Exposure of domestic swine to influenza A viruses in Ghana suggests unidirectional,reverse zoonotic transmission at the human–animal interface

Influenza A viruses (IAVs) have both zoonotic and anthroponotic potential and are of public and veterinary importance. Swine are intermediate hosts and ‘mixing vessels’ for generating reassortants, progenies of which may harbour pandemic propensity. Swine handlers are at the highest risk of becoming infected with IAVs from swine but there is little information on the ecology of IAVs at the human–animal interface in Africa. We analysed and characterized nasal and throat swabs from swine and farmers respectively, for IAVs using RT‐qPCR, from swine farms in the Ashanti region, Ghana. Sera were also analysed for IAVs antibodies and serotyped using ELISA and HI assays. IAV was detected in 1.4% (n = 17/1,200) and 2.0% (n = 2/99) of swine and farmers samples, respectively. Viral subtypes H3N2 and H1N1pdm09 were found in human samples. All virus‐positive swine samples were subtyped as H1N1pdm09 phylogenetically clustering closely with H1N1pdm09 that circulated among humans during the study period. Phenotypic markers that confer sensitivity to Oseltamivir were found. Serological prevalence of IAVs in swine and farmers by ELISA was 3.2% (n = 38/1,200) and 18.2% (n = 18/99), respectively. Human H1N1pdm09 and H3N2 antibodies were found in both swine and farmers sera. Indigenous swine influenza A viruses and/or antibodies were not detected in swine or farmers samples. Majority (98%, n = 147/150) of farmers reported of not wearing surgical mask and few (4%, n = 6) reported to wear gloves when working. Most (n = 74, 87.7%) farmers reported of working on the farm when experiencing influenza‐like illness. Poor husbandry and biosafety practices of farmers could facilitate virus transmission across the human–swine interface. Farmers should be educated on the importance of good farm practices to mitigate influenza transmission at the human–animal interface.     

Perceptions and attitudes of swine exhibitors towards recommendations for reducing zoonotic transmission of influenza A viruses

Since 2011, there have been 468 cases of variant influenza A virus (IAV) reported in the United States, many of which were associated with youth swine exhibition. In an effort to mitigate risk associated with exposure to IAV in swine, the “Measures to Minimize Influenza Transmission at Swine Exhibitions” (MtM) was developed for show organizers, volunteers and exhibitors. These recommendations are updated annually; however, it is not clear if youth swine exhibitors are aware of the recommendations; support the recommendations; and would be willing to practise recommended behaviours. Therefore, a cross‐sectional survey method was used to assess swine exhibitor perceptions and their adoption of swine production practices aimed at reducing the transmission of IAV at the human–animal interface. In addition, the survey asked participants their state of residence and the number of shows they would attend in 2017. In all, 155 participants who showed swine on a regular basis (x? = 11 shows per year), from at least 18 states within the US, completed the survey. At least, 67% of participants believed each statement was a good recommendation, with 6 of 11 recommendations being supported by >90% of participants. When asked if recommendations could be implemented, 65%–94% of respondents agreed, and 21%–89% of participants had already implemented each recommendation, respectively. Although significant efforts have been made to increase signage at swine exhibitions (warning of risks associated with eating/drinking in animal areas), a majority of respondents report eating/drinking in the barn and are unwilling to change their behaviours. This study provides evidence that developing and disseminating static recommendations to reduce zoonotic disease transmission is not enough to change human behaviour to prevent future variant IAV infections associated with swine exhibitions.     

