Study:Intranasal administration of octavalent next-generation influenza vaccine elicits protective immune responses against seasonal and pre-pandemic viruses. Image Credit: Mongkolchon Akesin / Shutterstock.com
A recent study published in the Journal of Virology discusses a recent vaccine candidate that has the potential to neutralize both existing and emerging flu viruses effectively.
The three human influenza viruses, A, B, and C are represented as IAV, IBV and ICV, respectively. Each type has multiple 18 and 11 subtypes distinguished by their hemagglutin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) surface glycoproteins, respectively.
H1N1 and H3N2 IAV strains and IBV circulate extensively in humans. Comparatively, H2, H5, and H7 subtypes are endemic in birds.
Current flu vaccines are based on three or four seasonal subtypes of circulating human strains and range in their effectiveness from 10% to 60%
The high mutation rate and selective immune pressure of influenza cause frequent antigenic variation to occur, enabling immune evasion. Thus, updated vaccine formulations are necessitated every year. Emerging viral variants could also cause a new pandemic if they escape pre-existing immunity.
The current study sought to develop a universal recombinant vaccine candidate that could protect against multiple influenza virus strains over multiple seasons.
Recombinant antigens can overcome the limitations of standard split-inactivated or attenuated vaccines. Conventional flu vaccines are produced in embryonated chicken eggs, and they contain egg-specific adaptive mutations that limit the induction of virus-specific immunity.
In contrast, recombinant antigens target specific antigenic sites that elicit neutralizing antibodies. These work effectively or better than conventional vaccines in normal and high-risk groups, reducing their risk of hospitalization.
In the current study, researchers utilized the computationally optimized broadly reactive antigen (COBRA) methodology to isolate numerous sequences from thousands of isolates. Thereafter, broadly reactive immunogens that elicit immune responses to multiple strains circulating over many seasons were identified.
In a previous mouse experiment, an intramuscular heptavalent vaccine containing COBRA HA and NA immunogens protected mice against both seasonal and potential pandemic IAV strains. However, intramuscular vaccines fail to induce local mucosal immunity.
Comparatively, intranasal vaccines stimulate local and systemic immune responses against respiratory pathogens. This prevents viral colonization at the entry site, thereby reducing the likelihood of viral transmission and severe illness. Furthermore, intranasal vaccines are less painful, more convenient, require less skill, and are associated with fewer complications as compared to intramuscular vaccines.
In the current experiment, octavalent combinations of COBRA HA antigens H1, H2, H3, H5, and H7, IBV, and NA N1 and N2 recombinant antigens were studied.
Bis-(3,5)-cyclic dimeric adenosine monophosphate (c-di-AMP) was used as an adjuvant to stimulate type 1 interferon (IFN) and tumor necrotic factor (TNF-) antiviral immune responses. Previously, c-di-AMP has been shown to promote both mucosal and systemic immunity and overcome immune tolerance while preventing vaccine breakdown.
The vaccine candidate was administered intranasally to either nave or pre-immune ferrets, whereas a control vaccine was administered to another group of pre-immune animals. Ferrets are the model of choice for studying influenza infections, as they exhibit similarities to humans in many key aspects of infection and immunologic response.
In the pre-immune group, immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to H1, N1, and N2 rose by 60 days from infection. Following vaccination, all eight antigenic components induced IgG binding antibodies.
In the control group, antibody titers were unchanged, whereas H1 antibody titers decreased.
Pre-immune but not nave ferrets had anti-HA and anti-NA antibody titers at baseline. After vaccination, antibody titers rose in the pre-immune group, whereas nave ferrets exhibited high binding antibody levels against all eight components of the vaccine. In the control group, titers remained unchanged, except for a reduction in anti-H1 antibodies.
Baseline anti-group 1 HA stem antibody titers were high in pre-immune ferrets but not in group 2 stem antibodies. The vaccine elicited a strong rise in cross-reactive antibody titers against both group 1 and 2 stem antigens in pre-immune and nave ferrets.
In the pre-immune group, hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titers to the post-pandemic H1N1 strains isolated in 2009, 2015, 2018, and 2019 were significantly higher than baseline levels. This immune response is significant, as HAI activity in earlier strains was very low.
