Virus-induced pathogenesis,vaccine development,and diagnosis of novel H7N9 avian influenza A virus in humans: a systemic literature review

Abstract

H7N9 avian influenza virus (AIV) caused human infections in 2013 in China. Phylogenetic analyses indicate that H7N9 AIV is a novel reassortant strain with pandemic potential. We conducted a systemic review regarding virus-induced pathogenesis, vaccine development, and diagnosis of H7N9 AIV infection in humans. We followed PRISMA guidelines and searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles published between January 2013 and December 2018. Pathogenesis data indicated that H7N9 AIV belongs to low pathogenic avian influenza, which is mostly asymptomatic in avian species; however, H7N9 induces high mortality in humans. Sporadic human infections have recently been reported, caused by highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses detected in poultry. H7N9 AIVs resistant to adamantine and oseltamivir cause severe human infection by rapidly inducing progressive acute community-acquired pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, and cytokine dysregulation; however, mechanisms via which the virus induces severe syndromes remain unclear. An H7N9 AIV vaccine is lacking; designs under evaluation include synthesized peptide, baculovirus-insect system, and virus-like particle vaccines. Molecular diagnosis of H7N9 AIVs is suggested over conventional assays, for biosafety reasons. Several advanced or modified diagnostic assays are under investigation and development. We summarized virus-induced pathogenesis, vaccine development, and current diagnostic assays in H7N9 AIVs.

Keywords

H7N9 reassortment pathogenesis vaccine review

Introduction

Influenza A is an enveloped virus belonging to the family Orthomyxoviridae that comprises a negative-sense segmented RNA genome. Influenza viruses are extremely variable owing to a lack of proofreading during genome replication; therefore, mutations are continuously accumulated.^1–3 Antigenic drift and antigenic shift are ongoing processes that result in the existence of a large amount of influenza viruses whose natural reservoirs include wild waterfowl and shorebirds.⁴ Reports indicate minimal evolution and apparent signs of disease in almost all natural reservoirs, but the occurrence of accumulated mutations in the genome or in certain fragments might benefit cross-species transmission.^4–7 Influenza A viruses have the capacity to evolve rapidly and cause epidemics or even pandemics in domestic poultry, lower mammals, and humans. Avian influenza virus (AIV) transmission has been reported in several countries, with sporadic human infections owing to transfer of the virus from wild birds (e.g., migrating or wild aquatic birds) to domestic poultry.^6,8 The first reported AIV infection in humans was caused by H5N1 virus and occurred in Hong Kong in 1997.^6,9 Subsequently, AIVs have been continuously monitored and surveyed. Increasingly more new subtypes of AIVs have emerged in recent decades.⁶

In February of 2013, a new atypical influenza virus, H7N9, was first reported in an 87-year-old male in Shanghai, China and the case was confirmed by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention on 29 March 2013.^10–12 H7N9 is an emerging avian influenza A virus owing to genetic reassortment.¹³ This virus was first identified as having low pathogenicity and was associated with asymptomatic or mild disease in poultry, causing sporadic human infections.^12,14–17 A clinical survey of human infections with H7N9 viruses revealed characteristics of upper and lower respiratory tract illnesses that varied from mild to moderate (conjunctivitis or uncomplicated influenza-like illness) and could result in hospitalization.^18–20 These novel H7N9 AIVs were reported to have gradually developed into highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) viruses,^21,22 indicating multiple increased polybasic amino acids at the hemagglutinin (HA) cleavage site (PEVPKRKRTAR/GL).²² High mortality rates of about 50% are reported in human cases.^18,22 Phylogenetic analysis of HA sequences in H7N9 isolates indicates that two major lineages of H7N9 have been established, including the Yangtze River Delta lineage and the Pearl River Delta lineage.²³ Reports indicate that the Yangtze River Delta lineage is broadly dispersed and was the original source of the H7N9 outbreaks in humans.^23,24 China is currently facing its sixth epidemic of H7N9 human infection since 2018, and there has been a total of 1566 laboratory-confirmed human cases reported since 2013.²⁵ The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that three subtypes of AIVs are currently known to cause human infection, namely, H5, H7, and H9.²⁶ Among them, H5N1 and H7N9 have caused the most human infections.²⁷ This implies a challenge for global public health services in controlling emerging influenza viruses, even though the number of human infections with the H7N9 influenza virus has gradually decreased with treatment.²⁸ At present, there is no prophylactic vaccine against H7N9 AIV infection licensed for use in humans. The vaccine candidates currently under investigation include HA/NA peptide, plasmid-based, baculovirus-insect and mammalian protein expression system, and virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines.^29–35 Some developed candidate vaccines are moving on to clinical trials. In addition, accurate and prompt diagnostic methods that have high sensitivity and specificity are essential for H7N9 influenza disease control and prevention. Several modified, advanced, conventional, and molecular diagnostic assays have been developed to enhance the capability of detecting H7N9 antigen or antibody.^36–40 In this study, we conducted a systemic literature review of the emergent H7N9 AIVs in China, mainly focusing on pathogenesis, vaccine development, and diagnosis of human infection.

Methods

Literature retrieval and inclusion criteria

In this review, we summarized the latest information the pathogenesis of H7N9 influenza virus in humans, vaccine development, and current laboratory assays for the diagnosis of infection with H7N9 AIV. This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines, using systematic methods to identify and select eligible articles from PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. We used search strings containing a combination of terms including H7N9 influenza virus, diagnosis, vaccine, and pathogenesis. The systemic search covered publication dates between January 2013 and December 2018. Search results were limited to articles published in English language. Articles related to pharmacodynamics, clinical trials, and meta‐analyses were excluded. Full‐text articles were reviewed to assess their relevance and quality of the methodology. Articles with the following were excluded: insufficiently detailed materials and methods; small sample size (n ≤ 20); irrelevant or insufficient information related to the review objectives; articles reporting H7N9 influenza and other microbes as a combined outcome, use of bioinformatics or mathematical models; and no quantitative data could be retrieved. We also searched gray literature such as WHO websites and announcements, and local ministries of health and centers for disease control and prevention. A flow chart of the systemic literature search and article selection is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Flow chart of criteria and selection guidelines for literature included in this systemic review

Literature analysis

Two independent reviewers assessed the level of data quality in the selected articles. Disagreements were resolved by joint discussion and consensus

Ethics statement

In this study, we conducted a literature review regarding the current status of avian H7N9 influenza virus. Human clinical trials, case reports, and studies correlated to human ethical issues were excluded from this review. Ethics approval and informed consent were not required for this study.

Results

Pathogenesis of H7N9 influenza infection

Emergence of a novel H7N9 virus in China

H7N9 AIV first appeared in China in 2013 as a new atypical strain arising as a result of either mutations or genetic reassortment of whole genome segments, including neuraminidase (NA) genes from wild birds in Korea, HA genes from duck H7 viruses, and internal genes derived from two distinct lineages of H9N2 viruses.^41,42 More specifically, the new H7N9 virus is derived from multiple and sequential reassortment among HxN9, H7N3, and H9N2 viruses where the H7 and N9 subtypes are from H7N3 and HxN9 AIVs, respectively, which were subsequently transmitted to and began circulating in poultry.^41,43 The H7N9 virus is known to evolve at a rapid rate. Currently, several emerging genotypes of H7N9 AIVs have been identified, including cocirculating low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) and HPAI, causing infections in poultry and humans. Previous reports have indicated that in the first wave of the H7N9 influenza outbreak, a total of 27 genotypes were observed and documented between 2013 and 2014.^12,44 The G0 genotype is predominantly found in human H7N9 infection whereas the G2, G4, and G5 genotypes are mainly detected in poultry. Most H7N9 genotypes were detected in the Yangtze River Delta area in China. More recent genotypic studies have identified dynamic reassortment of some internal genes among LPAI H7N9/H9N2/H6Ny and HPAI H7N9, as well as surface genes between the Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta lineages, resulting in at least 36 genotypes identified in 2017.^45,46 Among them, three main genotypes predominate, including G1 (A/chicken/Jiangsu/SC537/2013-like strain), G3 (A/chicken/Zhongshan/ZS/2017-like strain), and G11 (A/Anhui/40094/2015-like strain).⁴⁶

Most human cases of H7N9 AIV infection have been found in areas endemic for the virus.^18,19,42,47 Closure of live poultry markets effectively controlled H7N9 epidemics in Shanghai, Nanjing, Hangzhou, and Huzhou during the first wave of the H7N9 outbreak in China,⁴⁸ as well as in Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Hangzhou, Foshan, and Ningbo during the second outbreak wave.⁴⁷ This suggests that cases of human H7N9 AIV infection resulted from direct contact with infected poultry. Although animal-to-human transmission is the main route of infection, some studies have reported the possibility of human-to-human transmission using clusters of human cases and tracing data; however, these studies found very low basic reproduction number (R) estimates.^9,49–53 However, Kucharski et al.⁴³ reported finding no evidence of reduced human-to-human transmission in the two outbreak waves associated with the closure of live poultry markets, indicating that higher basic R estimates were reported for the human-to-human transmission component. Despite the high susceptibility and occurrence of transmission among household or family members, it has not been well demonstrated that the H7N9 virus is capable of human-to-human spread.^54,55 Poultry exposure remains the main risk factor for human H7N9 infection.^43,55,56 In addition, travelers also represent a potential risk factor in the dissemination of H7N9 AIVs from epidemic regions to non-epidemic areas.^3,57–60 The WHO has suggested that the health status of international travelers returning from H7N9 epidemic areas should be assessed on arrival, and these individuals should be monitored or observed by health care workers for any apparent symptoms indicative of possible infection .²⁶ Although imported cases of human H7N9 infection have been identified, the opportunity for spread at community level is unlikely as the virus has not adapted to humans.^3,57–60 Furthermore, health advisories and communications should warn travelers to avoid exposure to poultry and raw poultry products while visiting affected areas. In people with a history of travel to affected regions, screening should begin within 2 weeks of departure, prior to the onset of acute respiratory illness. Patients are encouraged to disclose recent travel histories, and health care workers should obtain information regarding travel to affected areas.^26,52,61 Public health and laboratory partners are suggested to notify suspected cases during the diagnostic work-up so as to receive guidance in a timely manner.⁶¹