Risk of zoonotic transmission of swine influenza at the human–pig interface in Guangdong Province,China

A cross‐sectional survey was conducted from 2015 to 2018 to assess the risk of zoonotic influenza to humans at the human–pig interface in Guangdong Province, south China. One hundred and fifty‐three pig farmers, 21 pig traders and 16 pig trade workers were recruited using convenience sampling and surveyed at local pig farms, live pig markets and slaughterhouses, respectively. Questionnaires were administered to collect information on the biosecurity and trading practices adopted and their knowledge and beliefs about swine influenza (SI). Most (12 of 16) trade workers said they would enter piggeries to collect pigs and only six of 11 said they were always asked to go through an on‐farm disinfection procedure before entry. Only 33.7% of the interviewees believed that SI could infect humans, although pig farmers were more likely to believe this than traders and trade workers (p < .01). Several unsafe practices were reported by interviewees. ‘Having vaccination against seasonal flu’ (OR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.19–8.93), ‘Believe that SI can cause death in pigs’ (no/yes: OR = 8.69, 95% CI: 2.71–36.57; not sure/yes: OR = 4.46, 95% CI: 1.63–14.63) and ‘Keep on working when getting mild flu symptoms’ (OR = 3.80, 95% CI: 1.38–11.46) were significantly and positively correlated to ‘lacking awareness of the zoonotic risk of SI’. ‘Lacking awareness of the zoonotic risk of SI’ (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.67–6.21), ‘Keep on working when getting mild flu symptoms’ (OR = 3.59, 95% CI: 1.57–8.63) and ‘Don't know SI as a pig disease’ (OR = 3.48, 95% CI: 1.02–16.45) were significantly and positively correlated to ‘not using personal protective equipment when contacting pigs’. The findings of this study would benefit risk mitigation against potential pandemic SI threats in the human–pig interface in China.     

2011年～2012年我国不同地区猪流感血清学监测

为了解猪流感病毒(SIV)在我国的流行情况,本研究对2011年～2012年从不同省市重点地区屠宰场、规模化猪场和个体养殖户采集猪血清样品13044份,以经典H1N1 (CS)、类禽H1N1 (EA)、甲型H1N1(pdm/09)、H3N2、H5N1、H9N2亚型SIV抗原并采用血凝抑制(HI)方法检测.结果显示,2011年～2012年我国猪血清中类禽H1N1亚型SIV抗体平均阳性率比其他亚型高,分别为42.24％和45.89％,2011年甲型H1N1亚型SIV血清抗体平均滴度(GMT)比其他亚型高,GMT为53.32,2012年经典H1N1 GMT比其他亚型高,GMT为73.2.结果表明2011年～2012年我国猪群中H1N1亚型SIV感染较为普遍.     

禽流感病毒和猪流感病毒——人兽共患病危险的新认识(续完)

上期回顾:上期介绍了禽流感病毒、猪流感病毒和人流感病毒各自的特点,流感病毒在其天然宿主中的致病机理。     

Avian and swine influenza viruses: our current understanding of the zoonotic risk

The introduction of swine or avian influenza (AI) viruses in the human population can set the stage for a pandemic, and many fear that the Asian H5N1 AI virus will become the next pandemic virus. This article first compares the pathogenesis of avian, swine and human influenza viruses in their natural hosts. The major aim was to evaluate the zoonotic potential of swine and avian viruses, and the possible role of pigs in the transmission of AI viruses to humans. Cross-species transfers of swine and avian influenza to humans have been documented on several occasions, but all these viruses lacked the critical capacity to spread from human-to-human. The extreme virulence of H5N1 in humans has been associated with excessive virus replication in the lungs and a prolonged overproduction of cytokines by the host, but there remain many questions about the exact viral cell and tissue tropism. Though pigs are susceptible to several AI subtypes, including H5N1, there is clearly a serious barrier to infection of pigs with such viruses. AI viruses frequently undergo reassortment in pigs, but there is no proof for a role of pigs in the generation of the 1957 or 1968 pandemic reassortants, or in the transmission of H5N1 or other wholly avian viruses to humans. The major conclusion is that cross-species transmission of influenza viruses per se is insufficient to start a human influenza pandemic and that animal influenza viruses must undergo dramatic but largely unknown genetic changes to become established in the human population.     