Pre-immune ferrets lacked detectable HAI antibodies to H3N2 strains at baseline. After vaccination, HAI titers against four of the six H3N2 strains significantly increased.
The lowest titers were observed in the pre-immune control ferrets. HAI activity against the 2015 and 2018 strains decreased fourfold by day 56 post-vaccination, compared to an eightfold reduction against the 2019 strain.
Cross-reactive anti-IBV HAI antibodies were produced against both IBV strains following infection with one IBV lineage.
In pre-immune ferrets, post-vaccination HAI titers were observed against all IBV strains, irrespective of lineage. The nave vaccinated group exhibited a small increase in HAI titers against the infecting lineage only.
Baseline HAI activity was not observed against any pre-pandemic strains. After vaccination, pre-immune and nave groups exhibited detectable HAI activity against H2, H5 and H7 antigens.
Higher anti-H5 HAI titers were achieved in pre-immune ferrets with baseline antibodies to H1N1, H3N2, and IBV strains after vaccination as compared to nave ferrets.
NA inhibition (NAI) titers to N1, but not N2, were detected at baseline in pre-immune ferrets. Following vaccination, NAI activity against both N1 and N2 increased.
The vaccine candidate protected nave and pre-immune ferrets against illness following infection with H1N1, IBV, and H5N1. The greatest protection was observed in the pre-immune vaccinated group.
Mucosal immunity was also highest in this group; however, both pre-immune and nave ferrets exhibited undetectable viral titers in their nasal wash fluid by day five following immunization.
The mixture of eight COBRA HA/NA proteins mixed with an intranasal adjuvant is a promising candidate for a universal influenza vaccine.
The novel vaccine formulation developed in the current study provided a balanced helper/cytotoxic/inflammatory T-cell response while also inducing the production of a broad range of IgG antibodies against virus-specific epitopes. Moreover, this octavalent vaccine elicited a cross-reactive response that was effective against new strains, which is a crucial aspect of a potential universal flu vaccine in the future.
All three ferret groups exhibited cross-reactive protection against lethal H5N1 infection, which may be due to the presence of antibodies to the conserved HA stem. These may neutralize this strain by inhibiting fusion or producing Fc-receptor-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity.
Future studies are needed to examine the role of immune imprinting in these post-vaccination responses. The use of additional doses to counteract the immunodominance of H1 has the potential to enhance HAI responses to IBV or H3N2 strains in nave ferrets.
Journal reference:
Although antivirals had some positive effects on the treatment of severe influenza and prevention of the flu, many effects on outcomes were uncertain, according to two World Health Organization-funded systematic reviews and network meta-analyses.
In the first analysis, treatment of severe influenza with oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and peramivir (Rapivab) appeared to reduce the length of hospital stays, but overall the effects of antivirals on key clinical outcomes -- such as mortality -- remained questionable, reported Qiukui Hao, MD, of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, and colleagues in The Lancet.
Another analysis from Hao and colleagues found that post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) with a range of antivirals probably decreased risk of severe disease in high-risk individuals after exposure to seasonal influenza viruses and may have also reduced the risk of zoonotic infection after exposure to novel influenza A viruses, Hao and researchers reported.
"The optimal antiviral drugs for treatment of severe influenza and post-exposure prophylaxis for influenza are unclear," David Hui, MD, of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, wrote in an accompanying editorial. "Many knowledge gaps remain that need to be filled."
Treatment of Severe Flu
In the first systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, Hao and colleagues analyzed eight trials that included a total of 1,424 participants.
Researchers found only low certainty of evidence that duration of hospitalization for seasonal flu was reduced with oseltamivir and peramivir when compared with standard care or placebo, although statistically significant with a mean reduction in hospitalization of 1.63 and 1.73 days for the two drugs, respectively.
There was no significant difference in time to symptom alleviation with either drug, although again with low certainty of evidence.
Researchers were unable to draw any other conclusions about the use of antivirals and key patient outcomes. For example, in a network meta-analysis of mortality that included four trials of oseltamivir, peramivir, or zanamivir (Relenza) for the treatment of severe seasonal influenza, the impact on mortality varied from a reduction of 18 per 1,000 patients to an increase of four per 1,000 patients for seasonal influenza when compared with standard care or placebo. Mortality also varied from 232 fewer to 51 more per 1,000 patients infected with zoonotic influenza A viruses. The evidence for both findings was of very low certainty.