Receptors and infection

The novel H7N9 influenza virus has been reported to be efficiently transmitted from avian species to humans.^62–64 Previous studies isolated two distinct human H7N9 viruses, A/Shanghai/1/2013 and A/Anhui/1/2013, carrying Gln-226 and Leu-226 on the HA proteins, respectively,⁶⁵ which present different receptor-binding properties. The HA molecule of the A/Anhui/1/2013 strain has dual-receptor specificity, with the ability to bind to human-type α2,6-linked sialic acid and avian-type α2,3-linked sialic acid receptors.^65,66 HA receptor binding affinity and specificity are required for efficient virus transmission between individuals and between species.^67,68 Reducing the binding affinities of HA to avian receptors is a critical factor in human-to-human transmission.⁶⁶

The receptor-binding tropism of H7N9 changing to human receptors is possibly owing to the acquisition of two hydrophobic residues by substitution of Gln226Leu and Gly186Val. These substitutions were found in influenza pandemic viruses H2N2 and H3N2 in 1957 and 1968, respectively, as well as aerosol-transmissible H5N1 mutants.⁶⁸ The receptor binding properties of the human H7N9 virus are diverse, comprising different lineages of avian H7N9 isolates, but the cleavage activity of its NA is clearly low for human-type α2,6-linked sialic acid receptors. Regarding the pathogenicity of H7N9 viruses, disease caused by virus infection is usually asymptomatic and mortality is rare in chickens, ducks, and other birds. Similarly, various studies have demonstrated that H7N9 viruses replicate well in ferrets,⁶⁹ pigs,^70,71 and mice,^71,72 but are rarely lethal. Since it first emerged in China in 2013, there have been five reported outbreak waves of H7N9 AIV, with the majority caused by H7N9 LPAI strains.³ More recently, HPAI H7N9 viruses have been isolated from humans in Guangdong, with high fatality rates.^22,73 These viruses contain an insertion of basic amino acids at the HA proteolytic cleavage site.^46,74 Highly pathogenic H7N9 human isolates were found to possess HA with a preference for human-type receptors and NA with inhibitor resistance;^22,75 furthermore, these strains retained a series of genetic features contributing to human infection, such as 186V in the HA protein, according to H3 numbering.^22,75 Sequence analysis has indicated that human HPAI H7N9 clinical isolates, such as A/Guangdong/17SF006/2017 and A/Taiwan/1/2017 possess mutations in the 627K domain of the PB2 subunit, conferring efficient replication in mammals.²² In addition, amino acid substitutions associated with drug-resistance have been detected on NA in these HPAI H7N9 isolates.⁷⁵

Clinical symptoms

H7N9 AIV has jumped the species barrier, causing sporadic human infections since 2013. H7N9 human influenza virus A/Anhui/1/2013 has sporadically infected humans, with a high mortality rate of about 40%. However, earlier H7N9 isolates lack the multiple basic amino acids at the HA cleavage site that are usually present on highly pathogenic AIV strains.^76,77 Clinical observations show that patients with confirmed H7N9 avian influenza present with high fever (≥39°C), productive or nonproductive cough, dyspnea, hypoxia, lower respiratory tract inflammation, shortness of breath, and infiltrates have also been noted on chest imaging.^3,78 Complications in human cases of H7N9 AIV infection include respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, refractory hypoxemia, rhabdomyolysis, encephalopathy, acute renal dysfunction, multiple organ dysfunction, ventilator-associated pneumonia, and bacteremia.^3,78,79 These features differ from those of previous human cases of infection with H7 subtype AIV, which generally presents as mild flu-like illness or conjunctivitis.⁶ The three first human H7N9 viruses (A/Shanghai/1/2013, A/Shanghai/2/2013, and A/Anhui/1/2013) isolated from patients were found to be identical in all eight viral gene segments. However, A/Shanghai/1/2013 has been found to be phylogenetically distinct from the other two strains mentioned above.⁸⁰ Compared with human cases of infection with HPAI H7N9 (e.g., A/Guangdong/17SF003/2016 or A/Guangdong/17SF006/2017), most patients infected with A/Shanghai/1/2013 have viral pneumonia and some patients have displayed acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), especially elderly people, who also have high fatality rates.^22,81 Overall, the clinical presentation of HAPI H7N9 infection is similar to that of LPAI H7N9 infection;²² however, fewer patients with HPAI than LPAI H7N9 infection have underlying conditions.⁸²

Host immune response against H7N9 influenza virus

The pathogenesis of human H7N9 virus that leads to severe outcomes remains unclear. Previous studies of HPAI H5N1 virus and pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus have suggested that poor prognosis in human disease caused by these influenza viruses might be attributed to a cytokine storm or hypercytokinemia in the body.^83–85 Some studies of H7N9 AIV have analyzed the cytokine and chemokine profiles in human serum samples from H7N9-infected patients. Reports have showed the presence of high levels of cytokines and chemokines, such as interleukin (IL)-6, IL-17, IL-2, monocyte chemotactic protein (MIP)-1, the monokine induced by gamma interferon (MIG), and macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-1β, in the serum of patients infected with H7N9 AIV.^86,87 Moreover, in patients with severe H7N9 infection, the expressed levels of IL-6 and IP-10 molecules are significantly higher than in asymptomatic patients with H7N9 infection.⁸⁶ However, a previous study using BALB/c and C57BL/6 mouse models assessed the pathogenicity of H7N9 virus, to examine the association of proinflammatory cytokines in lung injury and viral clearance. The findings of that study showed that TNF-α and IFN-γ suppress viral gene expression and increase viral clearance whereas IL-6 and MCP-1 contribute to lung injury in A/H7N9-infected mice.⁸⁸ In summary, H7N9 viruses potently induce the expression of proinflammatory cytokines (IL-2, IL-6, and IL-7) and chemokines (IP-10), which contributes to the regulation of cellular immune responses. Alternatively, H7N9 infection also induces strong inflammatory responses, leading to tissue destruction.

Clinical observation indicates that patients with severe H7N9 AIV infection have high serum levels of IP-10 and IL-6, which may reflect the severity of disease.⁸⁶ In addition, the PB1-F2 protein of the influenza virus has been implicated in the regulation of polymerase activity, immunopathology, susceptibility to secondary bacterial infection, and the induction of apoptosis.⁸⁹ Studies suggest that the PB1-F2 protein may assist in NLRP3-associated hyperinflammation in human H7N9 influenza virus infections via the formation of inflammasome in host cells. New treatment strategies for H7N9 PB1-F2-induced lung inflammation and cellular influx specifically target NLRP3 inflammasome formation, which may provide effective therapy to reduce the disease severity level and mortality rate in pathogenic H7N9 infection.

Drug resistance

The newly emerged avian H7N9 influenza virus is known to cause human infection with high mortality. Antiviral drugs are critical tools for the control, treatment, and prevention of H7N9 virus infection as humans lack immunity against H7 subtype influenza viruses. Both M2 ion channel blockers (adamantanes, amantadine, and rimantadine) and NA inhibitors (oseltamivir, zanamivir, peramivir, and laninamivir) are used clinically as antiviral drugs for influenza infection in humans.^90–92 Owing to the S31N mutation in the M2 protein, emerging H7N9 viruses are reported to be resistant to adamantine antiviral drugs,⁹³ which are therefore not recommended for clinical therapy. Oseltamivir, generally used as treatment for influenza infection, reduces the viral load in the respiratory tract of patients. Drug resistance to NA inhibitors is unusual among influenza viruses. However, some patients with H7N9 AIV infection have poor clinical outcome. The arginine to lysine substitution at residue R292K and E119V mutation in NA protein are linked with resistance to NA inhibitors, including oseltamivir and peramivir.^90,94–97 Ribavirin is a well-characterized, broad-spectrum nucleoside inhibitor, which is used for the inhibition of viral RNA synthesis and capping of mRNA. Ribavirin also has antiviral activity against NA inhibitor-resistant H7N9 virus infections.⁹⁸ Human infections with avian H7N9 influenza virus mainly originate from contact with infected poultry. An effective strategy to minimize the risk of human H7N9 infections would be to administer aerosolized ribavirin to the nasal mucosa. Regarding drug resistance of HPAI H7N9 isolates, A/Guangdong/17SF003/2016(H7N9) strain has been reported to have NA-292R residue, similar to A/Anhui/1/2013 (H7N9), and sensitivity to all three NA inhibitors.⁷⁵ Baloxavir marboxil is a novel inhibitor against influenza virus cap-dependent endonuclease, which was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in October 2018 to treat influenza A and B viruses in Japan and the United States.⁹⁹ This new drug might serve as a potential treatment for H7N9 AIV infections in the near future. We summarize some characteristics and features of H7N9 virus-induced pathogenesis in Table 1.

Table 1.