Control measures to African swine fever outbreak: active response in South Korea,preparation for the future,and cooperation

African swine fever (ASF) is one of the most complex infectious swine diseases and the greatest concern to the pig industry owing to its high mortality and no effective vaccines available to prevent the disease. Since the first outbreak of ASF in pig farms, ASF has been identified in 14 pig farms in four cities/counties in South Korea. The outbreak was resolved in a short period because of the immediate control measures and cooperative efforts. This paper reviews the ASF outbreak and the experience of successfully stopping ASF in pig farms in South Korea through active responses to prevent the spread of ASF. In addition, suitable changes to build a sustainable pig production system and collaborative efforts to overcome the dangerous animal disease, such as ASF, are discussed.     

猪H3N2亚型流感病毒受体亲和性鉴定

利用固相酶联方法对分离自吉林省猪群中的3株H3N2亚型流感病毒进行了受体亲和性鉴定.结果显示,这3株病毒与SAα2,3和SAα2,6受体都能结合,并且偏嗜SAα2,6受体,暗示它们具有感染人的潜能.因此应该加强猪流感的流行病学调查,及时发现那些具有引发人流感流行潜能的病毒,为防控人间流感提前做好准备.     

Despite high‐risk exposures,no evidence of zoonotic transmission during a canine outbreak of leptospirosis

Leptospirosis is a bacterial zoonosis that affects many mammals, including humans and dogs; dogs can transmit the bacteria to humans, but the frequency of transmission and highest risk exposures are poorly understood. During 2016–2017, the Maricopa County Department of Public Health, Arizona Department of Health Services and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention investigated the zoonotic potential of a canine leptospirosis outbreak in the Phoenix metro area. We identified symptomatic persons exposed to canine leptospirosis cases by conducting active and passive surveillance. We tested dog owners (n = 9) and animal care providers (n = 109) for serological evidence of Leptospira spp. infection (via the microscopic agglutination test [MAT]) and interviewed these persons about their specific exposures to canine cases and general exposures to canine blood and urine. Through surveillance, seven symptomatic persons were identified; six were tested and all were negative by MAT, and of these six, four persons were negative by PCR (two did not have PCR testing). All serosurvey participants (n = 118) were also seronegative. Among animal care providers, bare skin contact with urine/blood from a canine case was reported by 23.2%; two persons reported dog urine splashing in their face. Veterinary technicians were more likely to have bare skin contact with blood from a canine case compared to veterinarians and boarding facility staff (p < 0.001). Infection control practices were inconsistent; when working with specimens from a canine leptospirosis case, 44.6% of participants reported always wearing gloves when working with urine (i.e., collecting specimens), and 54.5% always wore gloves when working with blood. Veterinary technicians were also most likely to engage in all activities involving potential urine/blood contact, such as conducting laboratory tests (p < 0.01). We therefore recommend that veterinary technicians specifically receive targeted education about infection control practices. Our results suggest that dog‐to‐human transmission of leptospirosis is uncommon.     

Antibody prevalence of low-pathogenicity avian influenza and evaluation of management practices in Minnesota backyard poultry flocks

Low‐pathogenicity avian influenza (LPAI) viruses have caused illness in poultry and humans with poultry contact. To determine whether there is evidence of exposure to avian influenza viruses (AIV) among backyard poultry in Minnesota and their human caretakers, 150 flocks of backyard birds were sampled for antibodies to AIV from August 2007 through December 2008. One hundred flocks were tested through routine slaughter surveillance by the Minnesota Board of Animal Health and an additional 50 flocks were contacted and sampled by study investigators. Blood was collected from 10 to 13 birds from each flock and a survey of biosecurity and management practices was administered to the flock owner. Blood samples were tested by agar gel immunodiffusion (AGID) for influenza A antibodies. Tested flocks had a median flock size of 100 birds (range: 12–800 birds), and were most commonly owned for meat for personal use (81% of respondents), fun or hobby (58%) and eggs for personal use (56%). Although 7% of flock owners reported that their birds had shown respiratory signs in the previous 3 months, only 1 of 150 flocks tested positive for influenza by AGID. Antibodies to LPAI H6N1 were detected in the positive flock. The owner of the positive flock did not have antibodies to H6 or other common AIV. Based on the findings of this study, the risk of transmission of LPAI viruses from backyard poultry to owners in Minnesota appears to be low under current conditions and management practices.     

