandemic
demonstrated the key role that shipping of virus samples played in the global response.
3. BENEFIT SHARING
The PIP Framework aims to ensure that benefits arising from the sharing of PIP biological materials
are made more accessible and available to countries based on public health risk and need. Benefits
include vaccines and other pandemic supplies, as well as technical assistance, and transfer of
technology, skills and knowledge needed by developing countries to build pandemic influenza
preparedness and response capacity.2
The Framework further provides for influenza vaccine,
diagnostic and pharmaceutical manufacturers who use the WHO GISRS to make an annual
contribution to WHO. This annual payment, termed the Partnership Contribution, was created to help
safeguard the financial sustainability of the PIP benefit sharing system.
This section of the Annual Report reviews how sharing of various benefits has progressed in the first
12 months of the Framework’s implementation.
3.1 Access to vaccines and other benefits
As provided for in Annex 2 of the PIP Framework, any non-GISRS recipient of PIP biological
materials must assess what benefits it can contribute based on its nature and capacity and enter into a
binding contract, or SMTA 2, with WHO. During May 2011–May 2012, the Director-General initiated
discussions with four large influenza vaccine manufacturers to commence the process to sign SMTA 2s.
The PIP Secretariat has also provided information on the SMTA 2 and the process to conclude it to
over 30 prospective recipients of PIP biological materials.
3.2 Use of financial contributions: the Partnership Contribution
Pursuant to Section 6.14.3 of the Framework, Partnership Contribution payments to WHO are to
commence in 2012 in the amount of approximately US$ 28 million.3
In anticipation of this, and as
provided by the Framework,4
the Advisory Group first presented a series of recommendations to the
Director-General on how the Partnership Contribution should be allocated between pandemic
preparedness and pandemic response. In developing these recommendations, the Advisory Group, in
accordance with Framework Section 6.14.6, interacted with industry and other stakeholders on
23 February 2012 at which time important information and considerations were provided to the
Advisory Group and the Director-General relevant to the Partnership Contribution.
1
See: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA65/A65_19-en.pdf.
2
See PIP Framework Section 6 for more information about benefit sharing.
3
The annual amount of the Partnership Contribution was established by the Member States at 50% of the annual cost
to run GISRS. For more information see Framework Section 6.14.3, footnote 1.
4
See Framework Sections 6.14.5 and 6.14.6.and Section 2.4 of the Advisory Group’s Terms of Reference in Annex 3.

Annex 1 A66/17
23
These initial recommendations were contained in the Advisory Group’s February 2012 meeting report
which the Director-General subsequently transmitted to the Sixty-fifth World Health Assembly for its
consideration.1
In May 2012 the Advisory Group transmitted to the Director-General its
fully developed recommendations on the potential uses of the Partnership Contribution.2
3.3 Benefit sharing: summary and recommendations
The Framework places virus sharing on an equal footing with benefit sharing; sharing of viruses and
benefits is to be is fair, transparent, equitable and efficient. In the year since the PIP Framework was
adopted, essential groundwork has been laid to facilitate benefit sharing as envisioned in the
Framework. WHO has initiated discussions with influenza vaccine manufacturers to commence the
process to sign the first SMTA 2s. The Executive Board at its 131st session on 28–29 May 2012
considered and accepted the Director-General’s proposals, based on the Advisory Group’s
recommendations, on the proportional distribution of the Partnership Contribution between
pandemic preparedness and response.3
The Advisory Group also provided the Director-General with
recommendations about potential uses of the Partnership Contribution.
Substantial work remains, nonetheless, to advance this initial work into concrete benefits.
Recommendations
(1) WHO should conclude one or more SMTA 2s as soon as possible.
(2) With respect to the Partnership Contribution, the Director-General and the Advisory
Group should continue to collaborate with industry in further defining the specific amounts to
be contributed by each company as well as the mechanism for implementation4
and interact with
industry and other stakeholders on the use of the resources.5
(3) WHO should develop and share with the Advisory Group a method by which factors will
be applied in the selection of countries to receive Partnership Contribution funds.
4. GOVERNANCE
4.1 Appointment and composition of the first PIP Advisory Group
The Director-General appointed 18 members of the PIP Advisory Group in 2011 upon receipt of
nominations from Regional Directors. In accordance with Sections 7.2.2 and 7.2.3 and Annex 4 of the
PIP Framework, there are three members from each of WHO’s six regions, representing developed
and developing countries, affected countries, and a skill mix of policy-makers, public health experts
and influenza experts. A list of members may be found in Appendix 4 of this Report. At its first
meeting, the Advisory Group elected Professor Didier Houssin (France) as Chair and Professor Tjandra Y.
Aditama (Indonesia) as Vice-Chair.
1
Meeting report available at: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA65/A65_19-en.pdf.
2
See Appendix 3 of this Report for a synopsis of these recommendations.
3
See Document EB131/DIV/2 available at: http://apps.who.int/gb/e/e_eb131.html.
4
See PIP Framework Section 6.14.3.
5
See PIP Framework Section 6.14.6.