Summary of the characteristics of H7N9 avian influenza A virus in humans

Feature	Details
Low pathogenicity avian influenza (LPAI) virusH7N9	Displays low pathogenicity in poultry with no illness; highly virulent in humans with severe symptoms.^3,42,62
Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virusH7N9	Displays high pathogenicity in both avian and human infections.^18,22,23,73
First reported human case (date and location)	Case reported on February 2013 in Shanghai, China and confirmed by Chinese CDC on 29 March 2013³
Age range of confirmed human cases	Age 2–91 years,^3,9 with median age 62 years⁹
Ages with higher risk of further complications	<5 years and >65 years^3,9
Susceptibility by sex and area	67% of confirmed cases are males^9,153,154Increasing trend in rural areas¹⁵⁶
Transmission exposures	Being exposed to poultry in places such as live poultry markets or incidentally via contaminated surfaces.^48,62
Transmission source	Zoonotic: from poultry to humans.^{9,49–52,56,120,140,149,150}Human-to-human transmission⁵³
Host immune response	Proinflammatory cytokines (IL-2, IL-6 and IL-7) and chemokines (IP-10) are predominant^83–85
Anti-influenza drug resistance	Resistance to adamantine,⁹³ oseltamivir,^90,94–96 peramivir,⁹⁷ and zanamivir^97,161

Vaccine development

To reduce the mortality and morbidity rates of influenza virus infection, HA- and NA-specific neutralizing antibodies can be efficiently generated via vaccination. Early detection of neutralizing antibodies and rapid availability of the vaccine are required to prevent H7N9 pandemics. In the development of H7N9 vaccines, the peptides of HA7 and NA9 molecules of A/Shanghai/2/2013 or A/Anhui/1/2013 are considered the most promising candidates. These peptide vaccines are currently undergoing evaluation in clinical trials.

New technologies for vaccine production, such as cell culture-based antigen vaccine, live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV), DNA vaccine, phylogenetically related seed strain vaccine, recombinant baculovirus expression vaccine, and adjuvant-containing H7-based vaccine may be serve to increase vaccination capabilities.^100–108 These technologies would speed up the production of H7N9 vaccines; however, a long time is likely required to produce large quantities of available vaccine. Work is ongoing in developing vaccines based on the HA and NA genes of A/Anhui/1/2013-like H7N9 viruses reassorted with the high-yield master virus A/Puerto Rico/8/34 (PR8) to enhance H7N9 virus growth capability in eggs, with high total viral and HA protein yields and attenuated pathogenesis, which has already resulted in several vaccine candidates.^29,109 LAIVs have been tested against a pandemic influenza virus.^110–112

Vaccination with a single dose of LAIV is known to be sufficient to stimulate an immune response against the homologous wild-type strain. Several human clinical trials are currently evaluating H7-based LAIVs.^{110,112–114} Previous outbreaks of A/mallard/Netherlands/12/2000 (H7N3) and A/Netherlands/219/2003 (H7N7) were owing to avian-derived H7 strains. These strains have been found to be phylogenetically related to the HA of H7N9 viruses. Several previous reports have shown that serum from individuals vaccinated with these vector-based or inactivated vaccines cross-reacted with H7N9.^114–116 Baculovirus-insect cell expression vectors used in the rapid production of insect cell recombinant antigens is a practicable strategy in the development of HA-based vaccines. Other viral vectors (e.g., adenovirus and poxvirus) are also used to prepare vaccines.³¹ The modified vaccinia virus Ankara and chimpanzee adenoviral ChAdOx1 vaccines are considered safe and immunogenic in humans for inducing long-term cross-reactive antibody against influenza A virus. These vaccines can be developed in a short time, to be used against emerging influenza strains. Moreover, an H7 and N9 molecule-containing vaccine, which is VLP-based from the A/Anhui/1/13 strain, has been reported to be producible by the baculovirus system.¹⁰⁷ A dose of this VLP vaccine administered twice together with an adjuvant significantly increases the neutralizing ability of HA- and NA-inhibiting antibody.^32,107 The low-immunogenicity characteristics of H7-based vaccines have been reported in human¹¹⁷ and animal models.¹¹⁸ Currently, several clinical trials are investigating the effect of different adjuvants, including MF59 (Novartis), Matrix-M (Novavax), and AS03 (GlaxoSmithKline), to improve generation of protective antibodies.^119–121 Regarding poultry vaccination against H7N9 AIVs, a series of inactivated vaccines has been used for the control and prevention of H7N9 outbreaks in poultry.^100,122,123 For example, an H5/H7 bivalent inactivated influenza vaccine for chickens, ducks, and geese was introduced in September 2017;^124,125 cases of H7N9 infections in human and poultry populations decreased after vaccination.^126,127

Current diagnosis of H7N9 influenza virus infection

The first three human cases of infection with influenza H7N9 virus were reported in February and March 2013 in mainland China.^42,80 Respiratory specimens from these patients were analyzed using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), viral culture, and sequencing analysis.^128,129 Subsequently, cases were mostly confirmed using real time RT-PCR and in certain cases, viral isolation and serologic testing were also included.⁴² The proper collection and handling of specimen contributes to the quality of test results. The most acceptable specimens for diagnosis or identification of influenza A (H7N9) virus are nasal wash, nasal aspirate, sputum, and nasopharyngeal swab specimens.^36,130 Throat swabs are not recommended owing to the low viral load in these specimens; higher viral loads are found in sputum and tracheal samples.¹³¹ The best time for sample collection is near symptom onset, within the first 3 days as viral shedding decreases after 4–5 days. However, shedding lasts up to 5 days in children.

Currently, several methods are used in the diagnosis of H7N9 AIV. Routinely, rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDTs) are used along with other confirmatory tests such as viral isolation, serologic tests, and RT-PCR.¹³⁰ RIDTs are widely used owing to their ease of use and quick results. RIDTs are based on antigen detection methods via the use of monoclonal antibodies, which attach to nucleoproteins on the targeted virus.¹³¹ Compared with molecular methods, RIDTs have low sensitivity.¹³² All RIDTs lack the capability of identifying or differentiating avian influenza subtypes. Because there are several different AIV subtypes, some more pathogenic than others, RIDTs that can differentiate between subtypes would greatly aid in screening, efficient diagnosis, surveillance, and control of HPAI.^133,134 Such tests would also preclude the need for trained professionals to carry out testing. Although RIDTs only provide qualitative measures, the importance of obtaining a positive or negative result enhances efficient diagnosis, as positive samples can be sent for further analysis.¹³⁴

Viral isolation, considered the gold standard for influenza diagnosis, includes three different techniques: viral isolation using embryonated chicken eggs, viral culture, and shell viral culture. Viral isolation using embryonated eggs has some disadvantages, such as it is time consuming, has high biosafety level (BSL) requirements, and requires the use of eggs.¹²⁸ These disadvantages are drawbacks for efficient diagnosis; hence, viral isolation is more useful for subsequent viral analysis and, importantly, in the initial investigation of an outbreak. Molecular diagnostic tests such as real-time RT-PCR provide more rapid results for more efficient diagnosis.¹²⁸ Viral culture uses cell lines, which are infected, incubated, and monitored. Viral detection in cells can be done using different techniques, including specific antibody staining, hemadsorption, or immunofluorescence microscopy. In shell viral culture, cells are grown in 1 dram shell vials and stained with specific monoclonal antibodies for influenza detection. Serological tests include hemagglutination inhibition (HAI),^135–137 virus neutralization (VN),^136,138 complement fixation,^139,140 single radial hemolysis tests (SHR),^136,137,141 and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).^{128,136,142–144} ELISA, one of the most commonly performed laboratory assays, uses mono- and polyclonal antibodies against nucleoproteins on the influenza virus. However, the sensitivity of ELISA is lower than that of molecular testing.^128,132 HAI is a common assay based on HA-specific antibody that prevents influenza virus attachment to red blood cells, but HA has low sensitivity.^{128,136,138,145} VN assays require the use of infectious viruses, which are then neutralized with virus-specific antibodies. VN is more sensitive than HAI, but BSL2 or BSL3 laboratory conditions are required. The SHR assay measures complement-mediated hemolysis via antigen–antibody complex induction; this assay is more sensitive than HAI.^128,132

Molecular PCR-based diagnostic tests are commonly performed in the detection and subtyping of H7N9 AIVs as these are faster than viral isolation and more sensitive than serologic tests. PCR-based diagnostic tests require RNA extraction using reagents to inactivate the virus; hence, the BSL requirements are lower than for viral isolation techniques. The extracted RNA is transcribed with reverse transcriptase to complementary DNA (cDNA), then amplified using specific primers for each subtype. With advanced technology, primers are now able to detect avian influenza A even if the virus is genetically varied.¹²⁸ A recent advance in PCR-based detection methods for H7N9 AIV is the multiplex RT-PCR assay, which uses the GenomeLab Gene Expression Profiler (GeXP) analyzer, a multiplex gene expression analysis platform developed by Beckman Coulter.^146,147 This assay simultaneously detects four NA serotypes of the H5 subtype. Both sensitivity and specificity are reportedly high; hence, this method can be useful in the detection, surveillance, and control of HPAI viruses.¹⁴⁸ Detection techniques such as immunochromatographic RIDTs and PCR-based techniques greatly contribute to rapid, simple, and efficient screening and confirmation of cases of HPAI H7N9 infection. PCR-based methods further aid in the surveillance and control of HPAI H7N9 infection as this method has the advantages of speed, sensitivity, and specificity. We summarize the main tests performed in the diagnosis or confirmation of H7N9 virus in Table 2.

Table 2.