"Great uncertainty remains regarding the effects of oseltamivir, peramivir, and zanamivir on mortality in patients with severe seasonal influenza or zoonotic influenza," Hao and colleagues wrote.
The study had several limitations, the authors acknowledged. There were only eight trials in the analysis, and none looked at effects of antivirals versus placebo or standard care on any adverse events or severe adverse events, making it impossible to draw any firm conclusions about most outcomes for patients with severe influenza. Also, data were scarce on the effects of antivirals on patients over the age of 60, nor was there enough data to perform prespecified subgroup analyses.
Flu PEP?
In this systematic review, researchers analyzed 33 trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of six antivirals for the prevention of influenza: zanamivir, oseltamivir, baloxavir (Xofluza), amantadine (Symmetrel), rimantadine (Flumadine), and laninamivir (never approved in the U.S.).
In 19 trials that reported on laboratory-confirmed seasonal asymptomatic infections, zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir probably reduced symptomatic influenza in high-risk individuals when given within 48 hours after exposure to seasonal influenza. The four antivirals had similar, statistically significant risk reductions of 0.35 to 0.43 when compared with placebo.
However, the antivirals fell below the threshold of importance for reducing symptomatic influenza in people at low risk for severe disease.
Rimantadine did not significantly reduce risk for symptomatic influenza A virus infection; no data was available for amantadine.
Of note, researchers found that when given promptly after exposure, zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir might reduce the development of symptomatic infection from exposure to novel zoonotic influenza A viruses that are often associated with severe disease in people.
According to the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), PEP is only recommended for severely immunocompromised asymptomatic adults and children ages 3 months or older who are at very high risk of developing complications from influenza and for whom influenza vaccination is contraindicated or unavailable after household exposure to influenza.
Also, the CDC now recommends PEP with oseltamivir in people exposed to novel influenza A viruses, including H5N1 (bird flu).
Hao and colleagues also found that in studies evaluating both asymptomatic and symptomatic illness, oseltamivir, laninamivir, baloxavir, and amantadine probably decreased the risk of all influenza infection. Results were driven by reduction of symptomatic influenza.
"Antivirals probably have little or no effect on prevention of asymptomatic influenza virus infection," the researchers concluded.
The findings of the analysis "support the use of baloxavir, laninamivir, oseltamivir, or zanamivir for post-exposure prophylaxis of seasonal influenza in people at high risk of severe influenza, and they also provide some indirect support for the use of these antivirals for post-exposure prophylaxis of zoonotic influenza," Hui wrote in his editorial.
However, four of the 33 trials looked at the effects of oseltamivir administered as PEP and found it had little to no effect on preventing hospital admission from seasonal influenza.
In addition, 15 studies provided evidence that zanamivir, oseltamivir, laninamivir, and baloxavir as PEP probably had little to no effect on all-cause mortality. Absolute risk reductions ranged from zero fewer deaths to one more per 1,000 patients.
On one reassuring note, in an analysis of 13 trials that reported adverse drug-related events, zanamivir, laninamivir, and rimantadine appeared to result in few drug-related adverse events, with risk ratios ranging from 1.01 to 1.40. Baloxavir also appeared to have little or no effect on drug-related adverse events.
Hao and researchers acknowledged several limitations of this analysis, including lack of outcomes data on length of hospitalization, ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, and disease severity. Also the mean age of participants varied widely, from about 7 years to over age 81 years. There were few data on pregnant individuals or young infants. Studies also varied in terms of drug administration, dosage, and duration of PEP.
Katherine Kahn is a staff writer at MedPage Today, covering the infectious diseases beat. She has been a medical writer for over 15 years.
Disclosures
The studies were funded by the World Health Organization.
Hao and study co-authors reported no conflicts of interest.
Hui reported no conflicts of interest.
Primary Source
The Lancet
Source Reference: Gao Y, et al "Antivirals for treatment of severe influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials" Lancet 2024; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01307-2.