A66/17 Annex 1
24
In accordance with the provisions of the PIP Framework, all members will serve for three years. A
three-year appointment period was deemed particularly important for the Advisory Group in the early
stages of its work as this would allow for continuity of discussions and facilitate implementation of
critical and time-sensitive tasks under the PIP Framework.1
Subsequently, renewal of one third of the
members will be initiated every year per the PIP Framework.2
The Director-General will regularly
accept nominations of representatives for the Advisory Group.3
4.2 Meetings and recommendations of the Advisory Group
The Advisory Group held two meetings in Geneva (21–22 November 20114
and 22–24 February
20125
) and one meeting by teleconference (3–4 May 2012). Special attention was paid at the
beginning of each meeting to update the declaration of interests of each member of the Advisory
Group; all declarations of interest were detailed in the report of each meeting. Following its first two
meetings, the Chair of the Advisory Group led Information Sessions in Geneva for the Permanent
Missions on 1 December 2011 and 5 March 2012.
The Advisory Group has made recommendations to the Director-General in several key areas as
follows.
The Partnership Contribution
The Advisory Group had extensive discussions during its February and May 2012 meetings on the
Partnership Contribution. The Advisory Group presented recommendations with supporting
documentation to the Director-General on the proportional distribution of the Partnership Contribution
between pandemic preparedness and pandemic response and actual uses of the Partnership
Contribution. A synopsis of these recommendations can be found in Appendix 3 of this Report.
Urgency to commence SMTA 2 negotiations
The Advisory Group advised that discussions on the SMTA 2 commence no later than the Sixty-fifth
World Health Assembly. To aid in the process, they agreed that the Director-General should
encourage Member States to provide legal support.
Interim approach for the sharing of PIP biological materials with entities outside GISRS
pending the conclusion of SMTA 2s
While understanding the reasons for an interim approach, the Group recommended that if an SMTA 2
is not concluded with the recipient within six months after the beginning of negotiations, no further
PIP biological materials will be transferred to the recipient. The Director-General acknowledged the
advice provided by the Advisory Group in the matter of the “Interim Approach” and communicated to
them in May 2012 her proposed way forward to address this. This Interim Approach is detailed in
Section 2.5 of this Report.
1
See http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB130/B130_18-en.pdf.
2
PIP Framework Annex 3, section 3.2.
3
PIP Framework, Annex 3, Section 3.3.
4
Meeting report available at: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB130/B130_18-en.pdf.
5
Meeting report available at: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA65/A65_19-en.pdf.

Annex 1 A66/17
25
4.3 Governance: summary and recommendations
The Advisory Group has a broad range of expertise and experience which has been an asset in
addressing its TORs under the PIP Framework. The Advisory Group is aware of the keen interest in
the Framework and its operationalization. The Advisory Group has endeavored to keep Member States
updated through Information Sessions and reports to the World Health Assembly and Executive Board
and to interact with industry and other stakeholders.
Recommendations
(1) The Advisory Group expressed a view that any decision on the future mandate of the
Advisory Group (per PIP Framework Section 7.2.6) should be deferred until the Group had
completed a reasonable amount of work.1
(2) The Advisory Group recommends maintaining the Information Sessions, led by the Chair,
for Permanent Missions that follow Advisory Group meetings.
1
Meeting report available at: http://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB130/B130_18-en.pdf.

A66/17 Annex 1
26
APPENDIX 1
INDEX OF TOPICS COVERED IN THE ANNUAL REPORT
Topic area (PIP Framework Section 7.2.5) Location in the Annual Report
1. Necessary technical capacities of the WHO
Global Influenza Surveillance and Response
System (GISRS)
Section 2.1
Appendix 2
2. Operational functioning of WHO GISRS Section 2.2
3. WHO GISRS influenza pandemic preparedness
priorities, guidelines and best practices (e.g.
vaccine stockpiles, capacity building)
Section 2.3
4. Increasing and enhancing surveillance for H5N1
and other influenza viruses with human
pandemic potential
Section 2.4
5. Influenza Virus Traceability Mechanism
(IVTM)
Section 2.5
6. Sharing of influenza viruses and access to
vaccines and other benefits
Section 2.3 (H5N1 vaccine stockpile
Section 2.5
Section 3.1
7. Use of financial and non-financial contributions Section 3.2