Main tests for diagnosis and/or confirmation of H7N9 avian influenza A virus (AIV)

Test	Sensitivity Specificity	Advantages	Disadvantages	Reference
Real-time RT-PCR	High	Rapid Lower biosafety level (BSL) requirements Subtyping Confirmatory test Useful in surveillance and control	Requires highly trained staff Not available at all locations	[^128,131]
Rapid influenza diagnostic test	Low	Trained staff not required Rapid; 15–30 minutes Low cost	Does not differentiate between seasonal influenza and H7N9	[¹³¹]
Viral isolation	High	Gold standard Diagnosis of index cases For research	Requires embryonated eggs or cell culture Time consuming High BSL requirements	[^128,129]
Hemagglutination inhibition assay (HAI)	Low	Low cost Less technical than molecular tests Rapid Gold standard for correlation of protection from influenza vaccine	Not multiplex; single antigen identification Not adequate for evaluation of live attenuated vaccines Variability in results from different laboratories Requires red blood cells (RBCs), which may affect results depending on RBC source	[^{128,136,138,145}]
Virus neutralization assay	Low	Capable of detecting low antibody titers Able to differentiate between pre- and post-vaccination titers in serum Differentiates minor titer differences Higher sensitivity than HAI for detecting low-titer seroconversion	Requires high BSL levels for HPAI Results vary among laboratories owing to lack of standardization	[^136,138]
Single radial hemolysis	Low	Small viral or sample quantities required Ability to analyze multiple number of samples simultaneously No pretreatment required Rapid Differentiates between different AI virus strains Differentiates minor differences in antibody levels Inactivated virus detection Low BSL requirements Relatively low cost	More sensitive for avian influenza B strains	[^136,137,141]
Complement fixation	Intermediate sensitivity, high specificity	Useful for the detection of antigen–antibody complexes Easy reading and interpretation of results Good reproducibility Useful in analyzing small molecules	Requires activation of the complement system Requires a sampler and indicator system	[^139,140]
Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)	Low	Low cost Rapid test Useful in screening large number of samples Capable of measuring IgM, IgG, IgA antibodies (response to AI infection) Reproducible Reagents can be standardized Able to detect broad range of AI virus antigens	Not multiplex, single antigen identification Cross reactivity may occur	[^{128,136,142,143}]

Discussion

Herein, we conducted a systemic literature review for the novel emerged H7N9 AIVs with respect to pathogenesis, vaccine development, and current diagnosis. Although current major H7N9 epidemics are in China, this reassorted virus has gradually evolved from LPAI to HAPI. Currently, HPAI H7N9 AIV has the capability of causing severe syndromes and inducing high mortality in both avians and humans. The WHO has also pointed out that among current AIVs, those that cause human infection are H5N1 and H7N9, thereby necessitating the continuous monitoring of genetic and antigenic change and variation in H7N9 AIVs.²⁶ Understanding the pathogenesis of the virus, developing prophylactic vaccines, and enhancing the sensitivity and specificity of H7N9 AIV diagnostic methods are urgently required.

As an atypical strain with mutations and genetic reassortment, emergence of the novel H7N9 AIVs in China raises concerns regarding new vaccine development and drug resistance. The influence of animal infections on human disease propagation places a large burden on health systems and animal trade controls to prevent the virus spreading via travelers and animal movement. Although AIVs usually do not infect people, rare cases of human infection with these viruses have been reported.⁵³ Regarding the transmission route, H7N9 AIVs have been found to cause human infection, mainly from poultry to humans. Infected birds can shed H7N9 AIVs in secretions like saliva, mucous, and feces, which can lead to human infection via mucosal surfaces of the eyes, nose, and mouth or through inhalation of droplets and dust containing the virus. Unprotected exposure to H7N9 AIVs from infected birds is currently considered the main risk factor and transmission route. The role of poultry farms, live animal markets, and retailers might be key in the spread of disease, as well as inadequate biosafety measures and poor handling of sick or dead animals. However, some laboratory-confirmed human cases lack evidence of a history of direct contact with animals, indicating the possibility of human-to-human transmission.^53,149 To date, several studies have predicted and compared the route of poultry-to-human or human-to-human transmitted efficiency of H7N9 AIVs using the reproduction number (R);^{43,56,120,140,150} The R is a key indicator of transmission intensity estimated by fitting the number of poultry-to-human and from human-to-human infections into mathematical models. The data of these studies showed that the estimated R value for an H7N9 outbreak was below the epidemic threshold required for sustained human-to-human transmission, indicating that an H7N9 human-to-human pandemic is unlikely to occur and most cases of H7N9 AIV infection are owing to poultry-to-human transmission. Virlogeux et al.¹⁴⁹ recently used an ecological model to evaluate animal-to-human and human-to-human transmission of H7N9 during the first three epidemic waves in China; the authors indicated that there was a significant decrease in the incidence of H7N9 cases after live poultry market closures in several major cities of China. Accordingly, it can be concluded that although H7N9 human-to-human transmission might be possible, the major transmission route of H7N9 AIVs remains via poultry-to-human.

Regarding virus-induced pathogenesis and pathology, H7N9 AIV infection causes mild to severe syndromes to humans owing to either LPAI or HPAI strains, as compared with infections in poultry, which are often asymptomatic when infection is with LPAI H7N9 strains. The major element for distinguishing HPAI and LPAI is determination of the amino acid profiles at the HA cleavage site. Increased basic amino acids have been proven to enhance the capability of maturation and replication of AIVs. The mechanism through which LPAI H7N9 viruses induce different pathogenesis in birds and humans is still not fully understood, suggesting that to determine the virulence of influenza A virus, it is critical to check the occurrence of variations or mutations in other viral proteins that are involved in virus replication and dissemination. Reports have indicated that H7N9 Asian lineage and H5N1 HPAI Asian lineage strains are mainly responsible for most cases of human illness worldwide to date, and these also result in the most serious illnesses and highest mortality. Clinical observation reports indicate that severe symptoms including viral pneumonia, hypercytokinemia, and even ARDS in cases of death owing to H7N9 AIV infection, which mainly occur in older people, as compared with H5N1 infection in which severe symptoms generally occur in younger patients.^9,81,151,152

In addition, comparative cohort studies have indicated that the sex ratio is much higher in urban than rural areas in infections with both H7N9 and H5N1 viruses.^9,153,154 The reason might be correlated with sex-based differences in exposure to AIVs rather than to differences in immunity.^9,153 For instance, higher numbers of cases of H7N9 infection have been reported among men in Shanghai city, where men have a greater tendency than women to have more frequent retail exposure to live poultry. Other possible reasons for this difference have been reported, including worse prognosis for infected men than infected women, and differences in health-seeking behaviors.¹⁵³ However, some reports indicate that differences in immunity between men and women remain a consideration.¹⁵⁵ Recently, Chen et al.¹⁵⁶ reported that an increasing trend of H7N9 human infections in rural areas of Zhejiang Province in China during 2013–2017 was the result of rural live poultry markets that remained open despite the epidemic; this suggests that closing live poultry markets is an effective way to control H7N9 human infections.

In this study, we report that human patients with H7N9 AIV infection develop severe illness, dysregulation of the cytokine and chemokine response, late viral clearance, and impaired immunity.¹⁵⁷ Induction of pro-inflammatory cytokines by H7N9 is the predominant factor leading to hypercytokinemia, an important risk factor triggering multiple organ damage, thereby increasing the mortality rate in human cases of infection with H7N9 AIV.^81,152 Reports have indicated that peripheral blood mononuclear cells have greater susceptibility to H7N9 than H5N1 virus, and H7N9 could more efficiently infect B and T lymphocytes than H5N1 (p<0.01).¹⁵⁸ Another study indicated that hypercytokinemia is associated with interferon-induced transmembrane protein-3 dysfunction, which could be useful in the prediction of H7N9-induced mortality.¹⁵⁹ In addition, H7N9 AIVs show greater tropism for the respiratory epithelium as well as nasopharynx-associated lymphoid tissues than H5N1 viruses.¹⁵² Similar results have been found in H7N9 virus-challenged mice and ferret models.^152,160 Since the end of 2017, a new H7N9 AIV (A/Guangdong/17SF006/2017) has been identified as an HPAI strain in China. This HPAI H7N9 virus was generated from its LPAI counterpart^22,46,74 and has high affinity for both human-type α2-6-linked sialic acid and avian-type α2-3-linked sialic acid receptors.^65,66 These characteristics demonstrate the capability of H7N9 viruses for adaptation and binding, thus opening the door for the virus to develop drug resistance, thereby presenting a challenge for drug and vaccine development as the clinical symptoms of these mutants differ from the original H7N9 virus, including respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock, acute renal dysfunction, and multiple organ dysfunction.^3,78,79 These symptoms may be related to the presence of IP-10 and IL-6 in patients with severe H7N9-induced disease, as these induce an acute inflammatory response and extensive tissue destruction.⁸⁶

Regarding drug use and design, targeting NLRP3 inflammosome formation may be effective in reducing the severity and mortality of H7N9 AIV infection, as humans lack immunity against H7 subtype influenza viruses. Some patients with H7N9 infection have shown poor outcomes with therapies such as M2 ion channel or NA blockers.⁹⁴ In addition, some reports have indicated that H7N9 viruses acquire drug resistance against NA inhibitors via substitutions, which is correlated with amino acid substitutions; R292K confers the highest increase in oseltamivir half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀), E119D confers the highest IC₅₀ of zanamivir, and H274Y confers highly reduced inhibition by oseltamivir.¹⁶¹ The need for new anti-influenza viral drugs is urgent. Testing some alternatives in H7N9 treatment is advisable, such as intranasal administration of ribavirin and baloxavir marboxil, as these have demonstrated effectiveness with other influenza viruses.^98,99

In prevention and prophylaxis of H7N9 AIVs, it is necessary to develop vaccines that can easily induce neutralizing antibody and generate CD8⁺ cytotoxic T cells for virus neutralization and clearance, respectively. LAIV, H7 and N9 molecule-containing vaccine, and recombinant VLP vaccines based on A/Anhui/1/13 strain have shown effective stimulation of the specific immune response and no cross-reaction with other virus strains.^100,162 Clinical trials and animal studies have revealed that much remains to be accomplished in the development of new vaccines, and their efficacy relies on targeting different phylogenetically related genotypic strains of H7N9 AIV.¹⁰⁸ Human contact with infected poultry and global travel is unlikely to diminish, and the pathogenesis of H7N9 AIVs will likely persist. Therefore, strategies should be focused on understanding more about the impact of new therapies and prophylaxis to control circulating viruses.