Secondary Source
The Lancet
Source Reference: Zhao Y, et al "Antivirals for post-exposure prophylaxis of influenza: a systematic review and network meta-analysis" Lancet 2024; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01357-6.
Additional Source
The Lancet
Source Reference: Hui DS "Antiviral treatment and prophylaxis for influenza" Lancet 2024; DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01698-2.
Flu season is approaching and doctors are recommending you get your annual flu shot.
Research is being conducted here in Oregon that could lead to a one-and-done flu shot that provides lifetime immunity.
"It occurred to me after my son got infected with influenza that the annual influenza vaccine falls short and we need a one and done shot. What we showed is proof of concept that has merit and should be further explored."
In pre-clinical trials, Oregon Health Science University professor Jonah Sacha demonstrated a vaccine platform that attacks the internal proteins of the virus that triggered the 1918 flu pandemic and killed millions of people.
Current annual flu vaccines only attack the outer shell of virus proteins, which mutate over time, making them harder to stop.
"This idea of shooting where the virus just was and it's moved on by the time the bullet strikes is to, like a hunter, tracking the progress of the virus and aiming where it's going to be so you can hit the virus dead on. The idea behind this is you hit the virus in a place where it cant move and escape from," Sacha said.
Researchers reported the vaccine generated a robust immune response in nonhuman primates that were exposed to the modern avian H5N1 influenza virus.
But the primates were inoculated against the influenza virus of 1918, proving the internal proteins of viruses dont change much over time.
"None of us like getting an annual flu shot but it's important. But if you can make it even easier with a one shot for life, its a huge advantage for human health and thats what we are aiming for here."
Sacha says the lifetime influenza vaccine platform is almost ready for clinical trials in humans and could available for use by the general public in five to ten years.
Without a sharp pivot in state and federal policies, the bird flu virus that has bedeviled American farms is likely to find a firm foothold among dairy cattle, scientists are warning.
And that means bird flu may soon pose a permanent threat to other animals and to people.
So far, this virus, H5N1, does not easily infect humans, and the risk to the public remains low. But the longer the virus circulates in cattle, the more chances it gains to acquire the mutations necessary to set off an influenza pandemic.
I think the window is closing on our ability to contain the outbreak, said Dr. Krutika Kuppalli, an infectious-disease physician who worked at the World Health Organization until April.
Were so quick to blame China for what happened with SARS-CoV-2, but were not doing any better right now, she added. Thats how pandemics happen.
Half a year into the outbreak, H5N1 shows no signs of receding in U.S. dairy cattle or in the workers who tend them. In recent weeks, the virus has spread into poultry and workers.
As of Wednesday, infections had been reported in 192 herds of cattle in 13 states, and in 13 people. Nine were workers at poultry farms close to dairy farms in Colorado.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit andlog intoyour Times account, orsubscribefor all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber?Log in.
Want all of The Times?Subscribe.
Outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in poultry and dairy cattle have dropped off sharply in recent weeks, according to USDA databases. There was a similar but longer lull a year ago in bird flu, which has become the largest animal disease event in American agriculture, killing nearly 101 million birds in domestic flocks since it appeared in the United States in February 2022.
No cases of bird flu have been found in commercial poultry flocks since July 19, five weeks ago. The viral disease has been confirmed in three dairy herds since Aug. 5, three weeks ago.
Thirteen farmworkers have contracted mild cases of bird flu from exposure to infected dairy cattle and poultry since April. Ten of the cases were in Colorado. Public health officials say the risk to the general public is low and recommend that people wear protective equipment if they deal with infected or potentially infected animals. The jump by the virus to dairy cattle from birds gives the virus a possible route to threaten humans. Scientists say the H5N1 avian flu virus has not shown signs of becoming more communicable.
Last year, HPAI disappeared from commercial flocks for nearly six months, from April 19, when it was confirmed on two turkey farms in North Dakota and South Dakota, until Oct. 4, when it was found on a South Dakota turkey farm. In the interim, the disease was detected in six backyard flocks totaling 320 birds and at four live bird markets three in Brooklyn and one in Union County in northern New Jersey with 2,380 birds. Bird flu killed 20.9 million birds in domestic flocks during the final three months of 2023.
