Nuclear and chemical weapons of mass destruction share both a tragic and beneficial legacy in mankind’s history and health. The horrific health effects of ionizing radiation and mustard gas exposures unleashed during disasters, wars, and conflicts have been harnessed to treat human health maladies. Both agents of destruction have been transformed into therapies to treat a wide range of cancers. The discovery of therapeutic uses of radiation and sulfur mustard was largely due to observations by clinicians treating victims of radiation and sulfur mustard gas exposures. Clinicians identified vulnerability of leukocytes to these agents and repurposed their use in the treatment of leukemias and lymphomas. Given the overlap in therapeutic modalities, it goes to reason that there may be common mechanisms to target as protective strategies against their damaging effects. This commentary will highlight oxidative stress as a common mechanism shared by both radiation and sulfur mustard gas exposures and discuss potential therapies targeting oxidative stress as medical countermeasures against the devastating lung diseases wrought by these agents.

Although chemical and radiological agents cause toxicity through different mechanisms, the multiorgan injuries caused by these threats share similarities that convene on the level of basic biological responses. This publication will discuss these areas of convergence and explore “multi-utility” approaches that could be leveraged to address common injury mechanisms underlying actions of chemical and radiological agents in a threat-agnostic manner. In addition, we will provide an overview of the current state of radiological and chemical threat research, discuss the US Government’s efforts toward medical preparedness, and identify potential areas for collaboration geared toward enhancing preparedness and response against radiological and chemical threats. We also will discuss previous regulatory experience to provide insight on how to navigate regulatory paths for US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval/licensure/clearance for products addressing chemical or radiological/nuclear threats. This publication follows a 2022 trans-agency meeting titled, “Overlapping Science in Radiation and Sulfur Mustard Exposures of Skin and Lung: Consideration of Models, Mechanisms, Organ Systems, and Medical Countermeasures,” sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Discussions from this meeting explored the overlapping nature of radiation and chemical injury and spurred increased interest in how preparedness for one threat leads to preparedness for the other. Herein, subject matter experts from the NIAID and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a part of the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR), summarize the knowledge gained from recently funded biomedical research, as well as insights from the 2022 meeting. These topics include identification of common areas for collaboration, potential use of biomarkers of injury to identify injuries caused by both hazards, and common and widely available treatments that could treat damage caused by radiological or chemical threats.

Development of medical countermeasures (MCM) to mitigate and/ or treat the pulmonary complications associated with exposure to chemical, radiological, and/ or nuclear weapons is a national, public health preparedness posture priority in the United States (US). Pulmonary exposure to either sulfur mustard vapor or radiation causes oxidative damage, vascular injury, hyperinflammation, and pro-fibrotic signaling cascades that lead to life-threatening and potentially debilitating lung disease. There is no MCM currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to mitigate and/ or treat lung injury caused by sulfur mustard or radiation exposure. Thus, there remains a major unmet public health need for development of threat-agnostic, host-directed therapeutics that target common pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the progression of acute and/ or late lung injury independent of the etiology of disease. This review describes the clinical manifestations and underlying mechanisms of sulfur mustard and radiation-induced lung injury and regulatory considerations for MCM development under the non-traditional Animal Rule pathway.

Misinformation and disinformation during infectious disease outbreaks can hinder public health responses. This analysis examines comments about masks and COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted a content analysis of 6,600 randomly selected English-language tweets, examining tweets for health, political, of societal frames; inclusion of true information, false information, partially true/misleading information, and/or opinion; political components; risk frames; and use of specific types of rumor. We found false and partially false information in 22% of tweets in which we were able to assess veracity. Tweets with misinformation were more likely to mention vaccines, be political in nature, and promote risk elevating messages (p<0.5). We also found false information about vaccines as early as January 2020, nearly a year before COVID-19 vaccines became widely available. These findings highlight a need for new policies and strategies aimed to counter harmful and misleading messaging.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency prescribes a 48-h timeline between the declaration of an emergency and the treatment of the last person with Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) medical countermeasures (MCM). Many states struggle to meet the 48-h window. Issues surrounding adequate staffing, critical to maintaining necessary Points Of Dispensing (POD) throughput, are noted in the literature. The use of public and private partnerships in the health-care sector may improve POD throughput. This study describes a novel strategy for partnering with home health agencies (HHAs) to augment MCM distribution. The HHA In-Home Dispensing Model we propose authorizes HHAs to act as Closed PODs following a head of household model. Here, we evaluate the effectiveness of the model using a case study. First, we provide an overview of the methods used to estimate the duration of in-home nurse dispensing shifts. We then present the results for our case study area. Next, we discuss how the model can be used and its limitations. We conclude that the HHA In-Home SNS Dispensing Model shows promise and should receive further consideration, as it can decrease demand at open PODs and increase the reach of MCMs to vulnerable populations who might otherwise have difficulty receiving them.