Diagnostic tools or platforms with high sensitivity and specificity for detection of viral antigens or antibodies of H7N9 AIVs have been widely developed. Although viral culture is conventionally viewed as the gold standard in virological assays, real-time RT-PCR is currently suggested as an alternative gold standard as the former method requires specific BSL laboratory conditions and experienced staff. However, RIDTs are quick and easy to perform, so these tests have become essential at sites where real-time RT-PCR is unavailable. Current RIDTs have the capability of detecting strains of both influenza A and B. However, they have low sensitivity with new strains and are unable to differentiate between subtypes; therefore, the rate of false negatives is higher.¹³¹RIDTs provide rapid detection of the presence or absence of viral analytes in patient samples; a major advantage of RIDTs is that results can be obtained within 15–30 minutes.¹³¹ As mentioned, there are several different subtypes of H7N9 AIVs circulating in China, some more pathogenic than others. With the advantage of speedy results, RIDTs that can differentiate between subtypes would provide a breakthrough for rapid screening and diagnosis, especially of HPAI H7N9 and AIVs such as H5N1.¹³⁴ RIDTs can be performed at points-of-care for first-line influenza virus screening.¹³⁴ This would help in patient diagnosis as well as the detection of asymptomatic cases or mild symptom cases, thus preventing further spread.¹⁶³ In addition, several advanced or modified assays and platforms for detecting H7N9 AIVs are under investigation, such as modified surface plasmon resonance,³⁹ enzyme-induced metallization,¹⁶⁴ reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay,¹⁶⁵ and chip-based biosensors.¹⁶⁶

This study has some limitations. We selected articles written in English only; in addition, we excluded small cohort studies and clinical trials and focused mainly on study results in human cases of AIV infection. These selection criteria might have resulted in the loss of certain important information and experimental results published in Chinese or other non-English languages, as well as some important observations from small cohorts and animal studies.

Conclusion

Currently, H7N9 influenza virus is disseminated among aquatic birds and poultry, increasing their adaption and virulence in humans. Although this virus primarily exists in mainland China, increasingly more imported cases have been reported in other countries. Clinical H7N9 AIV isolates have been proven to have resistant to adamantine and oseltamivir, which are commonly used in influenza therapy. This highlights that new antiviral drugs, continuous genotype identification, and new vaccines against H7N9 influenza viruses are urgently needed. In addition, the development of accurate and rapid testing methods is necessary for the surveillance and control of H7N9 virus infections.

Footnotes

Author’s contribution

WHW prepared the manuscript. EME, MRCI, and CYL helped to prepare the draft. EME and MRCI assisted in language editing. WA and AT revised the draft. SFW conceived the study and revised the draft.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the staff from Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital and Taiwan CDC for their assistance in providing essential and meaningful information of current H7N9 influenza virus.

Declaration of conflicting interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

This work was supported by grants from the Center for Infectious Disease and Cancer Research, Kaohsiung Medical University (KMUTP105E00 and KMUTP 105E04), a grant from Higher Education Sprout Project - Ministry of Education, Taiwan (TB0357), and grants from the Ministry of Science and Technology, R.O.C. (108-2918-I-037-001).

References

Tang

Chen

HL.

An overview of the recent outbreaks of the avian-origin influenza A (H7N9) virus in the human.

J Chin Med Assoc 2013; 76: 245–248. 2013/05/09. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcma.2013.04.003.

Wen

Klenk

HD.

Erratum: H7N9 avian influenza virus - search and re-search.

Emerg Microbes Infect 2013; 2: e26. 2013/05/01. DOI: 10.1038/emi.2013.26.

Gao

Cao

, et al. Human infection with a novel avian-origin influenza A (H7N9) virus. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1888–1897. 2013/04/13. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1304459.

Prosser

Hungerford

Erwin

, et al. Mapping avian influenza transmission risk at the interface of domestic poultry and wild birds. Front Public Health 2013; 1: 28. 2013/12/19. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2013.00028.

Uyeki

Cox

NJ.

Global concerns regarding novel influenza A (H7N9) virus infections.

N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1862–1864. 2013/04/13. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1304661.

Poovorawan

Pyungporn

Prachayangprecha

, et al. Global alert to avian influenza virus infection: from H5N1 to H7N9. Pathog Glob Health 2013; 107: 217–223. 2013/08/07. DOI: 10.1179/2047773213y.0000000103.

Olson

Gilbert

Cheng

, et al. Historical prevalence and distribution of avian influenza virus A(H7N9) among wild birds. Emerg Infect Dis 2013; 19: 2031–2033. 2013/11/28. DOI: 10.3201/eid1912.130649.

Liu

JH.

[Virological characteristics of avian influenza A H7N9 virus].

Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Ke Za Zhi 2013; 15: 405–408. 2013/06/26.

Cowling

Jin

Lau

, et al. Comparative epidemiology of human infections with avian influenza A H7N9 and H5N1 viruses in China: a population-based study of laboratory-confirmed cases. Lancet 2013; 382: 129–137. 2013/06/28. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61171-X.

10.

Stein

RA.

H7N9 influenza: something old, something new.

Int J Clin Pract 2013; 67: 935–938. 2013/08/06. DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12214.

11.

Mei

, et al. Avian influenza A(H7N9) virus infections, Shanghai, China. Emerg Infect Dis 2013; 19: 1179–1181. 2013/06/19. DOI: 10.3201/eid1907.130523.

12.

Lam

Zhou

Wang

, et al. Dissemination, divergence and establishment of H7N9 influenza viruses in China. Nature 2015; 522: 102–105. DOI: 10.1038/nature14348.

13.

Wang

, et al. Sequential reassortments underlie diverse influenza H7N9 genotypes in China. Cell Host Microbe 2013; 14: 446–452. DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2013.09.001.

14.

Han

Zhang

, et al. Mild illness in avian influenza A(H7N9) virus-infected poultry worker, Huzhou, China, April 2013. Emerg Infect Dis 2013; 19: 1885–1888. 2013/11/12. DOI: 10.3201/eid1911.130717.

15.

Kreijtz

Kroeze

Stittelaar

, et al. Low pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N9) virus causes high mortality in ferrets upon intratracheal challenge: a model to study intervention strategies. Vaccine 2013; 31: 4995–4999. 2013/07/03. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.06.071.

16.

Wang

Zhang

, et al. Deaths associated with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in China. Ann Intern Med 2013; 159: 159–160. 2013/07/17. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-159-2-201307160-00022, 10.7326/0003-4819-159-2-201307160-00669.

17.

Song

, et al. Association between adverse clinical outcome in human disease caused by novel influenza A H7N9 virus and sustained viral shedding and emergence of antiviral resistance. Lancet 2013; 381: 2273–2279. 2013/06/04. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61125-3.

18.

Zhou

Tan

Kang

, et al. Preliminary epidemiology of human infections with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N9) virus, China, 2017. Emerg Infect Dis 2017; 23: 1355–1359. 2017/06/06. DOI: 10.3201/eid2308.170640.

19.

Wang

Chai

, et al. Epidemiology of human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in the two waves before and after October 2013 in Zhejiang province, China. Epidemiol Infect 2015; 143: 1839–1845. 2014/10/08. DOI: 10.1017/S095026881400257X.

20.

Wang

Xue

, et al. Spatial characteristics and the epidemiology of human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in five waves from 2013 to 2017 in Zhejiang Province, China. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0180763. 2017/07/28. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180763.

21.

Vaisocherova

Brynda

Homola

Functionalizable low-fouling coatings for label-free biosensing in complex biological media: advances and applications.

Anal Bioanal Chem 2015; 407: 3927–3953. DOI: 10.1007/s00216-015-8606-5.

22.

Mok

CKP

Zhu

, et al. Human infection with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N9) virus, China. Emerg Infect Dis 2017; 23: 1332–1340. 2017/06/06. DOI: 10.3201/eid2308.170600.

23.

Wang

Yang

Zhu

, et al. Two outbreak sources of influenza A (H7N9) viruses have been established in China. J Virol 2016; 90: 5561–5573. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.03173-15.

24.

Liu

, et al. Sudden emergence of human infections with H7N9 avian influenza A virus in Hubei province, central China. Sci Rep 2018; 8: 2486. 2018/02/08. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20988-9.

25.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Asian Lineage Avian Influenza A(H7N9) virus. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/avianflu/h7n9-virus.htm.

26.

World Health Organization. Emergencies preparedness, response. Human infection with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus – update. https://www.who.int/csr/don/2014_03_07/en/.

27.

World Health Organization. Fact sheets. Influenza (Avian and other zoonotic). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/influenza-(avian-and-other-zoonotic).

28.

Hatta

Zhong

Chiba

, et al. Effectiveness of whole, inactivated, low pathogenicity influenza A(H7N9) vaccine against antigenically distinct, highly pathogenic H7N9 virus. Emerg Infect Dis 2018; 24: 1910–1913. 2018/09/19. DOI: 10.3201/eid2410.180403.

29.

Nakamura

Shirakura

Suzuki

, et al. Development of a high-yield reassortant influenza vaccine virus derived from the A/Anhui/1/2013 (H7N9) strain. Vaccine 2016; 34: 328–333. 2015/12/15. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.11.050.

30.

de Jonge

Isakova-Sivak

van Dijken

, et al. H7N9 live attenuated influenza vaccine is highly immunogenic, prevents virus replication, and protects against severe bronchopneumonia in ferrets. Mol Ther 2016; 24: 991–1002. 2016/01/23. DOI: 10.1038/mt.2016.23.

31.

Cao

Liepkalns

Hassan

, et al. A highly immunogenic vaccine against A/H7N9 influenza virus. Vaccine 2016; 34: 744–749. 2016/01/15. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.12.062.

32.

Zhang

Chen

, et al. Characterization of humoral responses induced by an H7N9 influenza virus-like particle vaccine in BALB/C mice. Viruses 2015; 7: 4369–4384. 2015/08/08. DOI: 10.3390/v7082821.

33.

Pillet

Racine

Nfon

, et al. Plant-derived H7 VLP vaccine elicits protective immune response against H7N9 influenza virus in mice and ferrets. Vaccine 2015; 33: 6282–6289. 2015/10/04. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.09.065.

34.