Since the last major HPAI discovery among large flocks this year, in Colorado, three outbreaks of bird flu have been reported in Florida, totaling 6,285 birds.
The most recent bird flu cases in dairy have been two herds in Colorado and one in Idaho. Colorado accounts for 64 of the 192 dairy herds in 13 states that have tested positive for the avian flu virus. It is the only state that requires weekly tests for bird flu in milk samples from every dairy farm.
Animal health officials say HPAI is spread by migratory waterfowl and their droppings. Outbreaks are more common during the colder months of the year. Among cattle, bird flu is spread from cow to cow with high viral loads found in the milk of infected cows. In poultry and dairy cattle, the disease can be spread from farm to farm by shared equipment and by contaminated clothing. The USDA stresses biosecurity on the farm to prevent the spread of the virus.
Nine of the 10 cases of avian flu in livestock workers in Colorado this year involved contract laborers who culled infected flocks on two egg farms. Bird flu has been reported in four dairy workers nationwide; two in Michigan and one each in Texas and Colorado.
HPAI has been reported among animals worldwide. Weve never seen anything like this, said Maurice Pitesky, an expert in poultry disease modeling at the University of California-Davis. Its orders of magnitude larger and more complex than previous outbreaks, he said in the UC-Davis magazine.
A massive outbreak of H5N1 bird flu in the US has led to widespread rates of infection in both wild birds and farmed birds. With recent cases of the virus detected in humans, dairy cows, and other mammals, you might wonder about the risk of bird flu in dogs. Bird flu is highly contagious between birds and although rare, it can spread to humans.
Fortunately, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the current public health risk for bird flu is low. Still, its worth keeping an eye on updates to limit your dogs exposure to the virus. Read on for veterinary advice on the symptoms of a respiratory infection and how to keep your dog and the rest of your family safe.
Bird flu is a common name for avian flu or avian influenza, a virus that mainly infects birds. However, bird flu can also spread to humans and other mammals. There are four types of influenza viruses and several subtypes of each, such as H5N1 bird flu. These subtypes get their name from the proteins on the virus surface.
The H stands for hemagglutinin, which is a surface protein that has to fit with a particular type of cell in order for influenza to infect the animal, says Dr. Amy Attas, VMD of New York-based practice City Pets. The N stands for another protein called neuraminidase. Typically, H5N1 tends to infect waterfowl, ducks, and geese, in addition to domestic fowl like chickens and turkeys, she says.
The short answer is yes. H5N1 can infect dogs, as well as humans. As the virus replicates, its genes may develop errors or mutations, causing changes in the virus surface proteins. Its common for viruses to mutate as they move between host animals. Some mutations result in the virus becoming more transmissible or better at evading the immune systems natural defenses.
Dogs are at risk for bird flu because H5N1 is a pretty good mutator, Dr. Attas says. However, dogs are not one of the mammals that are overly represented in cases of bird flu. The virus can spread among wildlife and cows, but there are extremely sporadic reports of dogs getting infected.
So, while it helps to be aware of infectious disease outbreaks, dog owners dont need to be overly alarmed since there are so few cases of bird flu in dogs and people. That said, whenever youre dealing with an influenza virus that can mutate, you wouldnt want to risk exposing a beloved pet.
With so few cases of bird flu in dogs, whats known about respiratory disease comes from other influenza outbreaks. For example, H3N2 is a subtype of influenza that normally spreads in pigs but can infect other mammals and birds. Both H3N2 and H3N8 can cause canine influenza or dog flu, the symptoms of which can mirror human respiratory infections and include the following:
When there was an outbreak of canine influenza, dogs had no natural immunity, and so 100% of those who came in contact with this flu virus were infected, Dr. Attas says. These dogs werent all symptomatic, but a great percentage of them got sick. Similar to flu outbreaks in people, some dogs developed complications like pneumonia and others died as a result of the infection.
Although rare, bird flu and other influenza viruses can be transmitted from dogs to people and vice versa. Viruses are transmitted by being in direct contact with an infected animal, inhaling aerosolized droplets from coughing or sneezing, or touching or licking items contaminated with the virus. Other routes of transmission are contact with feces or discharge from the eyes, mouth, or nose.