Annex 1 A66/17
27
APPENDIX 2
FUNCTIONS AND TECHNICAL CAPACITIES OF GISRS LABORATORIES
National Influenza Centres
National Influenza Centres (NICs) typically are the principal resource for influenza-related virological
and epidemiological expertise in their country. They serve as the key point of contact between WHO
and their country for influenza-related technical issues. NICs analyze specimens obtained from
patients and make an initial identification of the influenza virus type and subtype, principally using the
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Representative viruses, as well as influenza viruses with
potential public health significance, and any available clinical and epidemiological information, are
sent to a WHO Collaborating Centre for further virus characterization.
WHO Collaborating Centres
WHO Collaborating Centres for Influenza (WHO CCs) are internationally-recognized centres of
excellence for influenza that perform critical and highly technical services. WHO CCs employ
sophisticated testing methods such as haemagglutination inhibition, microneutralization and also
perform viral gene sequencing. These analyses form the basis for WHO recommendations on
influenza vaccines (both seasonal vaccines and vaccines for influenza viruses with pandemic potential)
and the development and characterization of candidate vaccine viruses. In collaboration with scientists
from Cambridge University, antigenic cartography has been used in recent years as an adjunct to
standard methods to improve influenza vaccine virus selection.1
WHO CCs also monitor antiviral
susceptibility using genotypic and phenotypic methods; update and produce the standardized reagents
which are distributed to NICs and used to identify circulating influenza viruses; provide advice and
training on the most up-to-date laboratory methods; and assess the risk of, and respond to, outbreaks of
influenza, especially if there is concern about a new virus with pandemic potential.
WHO Essential Regulatory Laboratories
WHO Essential Regulatory Laboratories (WHO ERLs) are formally associated with national regulatory
agencies. The WHO ERLs, together with WHO CCs, conduct human serology studies to assess if the
previous season’s vaccine will offer suitable protection against more recent circulating influenza viruses.
The WHO ERLs and CCs, in collaboration with vaccine manufacturers, evaluate the growth of candidate
vaccine viruses to help manufacturers select the optimal virus for vaccine development and production.
The WHO ERLs, with support from vaccine manufacturers, develop, update and calibrate reference
agents that are used to test the “potency” of influenza vaccines, including seasonal vaccines and those for
pandemic preparedness, before vaccines can be released for marketing or clinical trials.
WHO H5 Reference Laboratories
The WHO H5 Reference Laboratory group (WHO H5 Ref Labs) perform diagnostic testing and
analyses of A(H5N1) and novel influenza subtypes from humans and animals worldwide. The WHO
H5 Ref Labs also contribute to the updating of the candidate vaccine viruses for H5 and H9 influenza
viruses and assess the pandemic potential of new influenza viruses, i.e. virological risk assessment.
1
Antigenic cartography is a novel computational methodology that is used to analyze and visualize large volumes of
laboratory data generated by GISRS laboratories. See http://www.antigenic-cartography.org/cam/ac.html for more
information.

A66/17 Annex 1
28
APPENDIX 3
SYNOPSIS OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ADVISORY GROUP TO THE
DIRECTOR-GENERAL ON POTENTIAL USES OF PIP PARTNERSHIP
CONTRIBUTION RESOURCES FOR PANDEMIC PREPAREDNESS
AND RESPONSE
Guiding principles
• The Advisory Group recommends that the allocations should:
– take into account Framework principles including fairness, equity, public health risk and
need of all Member States, and the particular vulnerability of countries affected by
influenza viruses with pandemic potential, especially H5N1;
– be evidence-based and consider indicators adapted to the Framework such as the
International Health Regulations’ (IHR) core capacities, income, health and epidemiology;
– consider the critical foundation of epidemiological and laboratory surveillance;
– take into account the modest amount of Partnership Contribution resources.
Proportional distribution of the Partnership Contribution (see Box)
• The Advisory Group recommends, in a first phase, to direct a greater proportion of the
Partnership Contribution resources to pandemic preparedness activities and a lesser
proportion to the reserve for pandemic response.
• The Advisory Group recommends that 70% (or approximately US$ 20 million per year) of
the Partnership Contribution be directed toward pandemic preparedness activities and 30% (or
approximately US$ 8 million per year) be directed toward pandemic response activities. For
reasons of flexibility and practicality, 70% and 30% should be considered as approximate
targets, e.g. in the range of 65% to 75% and 25% to 35%, respectively. The Director-General
should be able to temporarily modify the allocation of Partnership Contribution resources as
required to respond to pandemic influenza emergencies. The Director-General would report
on any such modification to Member States.
• The Advisory Group recommends that this proportional split be fixed for an initial period of
5 years, i.e. from 2012 through 2016.
Use of the Partnership Contribution: pandemic preparedness activities (see Box)
• The Advisory Group recommends starting with activities in support of the three technical
areas identified in Section 6.14.4 of the Framework, i.e. strengthening laboratory and
surveillance capacity, conducting disease burden studies, and improving access and effective
deployment of pandemic vaccines and antiviral medicines, as well as in one additional area
that will strengthen effective pandemic response: risk communications.

Annex 1 A66/17
29
• The Advisory Group recommends that of the approximately US$ 20 million per year for
pandemic preparedness activities, (1) 70% be used to build and/or strengthen surveillance and
laboratory capacity; (2) 10% to conduct disease burden studies; (3) 10% to strengthen
regulatory capacity and thereby improve access and effective deployment of pandemic
vaccines and antiviral medicines; and (4) 10% to strengthen risk communications.1
For
reasons of feasibility, flexibility and practicality, each of these proportions should be viewed
as an approximate target, i.e. +/- 5% for each.
Use of the Partnership Contribution: pandemic response
• The Advisory Group recommends that the approximately US$ 8 million per year available
through the Partnership Contribution for pandemic response be reserved to purchase vaccine
and antiviral medicines at the time of a pandemic for countries without access.
Implementation of activities
• The Advisory Group recommends that WHO headquarters work with and through its regional
and country offices to seek their assistance in the implementation of activities supported by
Partnership Contribution resources.
• The Advisory Group recommends that WHO (headquarters, regional offices, and country
offices) also provide technical guidance, as needed, to develop protocols/methodology and
implementation plans for each activity, and that the reporting of measurable results be carried
out within defined periods of time.
• The Advisory Group recommends that WHO establish and maintain ways to track the
distribution and use of Partnership Contribution resources over time.
Box. Recommendations of the PIP Framework Advisory Group on the distribution and
uses of the Partnership Contribution
70% directed to pandemic preparedness activities
• 70% disease and laboratory surveillance capacity
• 10% disease burden studies
• 10% regulatory capacity
• 10% risk communications
30% directed to pandemic response activities
• reserved for purchase of vaccine and antiviral medicines at the
time of a pandemic for countries without access
1
The Advisory Group proposed a general approach, including factors to consider, for selecting countries to receive
Partnership Contribution resources in each of these areas. The Advisory Group requested that WHO develop a method by
which factors will be applied in the selection of countries and share this with the Advisory Group at its meeting in
October 2012.