2009年我国部分猪群输血传播病毒感染情况调查

为调查输血传播病毒(TTV)在我国猪群中的感染状况,本研究对2009年采自29个省市的1990份猪血清样品进行了TTV1、TTV2的双重PCR方法检测,并对结果进行了统计分析.结果表明,我国猪群中TTV总的感染率为63.37％(1261/1990),其中TTV1感染率为55.88％(1112/1990),TTV2为32.91％ (655/1990),TTV1和TTV2双重感染率为25.43％(506/1990).进而对样品的地区性分布特征、样品来源等影响因素进行分析,表明我国猪群中TTV感染率以东北地区最高,西北地区最低.样品来源不是影响感染率的关键因素.     

Spatial clustering of swine influenza in Ontario on the basis of herd-level disease status with different misclassification errors

This approach maximizes sensitivity of serology-based monitoring systems by considering spatial clustering of herds classified as false positive by herd testing, allowing outbreaks to be detected in an early phase. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether swine herds infected with influenza viruses cluster in space, and if so, where they cluster. The secondary objective was to investigate the combining of a multivariate spatial scan statistic with herd test results to maximize the sensitivity of the surveillance system for swine influenza. We tested for spatial clustering of swine influenza using the Cuzick–Edwards test as a global test. The location of the most likely spatial clusters of cases for each subtype and strain in a sample of 65 sow and 72 finisher herds in 2001 (Ontario, Canada), and 76 sow herds in 2003 (Ontario, Canada) was determined by a spatial scan statistic in a purely spatial Bernoulli model based on single and multiple datasets.

A case herd was defined by true herd-disease status for sow or finisher herds tested for H1N1, and by apparent herd-disease status for sow herds tested for two H3N2 strains (A/Swine/Colorado/1/77 (Sw/Col/77) and A/Swine/Texas/4199-2/98 (Sw/Tex/98)). In sow herds, there was no statistically significant clustering of H1N1 influenza after adjustment for pig-farm density. Similarly, spatial clustering was not found in finisher herds. In contrast, clustering of H3N2 Sw/Col/77 (prevalence ratio = 12.5) and H3N2 Sw/Tex/98 (prevalence ratio = 15) was identified in an area close to a region with documented isolation of avian influenza isolates from pigs.

For the H1N1 subtype tested by ELISA, we used an approach that minimized overall misclassification at the herd level. This could be more applicable for detecting clusters of positive farms when herd prevalence is moderate to high than when herd prevalence is low. For the H3N2 strains we used an approach that maximized herd-level sensitivity by minimizing the herd cut-off. This is useful in situations where prevalence of the pathogen is low. The results of applying a multivariate spatial scan statistic approach, led us to generate the hypothesis that an unknown variant of influenza of avian origin was circulating in swine herds close to an area where avian strains had previously been isolated from swine. Maximizing herd sensitivity and linking it with the spatial information can be of use for monitoring of pathogens that exhibit the potential for rapid antigenic change, which, consequently, might then lead to diminished cross-reactivity of routinely used assays and lower test sensitivity for the newly emerged variants. Veterinary authorities might incorporate this approach into animal disease surveillance programs that either substantiate freedom from disease, or are aimed at detecting early incursion of a pathogen, such as influenza virus, or both.     

Prevalence of and risk factors for influenza in southern Ontario swine herds in 2001 and 2003

This research included 2 prevalence studies and a risk-factor investigation conducted in 2001 at 93 sites with sows only, finishers only, or both. In 2001, 1300 serum samples from sows in 65 herds and 720 serum samples from finisher pigs in 72 herds were tested for antibodies to swine influenzavirus (SIV) of H1N1 subtype with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). In 2003, 1140 serum samples from sows in 76 herds were tested for antibodies to SIV of H3N2 subtype with a hemagglutination-inhibition assay based on A/Swine/Colorado/1/77 and A/Swine/Texas/4199-2/98 isolates. The apparent pig-level H1N1 seroprevalence in 2001 was 61.1% and 24.3% in sows and finishers, respectively. The apparent pig-level seroprevalence in 2003 for H3N2 A/Sw/CO/1/77 and A/Sw/TX/4199-2/98 in sows was 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively. The factors associated with sow-herd H1N1 positivity included pig or farm density at different geographic levels, an external source of breeding pigs, number of animals on site, and decreasing proximity to other barns. Higher-parity sows had higher odds of seropositivity, but there was significant random variability in this association among herds. The odds of finisher-herd SIV positivity were higher with large herd size, high pig farm density, and farrow-to-finish type of farm. Finisher herds were SIV-positive only if source sow herds were positive. Simultaneously, 45% of finisher herds were SIV-negative although sow source herds were positive.     