Dogs with no signs of illness can still be infectious and spread the virus. Moreover, a dog could be exposed to both a bacterium and influenza virus and get that much sicker, Dr. Attas says. Here are some tips on how to keep your dog safe.
Although bird flu isnt prevalent in dogs, its possible for dogs to get the disease if they come in contact with infected birds, Dr. Attas explains. Her advice is to keep your dog away from dead birds, bird feces, wild birds, and poultry. Also, dogs should avoid or be very careful in locations where there has been a dead bird or if bird flu has been reported.
When theres a new virus of concern like bird flu, experts recommend vaccinating your dog against similar viruses to minimize their risk of infection. Vaccines can prevent infection or lessen the severity of illness should your dog become infected. As always, its best to consult with your veterinarian about appropriate vaccines for your dog.
For example, Bordetella bronchiseptica is a bacterium associated with respiratory disease in dogs or whats known colloquially as kennel cough. Dr. Attas recommends that dogs be adequately vaccinated against Bordetella if theyre going to be in locations with other dogs like doggy daycare, dog parks, dog shows, boarding kennels, and grooming facilities. That way, theyre less likely to develop a respiratory illness from an infected dog, she says.
Likewise, if there are any cases of canine influenza where you live, she recommends having your dog vaccinated. In the rare event, your dog is infected with bird flu, there may be some cross immunity from another influenza vaccine, although I have no scientific data to support this, she says.
Stay informed about outbreaks using resources that are properly vetted and up-to-date. For finding reliable information online, Dr. Attas recommends visiting the webpage of a local veterinary society, emergency hospital, or veterinary school. You can also find information from the American Veterinary Medical Association.
If your dog shows signs of respiratory illness like coughing, decreased appetite, and mucous discharge, isolate them from other pets and contact your veterinarian. Sometimes influenza can mimic symptoms of another condition. For instance, coughing can be a sign of heart disease or heartworm disease, Dr. Attas explains.
In dogs that attend daycare regularly, coughing may be a sign of a respiratory infection. But, for a senior dog who doesnt have much contact with other dogs, coughing may point to something else besides influenza. In either case, if your dog isnt eating or feeling well, I recommend a veterinary exam and sometimes even a chest X-ray to make sure were not dealing with something more serious.
As with any type of influenza, the primary treatment for dogs is supportive care, she says. This includes giving your dog water, food, and antibiotics if they develop a secondary infection. Some dogs may need appetite stimulants or intravenous fluids if theyre not eating. In general, the best way to protect your dog is to keep them in good health, well-vaccinated, and dont allow them to be in contact with wild birds, domestic fowl, or dead birds, she says.
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. After three weeks of testing as required under a voluntary state monitoring program for bird flu in dairy cattle, animal health experts in Penn States College of Agricultural Sciences announced that the Universitys dairy herd has been certified as free of highly pathogenic avian influenza, or HPAI.
The Penn State dairy herd has achieved monitored herd status under the Pennsylvania Lactating Dairy Cow Health Monitoring Program, said extension veterinarian Ernest Hovingh, clinical professor of veterinary and biomedical sciences and director of Penn States Animal Diagnostic Laboratory. This means the herd has met all program requirements, including having multiple negative weekly test results for the HPAI virus.
Penn State announced in July that it would test its herd in response to an outbreak of avian flu that has affected dairy cattle in more than a dozen states since March. As of Aug. 22, the virus had not been found in Pennsylvania dairy herds, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture and state animal health authorities.
The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture has encouraged all dairy farms in the state to enroll in its voluntary monitoring program, which is aimed at providing critical data on the status of dairy herds in Pennsylvania and detecting HPAI as quickly as possible should it arrive in the commonwealth.
All the tested bulk-tank milk samples, representing Penn States entire milking herd, were analyzed by the Animal Diagnostic Lab at Penn State one of three labs in the state-funded Pennsylvania Animal Diagnostic Laboratory System using a highly accurate test, according to Mathias Martins, head of the labs virology and molecular diagnostics sections.
The real-time PCR test conducted to monitor HPAI in dairy is highly sensitive and specific, ensuring a high level of confidence in the laboratory results, Martins said. All samples tested were negative for HPAI over three consecutive weeks, confirming that the virus is not present in the Penn State dairy herd.