A66/17 Annex 1
30
APPENDIX 4
ADVISORY GROUP MEMBERS
Professor Tjandra Y. Aditama, Director General of Disease Control and Environmental Health,
Ministry of Health, Indonesia
Dr William Kwabena Ampofo, Senior Research Fellow & Head – Virology, Noguchi Memorial
Institute for Medical Research, University of Ghana, Ghana
Dr Jarbas Barbosa da Silva Jr, Secretary (Vice Minister) of Health Surveillance, Ministry of Health,
Brazil
Dr Silvia Bino, Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases, Head, Control of Infectious Diseases
Department, Institute of Public Health, Albania
Professor Rajae El Aouad, Director, National Institute of Hygiene, Morocco
Dr Rainer Engelhardt, Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control
Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada, Canada
Mr David E. Hohman, Former Deputy Director, Office of Global Affairs, Department of Health and
Human Services, United States of America
Professor Didier Houssin, President, French Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education
(AERES), France
Dr Mark Jacobs, Director of Public Health, Ministry of Health, New Zealand
Professor Ziad Memish, Assistant Deputy Minister of Health for Preventive Medicine, Ministry of
Health, Saudi Arabia
Dr Hama Issa Moussa, National Technical Assistant, Institutional Support Unit, Ministry of Public
Health, Niger
Dr Amr Mohamed Kandeel, Chief of Preventative Affairs and Endemic Diseases Sector, First
Undersecretary, Ministry of Health and Population, Egypt
Professor Oleg Ivanovich Kiselev, Director, Research Institute of Influenza, Russian Academy of
Medical Sciences, National Influenza Centre, Russian Federation
Dr Nobuhiko Okabe, Director General, Kawasaki City Institute for Public Health, Japan
Dr Adrian J. Puren, Deputy Director, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, South Africa
Professor Prasert Thongcharoen, Professor Emeritus, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of
Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand
Dr P.V. Venugopal, Former Director of International Operations, Medicines for Malaria Venture,
Public Health Specialist, India
Professor Yu Wang, Director-General, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, China

A66/17
31
ANNEX 2
MEETING OF THE PANDEMIC INFLUENZA PREPAREDNESS
FRAMEWORK ADVISORY GROUP
3–5 OCTOBER 2012, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
Report to the Director-General
ORGANIZATION AND PROCESS OF THE MEETING
1. The fourth meeting of the Advisory Group took place at WHO headquarters in Geneva,
3–5 October 2012, with the following revised provisional agenda:
1. Registration
2. Welcome remarks from the Chair
3. Declarations of Interest
4. Adoption of agenda
5. Review experience of audio teleconference method for AG meetings
6. Feedback to the AG from the last WHA and EB
7. Review and discuss draft Annual Report to DG
8. Update on SMTA 2 negotiations
9 Discussion of PIP BM definition
• Perspectives from GISRS
10. Partnership Contribution
• Identification of pool of manufacturers using GISRS
• Distribution among manufacturers using GISRS
• Factors to consider in selecting countries
11. Preparations for meetings with industry and stakeholders
12. Collaborate with representatives of industry associations (IFPMA, DCVMN, BIO,
ADVAMedDx, etc): Distribution of Partnership Contribution among manufacturers
using GISRS
13. Interact with industry: Use of the Partnership Contribution

A66/17 Annex 2
32
14. Interact with other stakeholders: Use of the Partnership Contribution
15. Interact with industry and other stakeholders: Use of the Partnership Contribution
16. GISRS presentations
• Methodology for GISRS assessment
• Terms of Reference for GISRS laboratories
17. Vaccine and antiviral stockpiles presentation
18. Review and discuss Meeting Report
19. Approve reports
• Advisory Group Annual Report
• Meeting Report
20. Next steps
• Next meeting of the Advisory Group
• Any other business
21. Close of meeting
2. Of the 18 members of the Advisory Group, 13 were present. The list of meeting participants is
found in Appendix 1.
3. The Chair made a number of introductory remarks.
4. The WHO Principal Legal Officer reviewed the process for Declarations of Interests. The
summary of Declarations of Interest is found in Appendix 2.
5. The Advisory Group adopted the agenda.
Review experience of audio teleconference method for AG meetings
6. The audio teleconference method for the May 2012 meeting of the Pandemic Influenza
Preparedness (PIP) Advisory Group was viewed favourably by the members of the Advisory Group.
There were few technical difficulties. Engagement in the discussion was challenging for members who
require an interpreter. It was agreed that audio teleconference was best suited for follow-up of topics
that had been discussed at a prior face-to-face meeting of the Advisory Group.
7. The Assistant Director-General, Health Security and Environment (HSE) provided a brief
update on infections associated with a novel coronavirus. The World Health Organization (WHO)
continues to monitor the situation and inform its Member States through the designated National Focal
Points under the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005).