Characterization of Minnesota dairy herds participating in a Johne's disease control program and evaluation of the program risk assessment tool

The objectives of this study were to: (1) characterize Minnesota dairy herds participating in a Johne's disease control program (JDCP) based on herd size, milk production, and clinical Johne's disease (JD) history, (2) evaluate if change in farm management practices, expressed in risk assessment (RA) total score, is associated with the change between the first and most recent ELISA test herd seroprevalence or change in clinical JD culling rate, and (3) identify farm factors associated with ELISA seroprevalence. A total of 1234 RA, performed between January 2000 and February 2004, were available for analysis from 714 dairy herds. ELISA test results from herd sampling between 2000 and 2004 were obtained from the Minnesota board of animal health (MBAH) database, and were available for 474 herds. Both the first and the most recent ELISA test results for herds with more than one RA were available for 262 herds. Mean herd size and mean annual milk production per cow was higher in JDCP dairy herds (161 milking cows) than either all Minnesota dairy herds or Minnesota dairy herd improvement association (DHIA) herds. For herds with more than one RA available, the most recent RA total score was significantly lower (mean 11% less) than the first. The change in RA total score (and any RA subtotal scores) between the first and most recent RA was not associated with the change between the first and the most recent ELISA within-herd seroprevalence or the change in JD culling rate between the first and most recent RA. The most recent ELISA test results were positively associated with postweaned heifer score and JD culling rate. The RA score was not found to be an effective tool for the prediction of ELISA seroprevalence.     

规模猪场防控非洲猪瘟的生物安全措施

猪场的生物安全措施对该场的疫病预防和控制起到了非常重要的作用。文章介绍了在非洲猪瘟背景下,猪场需要在人员生物安全意识、猪群健康、猪场入口处、猪场出口处、猪场车辆管理等方面需要采取的一系列生物安全措施。供大家参考,以期提升猪场的生物安全管理水平,提高猪场疫病预防控制能力。     

Review of Influenza A Virus in Swine Worldwide: A Call for Increased Surveillance and Research

Pigs and humans have shared influenza A viruses (IAV) since at least 1918, and many interspecies transmission events have been documented since that time. However, despite this interplay, relatively little is known regarding IAV circulating in swine around the world compared with the avian and human knowledge base. This gap in knowledge impedes our understanding of how viruses adapted to swine or man impacts the ecology and evolution of IAV as a whole and the true impact of swine IAV on human health. The pandemic H1N1 that emerged in 2009 underscored the need for greater surveillance and sharing of data on IAV in swine. In this paper, we review the current state of IAV in swine around the world, highlight the collaboration between international organizations and a network of laboratories engaged in human and animal IAV surveillance and research, and emphasize the need to increase information in high‐priority regions. The need for global integration and rapid sharing of data and resources to fight IAV in swine and other animal species is apparent, but this effort requires grassroots support from governments, practicing veterinarians and the swine industry and, ultimately, requires significant increases in funding and infrastructure.     

