Pick up the On the Brink BGG expansion.
The forums at Boardgamegeek state that it definitely eases up the difficulty of the 4 and 5 player versions as well as providing more options.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/40/Pat Ludwig
You could for example always play with the same amount of pawns.
If you have 3 players everyone gets a pawn for themself and you have to discuss what happens with the 4th.
Considering there's already a lot of discussion on what to do with your own pawns it's not going to be much of a problem...
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/174/Kempeth
Allowing players to choose their roles, rather than having them assigned randomly, is one way to lower the difficulty.
The players can choose roles that they prefer to work with and that have better synergy.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/159/Todd
Consider making the epidemic cards predictable.
Space them out as stated in the rules, but always put them at the bottom of each pile.
This keeps the fun of dealing with the challenge, while enhancing the requirement that players work together to handle what they know is coming.
It does make it easier though, in general, due to this predictability.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/587/Neal Tibrewala
I found that a nice touch is to not shuffle the top stack of cards when mixing in the epidemic cards.
In the first stack, place the epidemic card at the bottom and shuffle the rest normally.
This just lets you get a leg up on the game at the beginning while leaving the rest of the game unchanged.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/6416/user6416
A big part of the variation in difficulty is the fixed number of event cards.
In the base game, you play with 5 event cards in the deck regardless of the number of players.
If you pick up "On the Brink" there are more event cards, so you play with 2 event cards in the deck per player.
This seems subtle
but I've found that it smooths most of the effect of different numbers of players (assuming you are good at coordinating).
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/11899/Nolan
2 things to make the game a bit easier.
1)
once a cure is found any player can cure a city of all diseases for only 1 action 2)
shuffle all the infection cards back into the deck when an Pandemic occurs (may be to big of a change)
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/2529/Joe vago
My group feels that Pandemic is easier with fewer players , so as player count goes down we increase the epidemic count to maintain the challenge level.
Other adjustments will depend on how you think the difficulty changes.
In player counts that you consider harder, try dealing out multiple roles and letting players choose, or try choosing play order only after seeing roles and starting cards.
For player counts that you consider easier, reverse these decisions.
On the Brink adds some variability and complexity.
I'm not sure
if (after you get past the learning curve of any new variant) it adds difficulty , but it might.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/1315/Monica Cellio
Normaly, you can trade city card on the city of that card.
So, I suggest that you can trade city black card on a black city, blue one on a blue city, yellow on yellow and red on red.
That way, you still restricted but it'll be easyer.
It'll make a donw grade for the Researcher but...
your choice.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/8017/user8017
In a 4 player game, you can make sure the researcher is in play for one of the players, and deal the other 3 roles from the deck.
I have played with almost every combination of roles (with 2 and 4 players) and the researcher has significant advantage and is very difficult to win with 4 player without her.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/11910/braingirl
If you're playing with 2p, use the next difficulty level in terms of # of Epidemics.
For example, if you play 4p on "Easy" (4 Epidemic cards), then with 2p, play on "normal" (5 Epidemics) to get the same effect of difficulty.
If you have On The Brink expansion, rather than adding another Epidemic, consider adding in the Virulent Strain.
The rules for that is only 1 page long, so you should be able to learn it in no time.
Mutation Challenge is more involving even if it's still only 1 page as well.
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/8043/ackmondual
Pandemic varies vastly in difficulty depending on the number of players. Does anyone know of any custom rules that make it more even?
Do you know any rules that make Pandemic's difficulty more even?
boardgames.stackexchange.com
<house-rules><pandemic>
boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/1747
boardgames.stackexchange.com/users/558/dan_waterworth
Try playing with the same amount of pawns and allow players to choose their roles. Shuffle all the Infection cards back into the deck when a pandemic occurs. You can also try not shuffling the top deck of cards when mixing in the epidemic cards. Allowing players to choose their roles, rather than having them assigned randomly, is one way to lower the difficulty or you could for example always play with the same amount of pawns. In addition, you could consider making the epidemic cards predictable.  Another nice touch is to not shuffle the top stack of cards when mixing in the epidemic cards and you can also shuffle all the infection cards back into the deck when an Pandemic occurs and once a cure is found any player can cure a city of all diseases for only 1 action. Pandemic is  easier with fewer players. You could consider dealing out multiple roles and letting players choose or choose play order only after seeing roles and starting cards.   In a 4 player game, you can make sure the researcher is in play for one of the players, and deal the other 3 roles from the deck. Another suggestion is to trade city black card on a black city, blue one on a blue city, yellow on yellow and red on red. If you're playing with 2p, use the next difficulty level in terms of the number of Epidemics.  
Allowing players to choose their roles, rather than having them assigned randomly, is one way to lower the difficulty or you could for example always play with the same amount of pawns. In addition, you could consider making the epidemic cards predictable.   Another nice touch is to not shuffle the top stack of cards when mixing in the epidemic cards.   You can also shuffle all the infection cards back into the deck when an Pandemic occurs and once a cure is found any player can cure a city of all diseases for only 1 action. Pandemic is  easier with fewer players. You could consider dealing out multiple roles and letting players choose or choose play order only after seeing roles and starting cards.    In a 4 player game, you can make sure the researcher is in play for one of the players, and deal the other 3 roles from the deck. Another suggestion is to trade city black card on a black city, blue one on a blue city, yellow on yellow and red on red. If you're playing with 2p, use the next difficulty level in terms of the number of Epidemics.  