Pushko

Tretyakova

. Recombinant hemagglutinin and virus-like particle vaccines for H7N9 influenza virus. J Vaccines Vaccin 2015; 6: pii: 287. 2015/11/03. DOI: 10.4172/2157-7560.1000287.

35.

Biggerstaff

Reed

Swerdlow

, et al. Estimating the potential effects of a vaccine program against an emerging influenza pandemic–United States. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60: S20–S29. 2015/04/17. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciu1175.

36.

Shen

2014 update of the Chinese guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus infection.

Chin Med J (Engl) 2014; 127: 2543–2547. 2014/07/06.

37.

Nakauchi

Takayama

Takahashi

, et al. Development of a reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for the rapid diagnosis of avian influenza A (H7N9) virus infection. J Virol Methods 2014; 204: 101–104. 2014/04/22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2014.03.028.

38.

Cheng

Wang

Jiang

, et al. Laboratory diagnosis of avian influenza virus H7N9 infection in a renal transplant recipient. Int J Clin Exp Med 2014; 7: 451–455. 2014/03/07.

39.

Chang

Wang

Hong

, et al. Simple strategy for rapid and sensitive detection of avian influenza A H7N9 virus based on intensity-modulated SPR biosensor and new generated antibody. Anal Chem 2018; 90: 1861–1869. 2018/01/13. DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.7b03934.

40.

Wang

Peng

Tao

, et al. Serologic assay for avian-origin influenza A (H7N9) virus in adults of Shanghai, Guangzhou and Yunnan, China. J Clin Virol 2014; 60: 305–308. 2014/05/06. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2014.04.006.

41.

Wang

Yang

Gao

, et al. Genetic tuning of the novel avian influenza A(H7N9) virus during interspecies transmission, China, 2013. Euro Surveill 2014; 19: pii: 20836. 2014/07/06.

42.

Zhou

, et al. Epidemiology of human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in China. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 520–532. 2013/04/26. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1304617.

43.

Kucharski

Mills

Donnelly

, et al. Transmission potential of influenza A(H7N9) virus, China, 2013-2014. Emerg Infect Dis 2015; 21: 852–855. 2015/04/22. DOI: 10.3201/eid2105.141137.

44.

Cui

Liu

Shi

, et al. Dynamic reassortments and genetic heterogeneity of the human-infecting influenza A (H7N9) virus. Nat Commun 2014; 5: 3142. 2014/01/25. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4142.

45.

Jiao

, et al. Co-circulation of multiple genotypes of influenza A (H7N9) viruses in eastern China, 2016-2017. Arch Virol 2018; 163: 1779–1793. DOI: 10.1007/s00705-018-3800-3.

46.

Ding

Luo

Quan

, et al. Evolutionary genotypes of influenza A (H7N9) viruses over five epidemic waves in China. Infect Genet Evol 2017; 55: 269–276. DOI: 10.1016/j.meegid.2017.09.027.

47.

Jiang

, et al. Poultry market closures and human infection with influenza A(H7N9) virus, China, 2013-14. Emerg Infect Dis 2014; 20: 1891–1894. 2014/10/24. DOI: 10.3201/eid2011.140556.

48.

Cowling

, et al. Effect of closure of live poultry markets on poultry-to-person transmission of avian influenza A H7N9 virus: an ecological study. Lancet 2014; 383: 541–548. 2013/11/05. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61904-2.

49.

Qin

Horby

Tsang

, et al. Differences in the epidemiology of human cases of avian influenza A(H7N9) and A(H5N1) viruses infection. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 61: 563–571. 2015/05/06. DOI: 10.1093/cid/civ345.

50.

Yang

Zhang

Fang

, et al. Household transmissibility of avian influenza A (H7N9) virus, China, February to May 2013 and October 2013 to March 2014. Euro Surveill 2015; 20: 21056. 2015/03/20.

51.

Rudge

Coker

Human to human transmission of H7N9.

BMJ 2013; 347: f4730. 2013/08/08. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f4730.

52.

Qian

Bao

, et al. Probable person to person transmission of novel avian influenza A (H7N9) virus in Eastern China, 2013: epidemiological investigation. BMJ 2013; 347: f4752. 2013/08/08. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f4752.

53.

Zhou

Chen

Bao

, et al. Clusters of human infection and human-to-human transmission of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus, 2013-2017. Emerg Infect Dis 2018; 24: 397–400. 2017/11/23. DOI: 10.3201/eid2402.171565.

54.

Dong

Yang

, et al. Spatio-temporal pattern analysis for evaluation of the spread of human infections with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in China, 2013-2014. BMC Infect Dis 2017; 17: 704. 2017/10/27. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2781-2.

55.

Zhu

Zhao

, et al. Limited human-to-human transmission of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus, Shanghai, China, March to April 2013. Euro Surveill 2014; 19: pii: 20838. 2014/07/06.

56.

Xiao

Sun

Tang

, et al. Transmission potential of the novel avian influenza A(H7N9) infection in mainland China. J Theor Biol 2014; 352: 1–5. 2014/03/13. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.02.038.

57.

Shen

Human infection with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in Shanghai: current status and future trends. Chin Med J (Engl) 2014; 127: 1973–1976. 2014/05/16.

58.

Jian

Liu

Chang

FY.

Risk assessment of human infection with avian influenza A (H7N9) virus in Taiwan.

J Formos Med Assoc 2014; 113: 397–399. 2014/03/19. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfma.2014.02.001.

59.

Chen

Huang

, et al. Surveillance of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus infection in humans and detection of the first imported human case in Taiwan, 3 April to 10 May 2013. Euro Surveill 2013; 18: pii: 20479. 2013/06/04.

60.

Liu

Yang

, et al. Spatial and temporal analysis of human infection with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in China, 2013. Euro Surveill 2013; 18: pii: 20640. 2013/12/05.

61.

Cowling

Feng

, et al. Human infection with avian influenza A H7N9 virus: an assessment of clinical severity. Lancet 2013; 382: 138–145. 2013/06/28. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61207-6.

62.

Liu

Xiao

, et al. H7N9: a low pathogenic avian influenza A virus infecting humans. Curr Opin Virol 2014; 5: 91–97. 2014/04/08. DOI: 10.1016/j.coviro.2014.03.001.

63.

Parry

H7N9 avian flu infects humans for the first time.

BMJ 2013; 346: f2151. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f2151.

64.

Shu

Human infection with H7N9 virus.

N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 880. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc1308255.

65.

Shi

Zhang

Wang

, et al. Structures and receptor binding of hemagglutinins from human-infecting H7N9 influenza viruses. Science 2013; 342: 243–247. DOI: 10.1126/science.1242917.

66.

Xiong

Martin

Haire

, et al. Receptor binding by an H7N9 influenza virus from humans. Nature 2013; 499: 496–499. 2013/06/22. DOI: 10.1038/nature12372.

67.

Zhang

Shi

, et al. An airborne transmissible avian influenza H5 hemagglutinin seen at the atomic level. Science 2013; 340: 1463–1467. DOI: 10.1126/science.1236787.

68.

Xiong

Coombs

Martin

, et al. Receptor binding by a ferret-transmissible H5 avian influenza virus. Nature 2013; 497: 392–396. DOI: 10.1038/nature12144.

69.

Siegers

Short

Leijten

, et al. Novel avian-origin influenza A (H7N9) virus attachment to the respiratory tract of five animal models. J Virol 2014; 88: 4595–4599. 2014/01/31. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.03190-13.

70.

Zhu

Wang

Kelvin

, et al. Infectivity, transmission, and pathology of human-isolated H7N9 influenza virus in ferrets and pigs. Science 2013; 341: 183–186. 2013/05/25. DOI: 10.1126/science.1239844.

71.

Watanabe

Kiso

Fukuyama

, et al. Characterization of H7N9 influenza A viruses isolated from humans. Nature 2013; 501: 551–555. DOI: 10.1038/nature12392.

72.

Mok

Lee

Chan

, et al. Pathogenicity of the novel A/H7N9 influenza virus in mice. MBio 2013; 4: pii: e00362–13. 2013/07/04. DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00362-13.

73.

Yang

Shi

Zhang

, et al. Westward spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N9) virus among humans, China. Emerg Infect Dis 2018; 24: 1095–1098. 2018/04/06. DOI: 10.3201/eid2406.171135.

74.

Liu

, et al. Epidemiology, evolution, and pathogenesis of H7N9 influenza viruses in five epidemic waves since 2013 in China. Trends Microbiol 2017; 25: 713–728. 2017/07/25. DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2017.06.008.

75.

Zhu

Zhou

, et al. Biological characterisation of the emerged highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) A(H7N9) viruses in humans, in mainland China, 2016 to 2017. Euro Surveill 2017; 22: pii: 30533. 2017/05/26. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.19.30533.

76.

Hatta

Gao

Halfmann

, et al. Molecular basis for high virulence of Hong Kong H5N1 influenza A viruses. Science 2001; 293: 1840–1842. DOI: 10.1126/science.1062882.

77.

Fouchier

Schneeberger

Rozendaal

, et al. Avian influenza A virus (H7N7) associated with human conjunctivitis and a fatal case of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004; 101: 1356–1361. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0308352100.

78.

Chen

Liang

Yang

, et al. Human infections with the emerging avian influenza A H7N9 virus from wet market poultry: clinical analysis and characterisation of viral genome. Lancet 2013; 381: 1916–1925. 2013/04/30. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60903-4.

79.

Chang

Lin

Chiu

WT.

Human infection with H7N9 virus.

N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 879. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc1308255#SA1.

80.

Gao

Cao

, et al. Human Infection with a novel avian-origin influenza A (H7N9) virus. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 1888–1897. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1304459.

81.

Wang

Horby

, et al. Comparison of patients hospitalized with influenza A subtypes H7N9, H5N1, and 2009 pandemic H1N1. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 58: 1095–1103. 2014/02/04. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciu053.

82.

