How well prepared are our vaccines if bird flu starts spreading between humans?

Publicly released:
International
Photo by Mufid Majnun on Unsplash
Photo by Mufid Majnun on Unsplash

The vaccines we have for bird flu are our best shot at staying safe if a strain of the virus starts spreading between humans, according to an international review. As human cases of avian influenza pop up sporadically around the world, the researchers reviewed existing studies on vaccines for the most concerning strains of the virus to examine how safe and effective what we already have is. Looking at studies in both humans and animals, the researchers say current inactivated vaccines are a safe and affordable option we have, and live attenuated influenza vaccines may be even more effective but require more research into their safety. Other, newer types of vaccines in development including mRNA vaccines and virus-like particle vaccines are showing promise, they add. The researchers say vaccination is our best defence if bird flu becomes a bigger threat, so it is important to keep investigating a diverse range of vaccine options.

Media release

From: Taylor and Francis Group

Bird Flu: Diverse Range of Vaccines Platforms “Crucial” for Enhancing Human Pandemic Preparedness

Peer-reviewed / Literature Review

New Study Launches Following the Discovery of a Second Case of Avian Influenza Spreading from Cows to Humans

Vaccination remains the most effective strategy for avian influenza prevention and control in humans, despite varying vaccine efficacy across strains.

That’s according to the authors of a new review which delves into existing research into bird flu vaccines for humans.

Published in the peer-reviewed journal Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, the results of the paper are particularly timely following news last week (Wednesday 22nd May) that the bird flu strain H5N1 had once again, for a second time, jumped from cattle in America to a human – prompting fears of subsequent human-to-human infection, with possible critical consequences.

Instances of the avian influenza were first recognized in US cattle in March. Since then, this strain has mainly spread from cow-to-cow and scientists have discovered very high levels of virus in raw milk (pasteurized milk is safe, having shown viral RNA but not infectious virus). To-date two people, however, are known to have contracted the bird flu virus. Both patients – US farmers – only reported eye symptoms and with treatment they made a full recovery.

Following tests on the first human instance, it was seen that the strain had mutated to be better adapted to mammalian cells, but as long as that human didn’t pass it onto another person it likely stopped the spread at that point.  
With the second case, the CDC has released a statement to say it has been monitoring influenza surveillance systems intently, especially in impacted states. “There has been no sign of unusual influenza activity in people, including in syndromic surveillance,” they report.

The concern now, though, is that if H5N1 continues to be given the environment in which to mutate (such as in close quarter cattle farms) – and this continues long enough – it has the potential to find a combination that will easily spread to humans.

The results of this new research, carried out by a team at the University of Georgia, USA, suggests vaccines still remain our “primary defense” against potential spread of avian influenzas such as the H5N1 and others assessed.

“The H5N1, H7N9, and H9N2 subtypes of avian influenza virus pose a dual threat, not only causing significant economic losses to the global poultry industry but also presenting a pressing public health concern due to documented spillover events and human cases,” explains lead author Flavio Cargnin Faccin, who alongside his mentor Dr. Daniel Perez of the University of Georgia, USA, analyzed the current landscape of research into human vaccines for these bird flus.

“This deep delve into the landscape of avian influenza vaccines for humans shows vaccination remains the primary defense against the spread of these viruses.”

The team examined studies of vaccines tested in mice, ferrets, non-human primates, and clinical trials of bird flu vaccines in humans, and assessed both established platforms and promising new directions.

The review carried out suggests inactivated vaccines are a safe and affordable option that primarily activate humoral immunity – the part of our immune system that produces antibodies.
 
Live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs) are known to induce a wider immune response than inactivated vaccines, activating not only antibody production but also mucosal and cellular defenses. In this review, the authors suggest this broader response may offer greater protection, though, the authors suggest further research is needed to fully understand and harness its potential benefits for both human and agricultural applications.

The review also examined alternatives, such as virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines and messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines, that have emerged more recently. Although VLP vaccines for bird flu have limited clinical trial data in humans, results from studies in mice and ferrets showed promise, the authors found. mRNA vaccines against H5N1 and H7N9 bird flu subtypes also generated a rapid and strong immune response in mice and ferrets, and, while data in humans is scarce, results from a phase 1 study of an H7N9 mRNA vaccine in healthy humans were “encouraging”.

Overall, the team suggests “exploring and employing a diverse range of vaccine platforms”, will be “crucial for enhancing pandemic preparedness and mitigating the threat of avian influenza viruses”.

Attachments

Note: Not all attachments are visible to the general public. Research URLs will go live after the embargo ends.

Research Taylor and Francis Group, Web page The URL will go live after the embargo ends
Journal/
conference:
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
Research:Paper
Organisation/s: University of Georgia, USA
Funder: Funding for this work includes grants, contracts, and subawards to D.R.P. including National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Grant award numbers 2020-67015-31539 and 2021-67015-33406, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant award number R21AI146448 and R01AI154894, Contract number 75N93021C00014 and Options 15A, 15B and 17A. Additional funds were provided to D.R.P. by the Georgia Research Alliance and the Caswell S Eidson Chair in Poultry Medicine endowment funds.
Media Contact/s
Contact details are only visible to registered journalists.