Surveillance of swine influenza viruses in sentinel familial farms in Hung Yen province in Northern Vietnam in 2013–2014

From May 2013 to April 2014, 15 swine family‐run farms (17 pig litters) in two districts in Hung Yen province, near Hanoi, were virologically and epizootiologically monitored for swine influenza viruses (SIV) monthly. No SIV was isolated from nasal swabs. Maternal antibodies were detected in 10 litters, and seroconversion against SIV was detected in six litters. There was a marked difference in patterns of SIV transmission in the two districts. Van Lam district which has low density of swine with mainly smallholder farms had low intensity of SIV, with much of the infection caused by H1N1 2009 pandemic‐like viruses A(H1N1)pdm09, likely originated from humans. In contrast, Van Giang district, which has high swine density and larger farms, had high levels of typical SIV (triple reassortants H3N2 and H3N2 Binh Duong lineage viruses) circulating within swine. With one exception, the SIV lineages detected were those we concurrently isolated from studies in a large central abattoir in Hanoi. Influenza‐like illness symptoms reported by farmers were poorly correlated with serological evidence of SIV infection.     

Review of African swine fever outbreaks history in South Africa: From 1926 to 2018

The article reviews the outbreaks and distribution of African swine fever (ASF) in South Africa since the first probable outbreak that occurred in the Koedoesrand Ward in 1926. Retrospective data on the ASF outbreaks in South Africa were obtained from the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) disease database and the South African veterinary services annual reports in addition to published articles and online sources. South Africa has experienced many outbreaks that can be divided into 2 time periods: the period before the development of the OIE diseases database (1993) and the period after. More than 141 outbreaks of ASF were reported during the first period. Since the development of OIE disease database, 72 outbreaks directly involving 2968 cases, 2187 dead and 2358 killed pigs mainly in smallholder pig farms were reported. The median number of cases for a given ASF outbreak is 17, but in 50% of outbreaks no pigs were killed for prevention. The most important ASF outbreak was reported in April 2014 in the Greater Zeerust district (North West province) involving 326 cases and 1462 killed pigs. However, the outbreak with highest mortality involving 250 pigs was reported in 2016 (Free State province). According to phylogenetic analysis, nine p72 genotypes (I, III, IV, VII, VIII, XIX, XX, XXI and XXII) have been identified in South Africa. Season-wise, more outbreaks were recorded during summer. It was also observed that the OIE disease database could contain errors that would have been introduced through compiled forms at country level. Spatiotemporal studies on ASF outbreaks in South Africa are therefore required in order to assess statistically and quantitatively the clustering of outbreaks over space and time.     

Carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in small animal veterinarians: indirect evidence of zoonotic transmission

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus pseudintermedius (MRSP) is increasingly reported in small animals and cases of human infections have already been described despite its recent emergence in veterinary practice. We investigated the prevalence of MRSP and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) among small animal dermatologists attending a national veterinary conference in Italy. Nasal swabs were obtained from 128 veterinarians, seven of which harboured MRSP (n = 5; 3.9%) or MRSA (n = 2; 1.6%). A follow-up study of two carriers revealed that MRSP persisted for at least 1 month in the nasal cavity. Methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) was isolated from 32 (25%) conference participants, whereas methicillin-susceptible S. pseudintermedius (MSSP) was not detected, suggesting that MRSP may have a particular ability to colonize humans compared to MSSP. All isolates were characterized by spa typing. Methicillin-resistant isolates were further typed by antimicrobial susceptibility testing, SCCmec and multi-locus sequence typing. Two lineages previously associated with pets were identified among the five MRSP isolates; the European epidemic clone ST71-SCCmec II-III and ST106-SCCmec IV. One of the two MRSA isolates displayed a genotype (ST22- SCCmecIV) frequently reported in dogs and cats. MRSP isolates were resistant to more antimicrobial agents compared with MRSA isolates and displayed the typical multidrug resistance patterns of MRSP in pets. The 32 MSSA isolates belonged to 20 spa types and the most frequent types (t12, t15 and t166) were associated with common S. aureus lineages in humans (CC30 and CC45). Although low, the 3.9% MRSP carriage rate found among small animal dermatologists was surprising in consideration of the rare occurrence of S. pseudintermedius in humans, the lack of MSSP detection and the recent appearance of MRSP in Europe. As cases of human MRSP infection have been linked with pets, veterinarians should be aware of this zoonotic risk and proper preventative measures should be taken to avoid MRSP transmission from animal patients.