Kang

Lau

EHY

Guan

, et al. Epidemiology of human infections with highly pathogenic avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in Guangdong, 2016 to 2017. Euro Surveill 2017; 22: ▪. 2017/07/14. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2017.22.27.30568.

83.

Peiris

Leung

, et al. Re-emergence of fatal human influenza A subtype H5N1 disease. Lancet 2004; 363: 617–619. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15595-5.

84.

de Jong

Simmons

Thanh

, et al. Fatal outcome of human influenza A (H5N1) is associated with high viral load and hypercytokinemia. Nat Med 2006; 12: 1203–1207. DOI: 10.1038/nm1477.

85.

Hung

, et al. Delayed clearance of viral load and marked cytokine activation in severe cases of pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza virus infection. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50: 850–859. DOI: 10.1086/650581.

86.

Chi

Zhu

Wen

, et al. Cytokine and chemokine levels in patients infected with the novel avian influenza A (H7N9) virus in China. J Infect Dis 2013; 208: 1962–1967. 2013/08/31. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jit440.

87.

Yang

Lou

Zheng

, et al. Cytokines and chemokines in mild/asymptomatic cases infected with avian influenza A (H7N9) virus. J Med Microbiol 2016; 65: 1232–1235. 2016/08/19. DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.000333.

88.

Zhao

Liu

Kou

, et al. Differences in the pathogenicity and inflammatory responses induced by avian influenza A/H7N9 virus infection in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mouse models. PLoS One 2014; 9: e92987. 2014/03/29. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092987.

89.

Wei

, et al. Epidemiological and molecular characteristics of the PB1-F2 proteins in H7N9 influenza viruses, Jiangsu. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 804731. DOI: 10.1155/2015/804731.

90.

Eweas

Abdel-Moneim

AS.

In-silico structural analysis of the influenza A subtype H7N9 neuraminidase and molecular docking with different neuraminidase inhibitors.

Virusdisease 2015; 26: 27–32. 2015/10/06. DOI: 10.1007/s13337-014-0245-5.

91.

Danqi

Liu

, et al. H7N9 avian influenza A virus in China: a short report on its circulation, drug resistant mutants and novel antiviral drugs. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2017; 15: 723–727. 2017/07/12. DOI: 10.1080/14787210.2017.1353419.

92.

Cao

Xiao

Cao

, et al. Inhibition of novel reassortant avian influenza H7N9 virus infection in vitro with three antiviral drugs, oseltamivir, peramivir and favipiravir. Antivir Chem Chemother 2014; 23: 237–240. 2013/08/21. DOI: 10.3851/IMP2672.

93.

Liu

Strayer

, et al. Emergence of a novel drug resistant H7N9 influenza virus: evidence based clinical potential of a natural IFN-alpha for infection control and treatment. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2014; 12: 165–169. 2013/12/20. DOI: 10.1586/14787210.2014.870885.

94.

Yen

Herlocher

Hoffmann

, et al. Neuraminidase inhibitor-resistant influenza viruses may differ substantially in fitness and transmissibility. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49: 4075–4084. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.49.10.4075-4084.2005.

95.

Mok

Chang

Chen

, et al. Pyrosequencing reveals an oseltamivir-resistant marker in the quasispecies of avian influenza A (H7N9) virus. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2015; 48: 465–469. 2014/01/07. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2013.09.010.

96.

Marjuki

Mishin

Chesnokov

, et al. Characterization of drug-resistant influenza A(H7N9) variants isolated from an oseltamivir–treated patient in Taiwan. J Infect Dis 2015; 211: 249–257. 2014/08/16. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiu447.

97.

Hai

Schmolke

Leyva-Grado

, et al. Influenza A(H7N9) virus gains neuraminidase inhibitor resistance without loss of in vivo virulence or transmissibility. Nat Commun 2013; 4: 2854. 2013/12/12. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms3854.

98.

Wong

Liu

, et al. Ribavirin is effective against drug-resistant H7N9 influenza virus infections. Protein Cell 2016; 7: 611–614. 2016/07/20. DOI: 10.1007/s13238-016-0287-0.

99.

XOFLUZA (Baloxavir marboxil) for the treatment of influenza types A and B launched in Japan. Shionogi press release

2018.

100.

Kong

Zhang

, et al. A live attenuated vaccine prevents replication and transmission of H7N9 virus in mammals. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 11233. 2015/06/11. DOI: 10.1038/srep11233.

101.

Chia

Tseng

, et al. Evaluation of MDCK cell-derived influenza H7N9 vaccine candidates in ferrets. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0120793. 2015/03/24. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120793.

102.

Wodal

Schwendinger

Savidis-Dacho

, et al. Immunogenicity and protective efficacy of a Vero cell culture-derived whole-virus H7N9 vaccine in mice and guinea pigs. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0113963. 2015/02/27. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113963.

103.

Guo

, et al. [Safety and immunogenicity of seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (split virion) and cross-reactive antibody responses to the H7N9 avian influenza virus]. Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi 2014; 35: 949–952. 2014/11/08.

104.

Yan

Villarreal

Racine

, et al. Protective immunity to H7N9 influenza viruses elicited by synthetic DNA vaccine. Vaccine 2014; 32: 2833–2842. 2014/03/19. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.02.038.

105.

Novavax' H7N9 avian influenza VLP vaccine positive in Phase 1/2. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014; 10: 3103–3104. 2014/01/01.

106.

Fries

Smith

Glenn

GM.

A recombinant viruslike particle influenza A (H7N9) vaccine.

N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 2564–2566. 2013/11/15. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc1313186.

107.

Smith

Flyer

Raghunandan

, et al. Development of influenza H7N9 virus like particle (VLP) vaccine: homologous A/Anhui/1/2013 (H7N9) protection and heterologous A/chicken/Jalisco/CPA1/2012 (H7N3) cross-protection in vaccinated mice challenged with H7N9 virus. Vaccine 2013; 31: 4305–4313. 2013/07/31. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.07.043.

108.

Isakova-Sivak

Rudenko

Tackling a novel lethal virus: a focus on H7N9 vaccine development.

Expert Rev Vaccines 2017; 16: 1–13. 2017/05/24. DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2017.1333907.

109.

Ridenour

Johnson

Winne

, et al. Development of influenza A(H7N9) candidate vaccine viruses with improved hemagglutinin antigen yield in eggs. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2015; 9: 263–270. 2015/05/13. DOI: 10.1111/irv.12322.

110.

Sobhanie

Matsuoka

Jegaskanda

, et al. Evaluation of the safety and immunogenicity of a candidate pandemic live attenuated influenza vaccine (pLAIV) against influenza A(H7N9). J Infect Dis 2016; 213: 922–929. 2015/12/15. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiv526.

111.

Rudenko

Isakova-Sivak

Naykhin

, et al. H7N9 live attenuated influenza vaccine in healthy adults: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16: 303–310. 2015/12/18. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00378-3.

112.

Rudenko

Kiseleva

Naykhin

, et al. Assessment of human immune responses to H7 avian influenza virus of pandemic potential: results from a placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind phase I study of live attenuated H7N3 influenza vaccine. PLoS One 2014; 9: e87962. 2014/02/18. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087962.

113.

Rudenko

Desheva

Korovkin

, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of live attenuated influenza reassortant H5 vaccine (phase I-II clinical trials). Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2008; 2: 203–209. DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2008.00064.x.

114.

Talaat

Karron

Callahan

, et al. A live attenuated H7N3 influenza virus vaccine is well tolerated and immunogenic in a Phase I trial in healthy adults. Vaccine 2009; 27: 3744–3753. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.03.082.

115.

Rudenko

Isakova-Sivak

Donina

H7N3 live attenuated influenza vaccine has a potential to protect against new H7N9 avian influenza virus.

Vaccine 2013; 31: 4702–4705. 2013/08/31. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.08.040.

116.

Carter

Bloom

Kirchenbaum

, et al. Cross-protection against H7N9 influenza strains using a live-attenuated H7N3 virus vaccine. Vaccine 2015; 33: 108–116. 2014/12/03. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.11.008.

117.

Couch

Patel

Wade-Bowers

, et al. A randomized clinical trial of an inactivated avian influenza A (H7N7) vaccine. PLoS One 2012; 7: e49704. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049704.

118.

Cox

Major

Hauge

, et al. A cell-based H7N1 split influenza virion vaccine confers protection in mouse and ferret challenge models. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2009; 3: 107–117. DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-2659.2009.00082.x.

119.

Madan

Segall

Ferguson

, et al. Immunogenicity and safety of an AS03-Adjuvanted H7N9 pandemic influenza vaccine in a randomized trial in healthy adults. J Infect Dis 2016; 214: 1717–1727. 2016/09/10. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiw414.

120.

Nishiura

Mizumoto

Ejima

How to interpret the transmissibility of novel influenza A(H7N9): an analysis of initial epidemiological data of human cases from China.

Theor Biol Med Model 2013; 10: 30. 2013/05/07. DOI: 10.1186/1742-4682-10-30.

121.

Luo

An update on clinical trials of H7N9 influenza vaccines.

J Appl Virol 2014; 3: ▪. DOI: http://doi.org/10.21092/jav.v3i3.37.

122.

Liang

, et al. Recombinant baculovirus vaccine expressing hemagglutinin of H7N9 avian influenza virus confers full protection against lethal highly pathogenic H7N9 virus infection in chickens. Arch Virol 2019; 164: 807–817. 2019/01/24. DOI: 10.1007/s00705-018-04142-4.

123.

Chu

Sakoda

Nishi

, et al. Potency of an inactivated influenza vaccine prepared from A/duck/Mongolia/119/2008 (H7N9) against the challenge with A/Anhui/1/2013 (H7N9). Vaccine 2014; 32: 3473–3479. 2014/05/06. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.060.

124.