Annex 2 A66/17
33
Feedback to the AG from the last World Health Assembly and Executive Board
8. The Executive Board at its 131st session on 28–29 May 2012 considered and accepted the
Director-General’s proposals, based on the Advisory Group’s recommendations, on the proportional
distribution of the Partnership Contribution between pandemic preparedness and pandemic response.
The Chair reported that Member States expressed support for the Advisory Group’s work to date at the
Sixty-fifth World Health Assembly in May 2012.
9. The Advisory Group discussed if documents related to their work, i.e. meeting reports and their
recommendations to the Director-General on the proportional distribution and use of the Partnership
Contribution, could be made available in the public domain. All members of the Advisory Group
supported making such documents available to promote transparency. Possible options proposed for
disseminating documents included publication on the WHO web site, internal dissemination within
WHO including regional offices, the IHR event web site, and Information Sessions for Member States.
Draft Annual Report to the Director-General
10. Members of the Advisory Group reviewed the draft Annual Report and accompanying table
with PIP Framework-related tasks/activities. Revisions were proposed to the Report and the table of
PIP Framework-related tasks/activities. The Advisory Group proposed to include the table of PIP
Framework-related tasks/activities as a supplementary annex. The annex would be referenced in the
Report and made available on the WHO web site due to its length and use of colours. It was noted that
the Annual Report and the supplementary table should cover the same time period. The Chair clarified
that the table of PIP Framework-related tasks/activities is intended as a tool to monitor, but not
evaluate, the implementation of the Framework. The Advisory Group requested that the table be
updated in advance of each Advisory Group meeting; publication of the table would, however, occur
on an annual basis as part of the Advisory Group’s Annual Report.
11. The Advisory Group discussed the time period to be covered in subsequent Annual Reports. It
was agreed that the 2013 Annual Report will cover the period May 2012 to October 2013. Thereafter,
Annual Reports will cover a 12-month period commencing 1 October and ending 30 September of the
following year. To ensure that the data are up-to-date, there may be a need for an Addendum prior to
the Director-General’s submission of the Report to the Executive Board in January.
Update on SMTA 2 negotiations
12. The Assistant Director-General, HSE updated the Advisory Group on the status of Standard
Material Transfer Agreement 2 (SMTA 2) negotiations. The Director-General has initiated discussions
with four large influenza vaccine manufacturers to commence the process to sign SMTA 2s and
expects to contact two other manufacturers in the next few weeks. In addition, the Secretariat has
provided information on the SMTA 2 process to 30 other prospective recipients of PIP biological
materials. WHO has been unable to obtain any legal support from Member States to assist in
negotiations.
13. Advice to the Director-General on SMTA 2
The Advisory Group welcomes the progress to date in the negotiations of SMTA 2s and urges
the Director-General to accelerate interaction with the entities concerned and finalize these
agreements. In recognition of both the importance of this process, and the need to obtain results
rapidly in coming months, the Advisory Group recommends that adequate resources are made
available to support WHO’s negotiation and establishment of these agreements.

A66/17 Annex 2
34
Discussion of PIP BM definition
14. Section 7.4.1 of the PIP Framework requires that the Director-General shall, on a biennial basis,
inform the World Health Assembly, through the Executive Board, on the status of, and progress on,
(v) the experience arising from the use of the definition of PIP biological materials in Section 4.1.
15. Advice to the Director-General on the PIP BM definition
Since the adoption of WHA64.5 in May 2011, the Global Influenza Surveillance and Response
System (GISRS) has accumulated experience related to the use of the definition of “PIP
biological materials”.1
The experience is primarily based in ongoing influenza surveillance and
response activities, and collaborations and direct discussions with representatives of the animal
sector related to application of the PIP biological materials definition. Based on these
discussions, the Directors of WHO Collaborating Centres (CCs) and Essential Regulatory
Laboratories (ERLs) of GISRS informed the Advisory Group during the session of their
concerns related to the application of the definition.
The definition covers wild type H5N1 and/or other influenza viruses with human pandemic
potential obtained from infected humans as well as any candidate vaccine viruses that had been
prepared for the purposes of developing a pandemic or potential pandemic vaccine.
A less strict application of the definition could cover all wild type viruses obtained from
infected animals as well as infected humans, and subsequently modified viruses.
It was considered that the less strict application of the definition could reduce the willingness or
ability of collaborating laboratories in the animal sector, including the World Organisation for
Animal Health (OIE), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the
OIE–FAO Network of Expertise on Animal Influenza (OFFLU), and academic and other
laboratories to share such viruses obtained from infected animals. This would be highly
undesirable if it dampened current and long-term collaboration between the animal sector and
GISRS since increased collaboration is considered critical for strengthening pandemic influenza
preparedness. Moreover, the less strict application could also markedly increase the burden of
work within GISRS laboratories owing to the need to implement PIP Framework activities,
e.g. use of the Influenza Virus Traceability Mechanism (IVTM).
In view of the foregoing, and based on discussion, the PIP Advisory Group expressed its view that
a strict application of the definition met the intent of Member States during the PIP Framework
negotiations and would have the least potential for dampening important collaborations between
1
Section 4.1of the PIP Framework defines “PIP biological materials” as follows: “‘PIP biological materials’,1
for the
purposes of this Framework (and its annexed Standard Material Transfer Agreements (SMTAs) and terms of reference
(TORs)) and the Influenza Virus Tracking Mechanism (IVTM), includes human clinical specimens, virus isolates of wild
type human H5N1 and other influenza viruses with human pandemic potential; and modified viruses prepared from H5N1
and/or other influenza viruses with human pandemic potential developed by WHO GISRS laboratories, these being candidate
vaccine viruses generated by reverse genetics and/or high growth re-assortment.
Also included in “PIP biological materials” are RNA extracted from wild-type H5N1 and other human influenza
viruses with human pandemic potential and cDNA that encompass the entire coding region of one or more viral genes.a
a
OPERATIONAL EXEMPTION: materials shared within the WHO GISRS or with other laboratories specifically for
non-commercial public health uses including surveillance activities, diagnostic applications, and quality assurance, are not
handled as PIP Biological Materials. Their onward transfer for purposes other than those specified in the terms of reference
of National Influenza Centres, WHO Collaborating Centres, Essential Regulatory Laboratories and H5 Reference
Laboratories is not allowed under this operational exemption.”