Research Professor and Attending Veterinarian Jacob Werner, who oversees the health and well-being of all Penn State livestock, said the Universitys cows have remained healthy, and no animals have been brought into the herd from other farms, which is thought to be a prime means of HPAI spread among herds. He pointed out that under the state monitoring program, weekly testing will continue, even though the risk of an introduced infection is extremely minimal.
Its a very simple process to take a sample and submit it to the lab, Werner said. And theres no charge for the testing, since thats covered by the USDAs National Animal Health Laboratory Network.
Hovingh and Werner noted that Penn State is on the leading edge of supporting state and national surveillance efforts by having its dairy cattle tested for avian flu.
By testing our herd, we hope to have set an example for others to participate in the Lactating Dairy Cow Health Monitoring Program, Hovingh said. Besides confirming our expectation that our herd is free of avian flu, one of our goals was to inspire dairy producers across the state to test their herds too, so Pennsylvania animal health authorities can document that the state is in fact HPAI-free, as well as detect any outbreak that might occur and nip it in the bud before it has a chance to spread.
At least 5,000 birds have died so far this summer at a network of wildlife refuges on the Oregon-California border, sparking fears of another large outbreak of disease and calls for more water releases in a region roiled by drought and water uncertainty made worse by climate change.
The deaths are likely caused by a rare combination of avian flu and botulism, said John Vradenburg, supervisory biologist at the refuge complex. Virus-caused avian was confirmed at one of the refuges in July, Vradenburg said. Avian flu has been on the rise in recent years, leading to die-offs in poultry and wild birds.
This page either does not exist or is currently unavailable.
From here you can either hit the "back" button on your browser to return to the previous page, or visit the ABCNews.com Home Page. You can also search for something on our site below.
STATUS CODE: 404
Every medical intervention comes with both benefits and risks. For vaccinations, the benefits greatly outweigh any potential hazards in most people.
The new COVID-19 vaccines based on mRNA technology are no exception. But one risk associated with themmyocarditis, especially for young menhas raised concerns among the public.
A new study published in JAMA has found that the risk associated with getting myocarditiswhich is inflammation of the heart muscle, often triggered by the immune system as it responds to an infectionshortly after getting the COVID-19 vaccine is lower than the risk that can come from getting the disease.
Read More: The Best Way to Treat Insomnia
Researchers led by Dr. Mahmoud Zureik, professor of epidemiology and public health at the University of Versailles, studied people ages 12 to 49 who had been hospitalized with myocarditis in France from Dec. 2020 to June 2022, when mass vaccination campaigns were taking place. They sorted people into three groups: people who developed myocarditis and were hospitalized within seven days of receiving an mRNA shot, those who were admitted to the hospital within 30 days of getting COVID-19 but had not had an mRNA vaccine in the prior seven days, or people who had myocarditis that was due to other causes. Everyone was followed for 18 months.
In that time period, people with vaccine-related myocarditis were half as likely to be readmitted to the hospital for myocarditis or heart-related events compared to those with infection-related myocarditis or people with myocarditis due to other causes.
The findings indicate that the risk of myocarditis linked to the mRNA vaccines is very, very low, says Zureik. And it's important to remember that the risk of COVID-19 to the heart "is not limited to myocarditis. There are other cardiovascular risks as well."
Read More: Long COVID Looks Different in Kids
The results are timely, as COVID-19 cases and emergency room visits continue to climb in the U.S.. The increases are due in part to new variants and waning immunity people have from their last vaccines, which targeted different versions of SARS-CoV-2. That's why the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently approved an updated version of the vaccine to recognize the currently circulating variants. But uptake of recent shots has been low.
The study did not delve into the reason why the vaccines are linkedhowever slightlyto myocarditis, or why the immune system's response to the vaccine seems to be different than that generated by a COVID-19 infection. Its possible that because people are aware of the potential myocarditis risk associated with the vaccine, people hospitalized for the condition after getting vaccinated could have milder cases, Zureik says.
More research is needed to better understand how the mRNA vaccines are interacting with the bodys immune system, but the findings provide some confidence that the shots do not seem to be associated with any substantially greater risk of heart inflammation, even months after immunization.