Lau

EHY

, et al. Influenza H5/H7 virus vaccination in poultry and reduction of zoonotic infections, Guangdong Province, China, 2017-18. Emerg Infect Dis 2019; 25: 116–118. 2018/10/26. DOI: 10.3201/eid2501.181259.

125.

Hou

Wang

, et al. Influenza viral vectors expressing two kinds of HA proteins as bivalent vaccine against highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses of clade 2.3.4.4 H5 and H7N9. Front Microbiol 2018; 9: 604. 2018/04/20. DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00604.

126.

Zeng

Tian

Shi

, et al. Vaccination of poultry successfully eliminated human infection with H7N9 virus in China. Sci China Life Sci 2018; 61: 1465–1473. 2018/11/11. DOI: 10.1007/s11427-018-9420-1.

127.

Shi

Deng

, et al. Rapid evolution of H7N9 highly pathogenic viruses that emerged in China in 2017. Cell Host Microbe 2018; 24: 558–568.e7. 2018/10/03. DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2018.08.006.

128.

Okamatsu

Hiono

Kida

, et al. Recent developments in the diagnosis of avian influenza. Vet J 2016; 215: 82–86. DOI: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.05.007.

129.

Spackman

Killian

ML.

Avian influenza virus isolation, propagation, and titration in embryonated chicken eggs. Methods Mol Biol 2014; 1161: 125–140. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0758-8_12.

130.

Zhou

, et al. Laboratory diagnosis and epidemiology of avian influenza A (H7N9) virus infection in humans in Nanchang City, China. Jpn J Infect Dis 2013; 66: 558–560. 2013/11/26.

131.

Chen

Wang

Zheng

, et al. Rapid diagnostic tests for identifying avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in clinical samples. Emerg Infect Dis 2015; 21: 87–90. 2014/12/23. DOI: 10.3201/eid2101.140247.

132.

Vemula

Zhao

Liu

, et al. Current approaches for diagnosis of influenza virus infections in humans. Viruses 2016; 8: 96. DOI: 10.3390/v8040096.

133.

Guo

Wang

Zhou

, et al. Cross-reactivity between avian influenza A (H7N9) virus and divergent H7 subtypic- and heterosubtypic influenza A viruses. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 22045. 2016/02/26. DOI: 10.1038/srep22045.

134.

Powell

The critical need for rapid influenza serology testing for avian influenza pandemic preparedness.

Health Secur 2017; 15: 450–451. DOI: 10.1089/hs.2017.0041.

135.

Pedersen

JC.

Hemagglutination-inhibition assay for influenza virus subtype identification and the detection and quantitation of serum antibodies to influenza virus. Methods Mol Biol 2014; 1161: 11–25. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0758-8_2.

136.

Trombetta

Remarque

Mortier

, et al. Comparison of hemagglutination inhibition, single radial hemolysis, virus neutralization assays, and ELISA to detect antibody levels against seasonal influenza viruses. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2018; 12: 675–686. DOI: 10.1111/irv.12591.

137.

Wang

Russell

Brewer

, et al. Single radial haemolysis compared to haemagglutinin inhibition and microneutralization as a correlate of protection against influenza A H3N2 in children and adolescents. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2017; 11: 283–288. DOI: 10.1111/irv.12450.

138.

Teferedegne

Lewis

Jr Peden

, et al. Development of a neutralization assay for influenza virus using an endpoint assessment based on quantitative reverse-transcription PCR. PLoS One 2013; 8: e56023. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056023.

139.

Shi

Fang

, et al. Versatile microfluidic complement fixation test for disease biomarker detection. Anal Chim Acta 2016; 916: 67–76. DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2016.02.026.

140.

Chong

Wang

Liu

, et al. Interpreting the transmissibility of the avian influenza A(H7N9) infection from 2013 to 2015 in Zhejiang Province, China. Epidemiol Infect 2016; 144: 1584–1591. 2015/12/10. DOI: 10.1017/S0950268815002812.

141.

Trombetta

Perini

Vitale

, et al. Validation of single radial haemolysis assay: a reliable method to measure antibodies against influenza viruses. J Immunol Methods 2015; 422: 95–101. DOI: 10.1016/j.jim.2015.04.009.

142.

Lin

Wang

Jiao

, et al. An impedance immunosensor based on low-cost microelectrodes and specific monoclonal antibodies for rapid detection of avian influenza virus H5N1 in chicken swabs. Biosens Bioelectron 2015; 67: 546–552. DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2014.09.037.

143.

Bucukovski

Latorre-Margalef

Stallknecht

, et al. A multiplex label-free approach to avian influenza surveillance and serology. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0134484. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134484.

144.

Grund

Adams

Wahlisch

, et al. Comparison of hemagglutination inhibition assay, an ELISA-based micro-neutralization assay and colorimetric microneutralization assay to detect antibody responses to vaccination against influenza A H1N1 2009 virus. J Virol Methods 2011; 171: 369–373. DOI: 10.1016/j.jviromet.2010.11.024.

145.

Wilson

Xie

, et al. Automated interpretation of influenza hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assays: is plate tilting necessary? PLoS One 2017; 12: e0179939. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179939.

146.

Zhang

Xie

, et al. GeXP analyzer-based multiplex reverse-transcription PCR assay for the simultaneous detection and differentiation of eleven duck viruses. BMC Microbiol 2015; 15: 247. 2015/11/01. DOI: 10.1186/s12866-015-0590-6.

147.

Xie

, et al. Simultaneous detection of eight avian influenza A virus subtypes by multiplex reverse transcription-PCR using a GeXP analyser. Sci Rep 2018; 8: 6183. 2018/04/20. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-24620-8.

148.

Xie

, et al. Simultaneous detection of four different neuraminidase types of avian influenza A H5 viruses by multiplex reverse transcription PCR using a GeXP analyser. Influenza Other Respir Viruses 2016; 10: 141–149. DOI: 10.1111/irv.12370.

149.

Virlogeux

Feng

Tsang

, et al. Evaluation of animal-to-human and human-to-human transmission of influenza A (H7N9) virus in China, 2013-15. Sci Rep 2018; 8: 552. 2018/01/13. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-17335-9.

150.

Chowell

Simonsen

Towers

, et al. Transmission potential of influenza A/H7N9, February to May 2013, China. BMC Med 2013; 11: 214. 2013/10/03. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-214.

151.

Zhang

Much higher case-fatality rates of index cases. commentary: differences in the epidemiology of human cases of avian influenza A(H7N9) and A(H5N1) viruses infection.

Front Public Health 2016; 4: 116. 2016/07/06. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00116.

152.

Meliopoulos

Karlsson

Kercher

, et al. Human H7N9 and H5N1 influenza viruses differ in induction of cytokines and tissue tropism. J Virol 2014; 88: 12982–12991. 2014/09/12. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.01571-14.

153.

Gao

Cao

, et al. Clinical findings in 111 cases of influenza A (H7N9) virus infection. N Engl J Med 2013; 368: 2277–2285. 2013/05/24. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305584.

154.

Sun

Gong

, et al. Comparison of characteristics between patients with H7N9 living in rural and urban areas of Zhejiang Province, China: a preliminary report. PLoS One 2014; 9: e93775. 2014/04/09. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093775.

155.

Zhou

Wang

Gao

, et al. Biological features of novel avian influenza A (H7N9) virus. Nature 2013; 499: 500–503. 2013/07/05. DOI: 10.1038/nature12379.

156.

Chen

Wang

, et al. An increasing trend of rural infections of human influenza A (H7N9) from 2013 to 2017: a retrospective analysis of patient exposure histories in Zhejiang Province, China. PLoS One 2018; 13: e0193052. 2018/02/16. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193052.

157.

Lin

Chao

Kuo

, et al. Virological, serological, and antiviral studies in an imported human case of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in Taiwan. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 58: 242–246. 2013/10/01. DOI: 10.1093/cid/cit638.

158.

Lee

ACY

KKW

Zhu

, et al. Avian influenza virus A H7N9 infects multiple mononuclear cell types in peripheral blood and induces dysregulated cytokine responses and apoptosis in infected monocytes. J Gen Virol 2017; 98: 922–934. 2017/05/31. DOI: 10.1099/jgv.0.000751.

159.

Wang

Zhang

Wan

, et al. Early hypercytokinemia is associated with interferon-induced transmembrane protein-3 dysfunction and predictive of fatal H7N9 infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014; 111: 769–774. 2013/12/25. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1321748111.

160.

Bao

Deng

, et al. The mouse and ferret models for studying the novel avian-origin human influenza A (H7N9) virus. Virol J 2013; 10: 253. 2013/08/10. DOI: 10.1186/1743-422X-10-253.

161.

Gubareva

Sleeman

Guo

, et al. Drug susceptibility evaluation of an influenza A (H7N9) virus by analyzing recombinant neuraminidase proteins. J Infect Dis 2017; 216: S566–S574. 2017/09/22. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiw625.

162.

Quan

Lee

Kim

, et al. Progress in developing virus-like particle influenza vaccines. Expert Rev Vaccines 2016; 15: 1281–1293. 2016/04/09. DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2016.1175942.

163.

Kang

Chen

Zhao

, et al. Development of rapid immunochromatographic test for hemagglutinin antigen of H7 subtype in patients infected with novel avian influenza A (H7N9) virus. PLoS One 2014; 9: e92306. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092306.t001.

164.

Zhang

, et al. Highly sensitive visual detection of Avian Influenza A (H7N9) virus based on the enzyme-induced metallization. Biosens Bioelectron 2016; 79: 874–880. 2016/01/23. DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2016.01.004.

165.

Zhang

Feng

, et al. Rapid and sensitive detection of H7N9 avian influenza virus by use of reverse transcription-loop-mediated isothermal amplification. J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 3760–3764. 2013/09/06. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01907-13.

166.

Ahn

Park

, et al. Label-free and real-time detection of avian influenza using nanowire field effect transistors. J Biomed Nanotechnol 2015; 11: 1640–1643. 2015/10/22.