Volume 16, Number 5—May 2010
Cross-Reactive Antibodies to Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Virus, Singapore
To the Editor: Accumulating evidence suggests that the degree of serologic cross-reactivity to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus varies between populations worldwide. To assess potential serologic cross-reactivity in Singapore, we obtained serum samples during May–June 2009 from 50 randomly recruited, healthy volunteers born mostly before 1958 (i.e., potentially those with some natural exposure to the then circulating H1N1/1918-like subtype viruses) before widespread transmission of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus in Singapore. Standard serologic hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) tests (1) were performed in 2 reference laboratories (Singapore during July–October 2009 and Melbourne, Australia, in January 2010), and microneutralization (MN) tests (2) were performed in 1 reference laboratory (Singapore) for each serum sample against pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus (A/Auckland/1/2009) and seasonal influenza (H1N1) virus (A/Brisbane/59/2007). The study was reviewed and approved by the National Healthcare Group Domain-Specific Review Board (ref no. E/09/289, J.W.T. principal investigator).
Mean ± SD age of participants was 60.1 ± 7.4 years (range 45–82 years); 31 (62%) were women, 42 (84%) were born in Singapore (the rest in Hong Kong, Malaysia, or India), and 26 (52%) had not traveled outside Singapore. None of the 50 participants had HI or MN titers >40 against influenza A/Auckland/1/2009 when samples were tested in either laboratory. In contrast, 18 samples had either HI or MN titers >40 against seasonal influenza A/Brisbane/59/2007 (Table). Use of guinea pig or turkey erythrocytes in HI assays had little effect on the results (Table). Thus, our results are similar to those of Chen et al. (3) and Itoh et al. (4) for this small cohort in that none of the participants 40–80 years of age from Southeast Asia had cross-reactive antibodies to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus.
Although differences in population demographics and laboratory methods used make comparisons between studies difficult, one of the most striking observations from various studies has been the higher levels of cross-reactive antibody titers in prepandemic serum samples from older persons (>80 years of age) in western populations (United States and United Kingdom) (5,6) than from persons in eastern populations (China) (3) and Singapore (this study). Although Itoh et al (4) did not find serologic cross-reactivity in the population <80 years of age in Japan, they found higher levels of cross-reactive antibodies in their population >80 years of age. Historically, because epidemiologic data suggest that influenza (H1N1)/1918–like viruses were widespread in Asia, these contrasting results are a stimulus for additional large-scale studies to assess the effect of these viruses in these populations.
Although the main limitation of our study is the small sample size, several reasons may account for different findings in population studies of serologic cross-reactivity. First, populations may not be comparable in terms of geographic proximity and their potential for community-acquired infection within the same wave of a seasonal influenza epidemic with a virus that was similar to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus. Chen et al. (3) reported that their serum samples were obtained mainly from rural farmers in China who lived farther apart than city dwellers, However, Hancock et al. (5) reported that their samples were obtained from vaccine trials conducted in 1976 or 2005–2009 involving academic, government, and industrial workers, which likely indicates that these persons were urban-based (i.e., living and working more closely to each other than rural farmers in China). Thus, results of our study may not be directly comparable with either of these previous studies because our population resided in Southeast Asia and was urban-based.
Second, use of seasonal influenza vaccine has varied in different populations, with Singapore having one of the lowest recorded use rates in the Western Pacific region, and far lower than that in the United States (6). If previous seasonal influenza viruses shared a degree of antigenic cross-reactivity with pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, contemporary seasonal influenza vaccines, if well-matched, should reflect changing antigenicity of seasonal influenza viruses; thus, vaccinated populations may have acquired some serologic cross-reactivity through previous influenza vaccines. However, it is likely that past infection rather than vaccination results in cross-reactivity, as suggested by Miller et al. (7).
Third, because pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus originated mainly from swine viruses in North America and Europe (8), resident populations in these countries have been exposed to these virus lineages more frequently than populations in Asia, and therefore may have acquired a greater degree of preexisting cross-reactive immunity to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus. A recent review of human swine influenza infections suggests that they may not be uncommon (9), although the true incidence of human infections with swine influenza is unknown because of paucity of swine influenza surveillance data worldwide (8).
In conclusion, partial cross-immunity and cell-mediated immunity may be present but not detected by HI or MN assays. Thus, results of standard serologic assays may not be providing all relevant data (10).
Testing by the Melbourne World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Reference and Research on Influenza was supported by the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing.
- World Health Organization. WHO manual on animal influenza diagnosis and surveillance. Geneva: The Organization. Document WHO/CDS/CSR/NCS /2002.5); 2002. p. 28–39.
- World Health Organization. WHO manual on animal influenza diagnosis and surveillance. Geneva: The Organization. Document WHO/CDS/CSR/NCS /2002.5); 2002. p. 48–54.
- Chen H, Wang Y, Liu W, Zhang J, Dong B, Fan X, Serologic survey of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, Guanxi Province, China. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:1849–50.
- Itoh Y, Shinya K, Kiso M, Watanabe T, Sakoda Y, Hatta M, In vitro and in vivo characterization of new swine-origin H1N1 influenza viruses. Nature. 2009;460:1021–5.
- Hancock K, Veguilla V, Lu X, Zhong W, Butler EN, Sun H, Cross-reactive antibody responses to the 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza virus. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1945–52.
- Macroepidemiology of Influenza Vaccination (MIV) Study Group. The macro-epidemiology of influenza vaccination in 56 countries, 1997–2003. Vaccine. 2005;23:5133–43.
- Miller E, Hoschler K, Hardelid P, Standford E, Andrews N, Zambon M. Incidence of 2009 pandemic influenza A H1N1 infection in England: a cross-sectional serological study. [Epub ahead of print]. Lancet. 2010; (
- Peiris JS, Poon LL, Guan Y. Emergence of a novel swine-origin influenza A virus (S-OIV) H1N1 virus in humans. J Clin Virol. 2009;45:169–73.
- Myers KP, Olsen CW, Gray GC. Cases of swine influenza in humans: a review of the literature. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44:1084–8.
- Xing Z, Cardona CJ. Preexisting immunity to pandemic (H1N1) 2009. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:1847–9.
Suggested citation for this article: Tang JW, Tambyah PA, Wilder-Smith A, Puong K-Y, Shaw R, Barr IG, et al. Cross-reactive antibodies to pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus, Singapore [letter]. Emerg Infect Dis [serial on the Internet]. 2010 May [date cited]. http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/16/5/09-1678
Comments to the Authors
Comments to the EID Editors
Please contact the EID Editors via our Contact Form.
- Page created: December 23, 2010
- Page last updated: December 23, 2010
- Page last reviewed: December 23, 2010
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID)
Office of the Director (OD)