The deliberate use of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) materials in war or terrorist attacks is perceived as a great threat globally. In the event of a release of CBRN agents, protection by means of medical countermeasures (MedCMs) could reduce health vulnerability. Nonetheless, for some diseases caused by these agents, innovative MedCMs do not exist and many of those that do might not be readily available. Inappropriate research and development funding and government procurement efforts can result in adverse economic consequences (eg, lost income, cost per loss of life, medical expenses) far exceeding the costs of strong and comprehensive preparedness initiatives. By illustrating factors of demand-side rationale for CBRN MedCMs, this article aims to strengthen integrity of policy-making associated with current demand requirements. Namely, an approach to inspire broader assessment is outlined by compiling and adapting existing economic models and concepts to characterize both soft and hard factors that influence demand-side rationale. First, the soft factor context is set by describing the impact of behavioral and political economics. Then, lessons learned from past public health funding models and associated collaborative access infrastructure are depicted to represent hard factors that can enhance the viability of MedCM preparedness evaluations.

Having sufficient medical countermeasures (MCMs) available for the treatment of acetylcholinesterase-inhibiting nerve agent poisoned patients following a mass chemical exposure is a challenge for communities. After stockpiles containing auto-injectors are exhausted, communities need to be aware of alternative pharmaceutical options. The Department of Homeland Security Chemical Defense Program convened a federal interagency working group consisting of first responders, clinicians, and experts from the fields of medical toxicology, pharmacology, and emergency management. A literature review of pharmaceutical alternatives for treating nerve agent toxicity was performed. Pharmaceuticals that met the federal Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise Product Specific Requirements were prioritized. Food and Drug Administration approval for one indication, market availability, and alignment to government procurement strategy were considered. This article summarizes the literature on comparative pharmacokinetics and efficacy against nerve agents (where available) of Food and Drug Administration approved drugs with muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist and gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor agonist effects. This work is intended to serve as a resource of pharmaceutical options that may be available to communities (ie, emergency managers, planners, clinicians, and poison centers) when faced with a mass human exposure to a nerve agent and inadequate supplies of MCMs. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:605-612)

It is only possible to achieve a resilient community and an integrated, comprehensive, and resilient health system that can respond effectively to a public health emergency through active collaboration, coordination, and shared responsibility among a broad group of public and private stakeholders and the community itself. The Institute of Medicine established the Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Catastrophic Events in 2007 to provide a neutral venue for dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders in the preparedness field. In the Forum's first year, the members began to address topics such as medical countermeasures dispensing, crisis standards of care, and medical surge capacity. In the past 9 months, the Forum members have expanded their areas of interest in response to current events and national areas of focus. Current topics include individual, family, and community preparedness and resiliency; medical countermeasures from development through dispensing; and the response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Across all of the initiatives undertaken by the Forum, the common element is that they tackle problems, gaps, and future opportunities that can only be successfully addressed if multiple stakeholders work together.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:174-177)

Objective: The Cities Readiness Initiative is a federally funded program designed to assist 72 metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in preparing to dispense life-saving medical countermeasures within 48 hours of a public health emergency. Beginning in 2008, the 72 MSAs were required to conduct 3 drills related to the distribution and dispensing of emergency medical countermeasures. The report describes the results of the first year of pilot data for medical countermeasure drills conducted by the MSAs.

Methods: The MSAs were provided templates with key metrics for 5 functional elements critical for a successful dispensing campaign: personnel call down, site activation, facility setup, pick-list generation, and dispensing throughput. Drill submissions were compiled into single data sets for each of the 5 drills. Analyses were conducted to determine whether the measures were comparable across business and non-business hours. Descriptive statistics were computed for each of the key metrics identified in the 5 drills.

Results: Most drills were conducted on Mondays and Wednesdays during business hours (8:00 am-5:00 pm). The median completion time for the personnel call-down drill was 1 hour during business hours (n = 287) and 55 minutes during non-business hours (n = 136). Site-activation drills were completed in a median of 30 minutes during business hours and 5 minutes during non-business hours. Facility setup drills were completed more rapidly during business hours (75 minutes) compared with non-business hours (96 minutes). During business hours, pick lists were generated in a median of 3 minutes compared with 5 minutes during non-business hours. Aggregate results from the dispensing throughput drills demonstrated that the median observed throughput during business hours (60 people/h) was higher than that during non-business hours (43 people/h).

Conclusion: The results of the analyses from this pilot sample of drill submissions provide a baseline for the determination of a national standard in operational capabilities for local jurisdictions to achieve in their planning efforts for a mass dispensing campaign during an emergency.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:357–362)

The user-managed inventory (UMI) is an emerging idea for enhancing the current distribution and maintenance system for emergency medical countermeasures (MCMs). It increases current capabilities for the dispensing and distribution of MCMs and enhances local/regional preparedness and resilience. In the UMI, critical MCMs, especially those in routine medical use (“dual utility”) and those that must be administered soon after an incident before outside supplies can arrive, are stored at multiple medical facilities (including medical supply or distribution networks) across the United States. The medical facilities store a sufficient cache to meet part of the surge needs but not so much that the resources expire before they would be used in the normal course of business. In an emergency, these extra supplies can be used locally to treat casualties, including evacuees from incidents in other localities. This system, which is at the interface of local/regional and federal response, provides response capacity before the arrival of supplies from the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) and thus enhances the local/regional medical responders' ability to provide life-saving MCMs that otherwise would be delayed. The UMI can be more cost-effective than stockpiling by avoiding costs due to drug expiration, disposal of expired stockpiled supplies, and repurchase for replacement.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:408-414)