Annex 2 A66/17
35
human and animal sector laboratories. However, GISRS was asked to monitor the implementation
of this application to determine if critical viruses could fall outside of this approach. The
Secretariat was asked to report back to the PIP Advisory Group at its next meeting.
Partnership Contribution
Identification of pool of manufacturers using GISRS
16. Section 6.14.3 of the PIP Framework states that “influenza vaccine, diagnostic and
pharmaceutical manufacturers using the WHO GISRS will make an annual partnership contribution to
WHO for improving global pandemic influenza preparedness.” Section 4.3 of the Framework defines
these manufacturers as “… public or private entities including academic institutions, government
owned or government subsidized entities, nonprofit organizations or commercial entities that develop
and/or produce human influenza vaccines or other products derived from or using H5N1 or other
influenza viruses of human pandemic potential.” Identification of the pool of manufacturers using
GISRS is tied to a clear understanding of terms used in the Framework such as “develop”, “produce”
and “using GISRS”; the Advisory Group considered proposed definitions developed by the
Secretariat. The Advisory Group also considered an approach, proposed by the Secretariat, to identify
“manufacturers using GISRS”, i.e. transmittal by the Secretariat of a brief questionnaire through
industry associations and directly to known “users” that are not affiliated with associations.
Distribution among manufacturers using GISRS
17. Section 6.14.3 of the PIP Framework states that “The distribution between companies is to be
based on transparency and equity, based on their nature and capacities.” The Secretariat reviewed the
principles upon which defining a formula to distribute the Partnership Contribution among
manufacturers should be based:
• All manufacturers using GISRS should contribute.
• How much each manufacturer contributes should be based on their nature and capacity.
• The formula should be easy to apply and based on verifiable information; applicable across
companies; and transparent.
• The formula should be reassessed periodically.
18. The Secretariat summarized its discussions/collaborations with industry associations to date on
this matter, including a proposal from the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers
and Associations (IFPMA).
Factors to consider in selecting countries
19. In response to the Advisory Group’s request at its May 2012 meeting, the Secretariat presented
a proposed method by which factors will be applied in the selection of countries to receive Partnership
Contribution funds. The proposed method was tailored to the selection of countries to build and/or
strengthen laboratory and surveillance capacity; US$ 14 million of Partnership Contribution funds are
to be used for this purpose each year. In brief, the proposed method focused (per the PIP Framework)
on developing Member States; IHR core capacity; needs for influenza surveillance; and H5N1
vulnerability. Factors were selected and weighted for each of these four criteria to score and rank
Member States according to the level of their needs.

A66/17 Annex 2
36
20. In its discussion the Advisory Group noted the importance of developing plans for
implementation, monitoring and oversight; the identification of measurable outcomes; the important
role of WHO regional and country offices in providing assistance to countries; and a country’s ability
to sustain the work on a long-term basis without the support of Partnership Contribution funds. The
Advisory Group also noted the desirability, while retaining a primary focus on Member States with the
highest need, of ensuring the involvement of at least one Member State from each WHO region.
21. Advice to the Director-General on the Partnership Contribution
The Advisory Group considers that the use of GISRS has contributed to the development and
registration of vaccines, antivirals and diagnostics. Therefore, it is logical that all such
manufacturers contribute to the Partnership Contribution.
(1) Identifying contributors
Recognizing that certain contributors have been identified through representative associations,
the Director-General should make reasonable efforts to identify all other potential contributors
to the Partnership Contribution through the use of a questionnaire and other available means.
(2) Defining a Partnership Contribution “formula”
In accordance with Section 6.14.3 of the Framework, the Director-General should consider the
IFPMA proposal as reference for joint negotiation with industry with a view to presenting
(through electronic means) an agreed formula to the Advisory Group for its consideration by
12 November 2012 and its finalization by the Director-General by 16 November 2012.
The formula should explicitly include Partnership Contributions from antiviral manufacturers.
This is because the Advisory Group considers that the sales of influenza antivirals by
manufacturers benefit directly or indirectly from the use of GISRS, considering its role in
monitoring the susceptibility of the circulating virus to antivirals.
Further work should be conducted to explore the possibility of contributions from entities that
fall into the Research and Development category.
(3) Receiving Partnership Contributions
The Advisory Group strongly recommends that every effort is made to begin receiving
Partnership Contributions in 2012. The process should not be delayed until the complete list of
potential contributors is available.
(4) Use of the Partnership Contribution
The Advisory Group recommends that the Director-General develop a plan that is ready for use
as soon as the contributions are available. Drafts should be shared with the Advisory Group.
Meetings with industry and other stakeholders
22. The Advisory Group met with representatives of industry associations, manufacturers, and
stakeholders on the Partnership Contribution (see Appendix 3 for a list of participants). The following
views were expressed, inter alia:

Annex 2 A66/17
37
• In view of the Framework’s foundational principle of placing virus sharing and benefit
sharing on an equal footing, it is critical for Partnership Contributions to commence in 2012.
• Industry expressed its support for the Framework’s goals and objectives and its commitment
to provide fair and equitable annual Partnership Contributions.
• Industry is prepared to engage in collaborative dialogue with WHO on the Partnership Contribution.
• There is a need to define key terms that are not defined in the Framework and that are
relevant to the Partnership Contribution.
• The principles for identifying all contributors should be based on transparency and equity as
specified in Section 6.14.3 of the Framework.
• It is important to identify all contributors to the Partnership Contribution using criteria that
are clear and well-delineated, transparent in methodology, and inclusive of all companies on a
global basis. There are many challenges, however, to developing a comprehensive list.
• Various approaches for defining the formula to distribute the Partnership Contribution among
contributors can be considered.
• Transparency in how countries are selected to receive Partnership Contribution resources is
important. Following selection, it will be critical to monitor and evaluate how countries use
Partnership Contribution resources.
• There was general agreement that such interactions are useful and should continue.
23. The Director-General made several interventions. She stressed the importance of having WHO,
its Member States, industry and other stakeholders exchange and understand each other’s views and
perspectives. All parties must work to honour their commitment and commence Partnership
Contributions in 2012 as specified in the Framework. Global health security relies on the efforts of
countries. The judicious use of Partnership Contribution funds to build and strengthen capacity,
therefore, benefits not only the individual country, but all countries. The Director-General remains
committed to operationalization of the Framework and its principles of transparency and equity.
GISRS assessment and Terms of Reference
24. The Secretariat updated the Advisory Group on the scope, goals and proposed methodology for
an assessment of GISRS. The assessment will use indicators of GISRS functions and capacity. Data
will be derived from existing databases and reports, as well as new surveys of GISRS members and
external GISRS partners. It was noted that the scope of the assessment is subject to available funding.
25. In its discussion the Advisory Group noted that although some countries do not have a NIC,
they have other national laboratories that have capacities similar to a NIC or have access to
laboratories in other countries. Using such information, the Advisory Group asked the Secretariat to
provide a more comprehensive picture of global laboratory surveillance.
26. TORs for GISRS laboratories under the PIP Framework have not changed. The development of
a new category of WHO CCs on the human-animal interface is underway. Proposed draft TORs for
this new category of CCs are being prepared by GISRS, WHO regional and country offices and other
experts. The Advisory Group welcomes further information about the process of assessment of the
GISRS and about the recruitment of new Collaborating Centres in order to provide guidance on the

A66/17 Annex 2
38
general process and on the animal-human interface. The Secretariat noted that review of these TORs is
to follow the processes specified in PIP Framework Section 7.3.2.
Vaccine and antiviral stockpiles
27. The Secretariat updated the Advisory Group on the WHO pandemic vaccine (H5N1) stockpile
and WHO antiviral stockpiles, including their initial development, use during the 2009 pandemic, and
their current status.
28 The Secretariat indicated that the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) Working Group
on Influenza Vaccines and Immunizations considered three main options for the use of the remaining
120 million doses of H5N1 vaccine. The SAGE Working Group favoured one of three proposed
options (“option c”), namely that a virtual stockpile with a small physical stockpile of filled doses of
H5N1 vaccine (~1 million doses) would provide reassurance to countries in the event of an H5N1
outbreak. The PIP Advisory Group generally viewed this same option as the most viable with a
possible consideration of having the physical stockpile stored in bulk. The Advisory Group noted the
potential linkage of the WHO vaccine stockpiles with the 30% of Partnership Contributions reserved
for pandemic response and may wish to review this issue at a future meeting.
Approval of reports
29. The Annual Report and the Meeting Report were adopted unanimously by the Advisory Group.
Next steps
Next meeting
30. The next meeting of the Advisory Group will take place 20–22 March 2013 in Geneva. Agenda
items for the next meeting were discussed, to include:
• GISRS assessment
• Guidance on GISRS TORs
• Follow-up on the Partnership Contribution
• Follow-up on SMTA 2s
• Follow-up on implementation plans for the Partnership Contribution
• Vaccine stockpile (to be coordinated with other groups)
• Updated table of PIP Framework-related tasks/activities
• Overview of surveillance for influenza disease, e.g. syndromic surveillance
Any other business
31. An Information Session for Permanent Missions is scheduled for 18 October 2012; the Advisory
Group requested that the Secretariat develop a slide presentation for the Information Session which
could be distributed to WHO regional offices. A briefing for other stakeholders is to be scheduled.
32. The Advisory Group may reconvene by teleconference on 10 December 2012 at 12:00 GMT
+1 hour if necessary to discuss the status of the Partnership Contribution.

