Kin On Kwok1,2,3, Steven Riley4, Ranawaka A P M Perera3, Vivian W I Wei3, Peng Wu3, Lan Wei3, Daniel K W Chu3, Ian G Barr5,6, J S Malik Peiris3, Benjamin J Cowling3. 1. JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China. 2. Tanley Ho Centre for Emerging Infectious Diseases, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China. 3. WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China. 4. MRC Centre for Outbreak Analysis and Modelling, Department for Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK. s.riley@imperial.ac.uk. 5. WHO Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 6. Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Two subtypes of influenza A currently circulate in humans: seasonal H3N2 (sH3N2, emerged in 1968) and pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1, emerged in 2009). While the epidemiological characteristics of the initial wave of pH1N1 have been studied in detail, less is known about its infection dynamics during subsequent waves or its severity relative to sH3N2. Even prior to 2009, few data was available to estimate the risk of severe outcomes following infection with one circulating influenza strain relative to another. METHODS: We analyzed antibodies in quadruples of sera from individuals in Hong Kong collected between July 2009 and December 2011, a period that included three distinct influenza virus epidemics. We estimated infection incidence using these assay data and then estimated rates of severe outcomes per infection using population-wide clinical data. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence of infection was high among children in the first epidemic of pH1N1. There was a change towards the older age group in the age distribution of infections for pH1N1 from the first to the second epidemic, with the age distribution of the second epidemic of pH1N1 more similar to that of sH3N2. We found no serological evidence that individuals were infected in both waves of pH1N1. The risks of excess mortality conditional on infection were higher for sH3N2 than for pH1N1, with age-standardized risk ratios of 2.6 [95% CI: 1.8, 3.7] for all causes and 1.5 [95% CI: 1.0, 2.1] for respiratory causes throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Overall increase in clinical incidence of pH1N1 and higher rates of severity in older adults in post pandemic waves were in line with an age-shift in infection towards the older age groups. The absence of repeated infection is good evidence that waning immunity did not cause the second wave. Despite circulating in humans since 1968, sH3N2 is substantially more severe per infection than the pH1N1 strain. Infection-based estimates of individual-level severity have a role in assessing emerging strains; updating seasonal vaccine components; and optimizing of vaccination programs.
BACKGROUND: Two subtypes of influenza A currently circulate in humans: seasonal H3N2 (sH3N2, emerged in 1968) and pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1, emerged in 2009). While the epidemiological characteristics of the initial wave of pH1N1 have been studied in detail, less is known about its infection dynamics during subsequent waves or its severity relative to sH3N2. Even prior to 2009, few data was available to estimate the risk of severe outcomes following infection with one circulating influenza strain relative to another. METHODS: We analyzed antibodies in quadruples of sera from individuals in Hong Kong collected between July 2009 and December 2011, a period that included three distinct influenza virus epidemics. We estimated infection incidence using these assay data and then estimated rates of severe outcomes per infection using population-wide clinical data. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence of infection was high among children in the first epidemic of pH1N1. There was a change towards the older age group in the age distribution of infections for pH1N1 from the first to the second epidemic, with the age distribution of the second epidemic of pH1N1 more similar to that of sH3N2. We found no serological evidence that individuals were infected in both waves of pH1N1. The risks of excess mortality conditional on infection were higher for sH3N2 than for pH1N1, with age-standardized risk ratios of 2.6 [95% CI: 1.8, 3.7] for all causes and 1.5 [95% CI: 1.0, 2.1] for respiratory causes throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Overall increase in clinical incidence of pH1N1 and higher rates of severity in older adults in post pandemic waves were in line with an age-shift in infection towards the older age groups. The absence of repeated infection is good evidence that waning immunity did not cause the second wave. Despite circulating in humans since 1968, sH3N2 is substantially more severe per infection than the pH1N1 strain. Infection-based estimates of individual-level severity have a role in assessing emerging strains; updating seasonal vaccine components; and optimizing of vaccination programs.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cohort; Influenza; Seroepidemiology; Severe outcomes; Severity
Authors: J Ellis; M Galiano; R Pebody; A Lackenby; C Thompson; A Bermingham; E McLean; H Zhao; S Bolotin; O Dar; J M Watson; M Zambon Journal: Euro Surveill Date: 2011-01-06
Authors: Nathanael Lapidus; Xavier de Lamballerie; Nicolas Salez; Michel Setbon; Pascal Ferrari; Rosemary M Delabre; Marie-Lise Gougeon; Frédéric Vely; Marianne Leruez-Ville; Laurent Andreoletti; Simon Cauchemez; Pierre-Yves Boëlle; Eric Vivier; Laurent Abel; Michaël Schwarzinger; Michèle Legeas; Pierre Le Cann; Antoine Flahault; Fabrice Carrat Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Lone Simonsen; Peter Spreeuwenberg; Roger Lustig; Robert J Taylor; Douglas M Fleming; Madelon Kroneman; Maria D Van Kerkhove; Anthony W Mounts; W John Paget Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Peng Wu; Edward Goldstein; Lai-Ming Ho; Joseph T Wu; Thomas Tsang; Gabriel M Leung; Benjamin J Cowling Journal: Influenza Other Respir Viruses Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Vivian W I Wei; Jessica Y T Wong; Ranawaka A P M Perera; Kin On Kwok; Vicky J Fang; Ian G Barr; J S Malik Peiris; Steven Riley; Benjamin J Cowling Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-05-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Emma Rey-Jurado; Felipe Tapia; Natalia Muñoz-Durango; Margarita K Lay; Leandro J Carreño; Claudia A Riedel; Susan M Bueno; Yvonne Genzel; Alexis M Kalergis Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-01-18 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Robert Verity; Lucy C Okell; Ilaria Dorigatti; Peter Winskill; Charles Whittaker; Natsuko Imai; Gina Cuomo-Dannenburg; Hayley Thompson; Patrick G T Walker; Han Fu; Amy Dighe; Jamie T Griffin; Marc Baguelin; Sangeeta Bhatia; Adhiratha Boonyasiri; Anne Cori; Zulma Cucunubá; Rich FitzJohn; Katy Gaythorpe; Will Green; Arran Hamlet; Wes Hinsley; Daniel Laydon; Gemma Nedjati-Gilani; Steven Riley; Sabine van Elsland; Erik Volz; Haowei Wang; Yuanrong Wang; Xiaoyue Xi; Christl A Donnelly; Azra C Ghani; Neil M Ferguson Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 25.071
Authors: Tara M Babu; Ranawaka A P M Perera; Joseph T Wu; Theresa Fitzgerald; Carolyn Nolan; Benjamin J Cowling; Scott Krauss; John J Treanor; Malik Peiris Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2018-08-24 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: James A Hay; Amanda Minter; Kylie E C Ainslie; Justin Lessler; Bingyi Yang; Derek A T Cummings; Adam J Kucharski; Steven Riley Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2020-05-04 Impact factor: 4.779