Cross-neutralizing antibody against emerging Omicron subvariants of SARS-CoV-2 in infection-naïve individuals with homologous BNT162b2 or BNT162b2(WT + BA.4/5) bivalent booster vaccination.

Since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, different variants and subvariants successively emerged to dominate global virus circulation as a result of immune evasion, replication fitness or both. COVID-19 vaccines continue to be updated in response to the emergence of antigenically divergent viruses, the first being the bivalent RNA vaccines that encodes for both the Wuhan-like and Omicron BA.5 subvariant spike proteins. Repeated infections and vaccine breakthrough infections have led to complex immune landscapes in populations making it increasingly difficult to assess the intrinsic neutralizing antibody responses elicited by the vaccines. Hong Kong's intensive COVID-19 containment policy through 2020-2021 permitted us to identify sera from a small number of infection-naïve individuals who received 3 doses of the RNA BNT162b2 vaccine encoding the Wuhan-like spike (WT) and were boosted with a fourth dose of the WT vaccine or the bivalent WT and BA.4/5 spike (WT + BA.4/5). While neutralizing antibody to wild-type virus was comparable in both vaccine groups, BNT162b2 (WT + BA.4/BA.5) bivalent vaccine elicited significantly higher plaque neutralizing antibodies to Omicron subvariants BA.5, XBB.1.5, XBB.1.16, XBB.1.9.1, XBB.2.3.2, EG.5.1, HK.3, BA.2.86 and JN.1, compared to BNT162b2 monovalent vaccine. The single amino acid substitution that differentiates the spike of JN.1 from BA.2.86 resulted in a profound antigenic change.

From SARS to Avian Influenza Preparedness in Hong Kong.

The first human H5N1 case was diagnosed in Hong Kong in 1997. Since then, experience in effective preparedness strategies that target novel influenza viruses has expanded. Here, we report on avian influenza preparedness in public hospitals in Hong Kong to illustrate policies and practices associated with control of emerging infectious diseases. The Hong Kong government's risk-based preparedness plan for influenza pandemics includes 3 response levels for command, control, and coordination frameworks for territory-wide responses. The tiered levels of alert, serious, and emergency response enable early detection based on epidemiological exposure followed by initiation of a care bundle. Information technology, laboratory preparedness, clinical and public health management, and infection control preparedness provide a comprehensive and generalizable preparedness plan for emerging infectious diseases.