Annex 2 A66/17
39
APPENDIX 1
PANDEMIC INFLUENZA PREPAREDNESS FRAMEWORK
ADVISORY GROUP MEETING
3–5 OCTOBER 2012
List of Advisory Group participants
Professor Tjandra Y. Aditama, Director General of Disease Control and Environmental Health,
Ministry of Health, Indonesia
Dr William Kwabena Ampofo, Senior Research Fellow & Head – Virology, Noguchi Memorial
Institute for Medical Research, University of Ghana, Ghana
Dr Jarbas Barbosa da Silva Jr, Secretary (Vice Minister) of Health Surveillance, Ministry of Health,
Brazil
Dr Silvia Bino, Associate Professor of Infectious Diseases, Head, Control of Infectious Diseases
Department, Institute of Public Health, Albania
Dr Rainer Engelhardt, Assistant Deputy Minister, Infectious Disease Prevention and Control
Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada, Canada
Mr David E. Hohman, Former Deputy Director, Office of Global Affairs, Department of Health and
Human Services, United States of America
Professor Didier Houssin, President, French Evaluation Agency for Research and Higher Education
(AERES), France
Dr Mark Jacobs, Director of Public Health, Ministry of Health, New Zealand
Dr Hama Issa Moussa, National Technical Assistant, Institutional Support Unit, Ministry of Public
Health, Niger
Dr Nobuhiko Okabe, Director General, Kawasaki City Institute for Public Health, Japan
Dr Adrian J. Puren, Deputy Director, National Institute for Communicable Diseases, South Africa
Professor Prasert Thongcharoen, Professor Emeritus, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of
Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Thailand
Dr P.V. Venugopal, Former Director of International Operations, Medicines for Malaria Venture,
Public Health Specialist, India

A66/17 Annex 2
40
APPENDIX 2
3–5 OCTOBER 2012
Summary of Declarations of Interest by members
In accordance with WHO policy, all PIP Framework Advisory Group members completed the “WHO
Declaration of Interests for WHO Experts”. In advance of the meeting, all members were asked to
confirm the interests they had previously declared, disclose any relevant changes that had intervened
subsequently, and provide any additional information that could be relevant to the subject matter of the
meeting. Pursuant to WHO guidelines, their declarations were reviewed and assessed for real,
potential or apparent conflicts of interest. The experts participating in the Advisory Group meeting
were, by WHO region:
Africa:
• Dr William Kwabena Ampofo (Ghana)
• Dr Hama Issa Moussa (Niger)
• Dr Adrian J. Puren (South Africa)
Americas:
• Dr Jarbas Barbosa da Silva Jr (Brazil)
• Dr Rainer Englehardt (Canada)
• Mr David E. Hohman (United States of America)
Eastern Mediterranean:1
Europe:1
• Dr Silvia Bino (Albania)
• Professor Didier Houssin (France)
South-East Asia:
• Dr P.V. Venugopal (India)
• Professor Tjandra Y. Aditama (Indonesia)
1
Dr Rajae El Aouad (Morocco), Dr Amr Mohamed Kandeel (Egypt), Dr Ziad A. Memish (Saudi Arabia), Professor
Oleg Ivanovich Kiselev (Russian Federation), and Professor Yu Wang (China) were unable to attend.

Annex 2 A66/17
41
• Professor Prasert Thongcharoen (Thailand)
Western Pacific:1
• Dr Nobuhiko Okabe (Japan)
• Dr Mark Jacobs (New Zealand)
In the interest of transparency, the following interests and/or affiliations were deemed relevant to the
subject of work and are hereby disclosed:
Name Interest declared
Dr William Kwabena Ampofo Affiliated with a GISRS laboratory
Dr Hama Issa Moussa Civil Servant
Dr Adrian J. Puren Civil Servant
Dr Jarbas Barbosa da Silva, Jr Civil Servant
Dr Rainer Englehardt Civil Servant
Dr Silvia Bino Affiliated with a GISRS laboratory
Professor Tjandra Y. Aditama Civil Servant
Dr Mark Jacobs Civil Servant
Dr Nobuhiko Okabe Civil Servant
Professor Prasert Thongcharoen Affiliated institution received funding from a
vaccine manufacturer to conduct research*
* The interest declared by Professor Prasert Thongcharoen was reviewed by WHO and determined not
to present a conflict of interest with the objectives of the meeting.
No other interests declared by members of the Advisory Group were deemed relevant to the work of
the group.
1
Dr Rajae El Aouad (Morocco), Dr Amr Mohamed Kandeel (Egypt), Dr Ziad A. Memish (Saudi Arabia), Professor
Oleg Ivanovich Kiselev (Russian Federation), and Professor Yu Wang (China) were unable to attend.

A66/17 Annex 2
42
APPENDIX 3
3–5 OCTOBER 2012
Civil society organizations and other stakeholders:
Participants1
• Berne Declaration
• International Property Watch
• Knowledge Ecology International
• Medicines Patent Pool
• Third World Network
Manufacturers and industry associations:
Participants2
• AdvaMedDx
• Baxter
• Becton Dickinson
• BIKEN
• Biotechnology Industry Organization (Bio)
• CSL Biotherapies
• Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturers Network (DCVMN)
• Denka Seiken Co., Ltd.
• GSK Vaccines
• International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (IFPMA)
1
The China Preventive Medicine Association and the National Institute of Infectious Diseases (Japan) followed the
meeting via audio-conferencing.
2
Adimmune, the Japanese Association of Vaccine Industries, the China National Biotec Group, and MedImmune
followed the meeting via audio-conferencing.

Annex 2 A66/17
43
• Kaketsuken
• Kitasato Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.
• Novavax
• Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics
• Sanofi Pasteur
• Takeda Pharmaceuticals International
= = =

Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccine and other benefits

More Related Content

Similar to Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccine and other benefits (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Pandemic influenza preparedness: sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccine and other benefits