Showing posts with label risk assessment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label risk assessment. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 9, 2026

Rapid #Risk #Assessment: #Ebola #Bundibugyo virus disease, #DRC, #Uganda (#WHO, June 9 '26, summary)

 


Date and version of current assessment: 06 June 2026, v3  

Date(s) and version(s) of previous assessment(s): 15 May 2026, V1; 22 May 2026,V2 


Risk statement

    Following the publication of the second Rapid Risk Assessment (RRA) on 22 May 2026, the Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) outbreak has continued to expand, particularly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and, to a lesser extent, in Uganda

    During this period, a case was reported in a Congolese national who travelled from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, via Uganda, to the United Arab Emirates and then back to Uganda. 

    WHO is working with public health authorities in the United Arab Emirates and Uganda to gather additional information to assess the risk of exposure and facilitate contact tracing through the National International Health Regulations (IHR) Focal Point mechanism. 

    Following notification of the case, the United Arab Emirates authorities rapidly implemented risk assessment, contact tracing activities, follow-up of identified contacts, public health investigations, enhanced preparedness measures at points of entry, and coordination with relevant national and international partners. 

    Epidemiological investigations to date have not identified any secondary cases, local transmission, or evidence of onward spread in the country.   

    Additionally, as of 6 June, the outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has expanded considerably; the number of reported affected health zones has increased from 16 to 25, while the number of laboratory-confirmed cases increased from 63 to 515 and the number of confirmed deaths from four to 91 (CFR 17.7%). 

    The increase in the number of confirmed cases reflects both ongoing transmission and improvements in case detection through expanded testing and intensified contact tracing activities. 

    The number of reported suspected cases decreased from 661 to 117 following the testing of a backlog of samples and subsequent reclassification of suspected cases to either confirmed cases or noncases. 

    So far, at least 16 healthcare workers are among the confirmed cases. 

    Cases have been reported across all age groups, with most occurring among adults aged 20–49 years, and a slightly higher proportion among males. 

    To date, 12 patients have recovered

    The outbreak has also expanded geographically, with transmission reported in additional health zones in Ituri and North Kivu provinces. 

    The outbreak is now reported across 25 health zones in Ituri (17), North Kivu (seven), and South Kivu (one) provinces, with new affected areas identified in both Ituri and North Kivu.  

    In Uganda, as of 6 June, the number of reported confirmed cases increased from two to 19 (14 imported and five acquired in Uganda), including two deaths in imported cases. 

    All reported cases are from two districts (Kampala and Wakiso). 

    Five healthcare workers are among the confirmed cases, indicating transmission in healthcare settings

    To date, all cases in Uganda have been linked to importation from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or secondary cases linked to these; there has been no documented community transmission in Uganda.   

    In light of the continued evolution of the outbreak and newly available information, including the increase in the number of reported cases, geographic expansion, cross-border transmission to Uganda, and ongoing response activities, this RRA has been updated

    Based on these developments and the WHO Temporary Recommendations issued by the WHO Director-General following the declaration of a Public Health Event of International Concern (PHEIC) for the Ebola disease epidemic caused by Bundibugyo virus (BDBV) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, the risk for countries sharing land borders with countries with documented BDBV detection, currently the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, has been separated out from the risk for other countries in the African Region: the risk in countries sharing land borders remains high, while the risk for other countries in the African region is assessed as low

    Countries sharing land borders with the Democratic Republic of the Congo and/or Uganda have not reported confirmed cases to date

    Neighbouring countries have strengthened surveillance and point-of-entry (PoE) measures, although the extent of implementation may vary across countries.  

    The risk globally remains unchanged and is assessed as low.  

    The risk in the Democratic Republic of the Congo remains assessed as very high due to ongoing transmission and the continued expansion of the outbreak into new health zones, increasing the potential for further national and regional spread. 

    The key factors underpinning this assessment include:  

        The outbreak has continued to expand rapidly since the previous assessment. Between 22 May and 6 June 2026, the number of confirmed cases increased more than eightfold from 63 to 515 cases, while the number of health zones with confirmed cases has increased by 56 % (from 16 to 25), indicating intensified transmission and geographic spread. 

        The detection of cases in additional health zones in Ituri and North Kivu provinces and ongoing transmission among healthcare workers suggest that the outbreak continues to pose a very high risk of further spread within the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

        In Ituri province, 17 of the 36 health zones are now affected, with Aungba, Damas, Gety, Komanda, Lita, Mambasa and Mangala among the newly affected health zones. In North Kivu province, confirmed case detections in the Beni and Kyondo health zones have increased the number of affected health zones to seven out of 35. 

        According to the most up-to-date sub-national risk stratification analysis, which will be used to further inform operational response priorities, there are a total of 159 health zones currently deemed affected or at risk; this classifies the level of community transmission and underscores the large geographic scale of response needed to control this outbreak.  

            o 25 health zones with confirmed cases, including 17 ‘hotspot’ health zones and eight  ‘active’ health zones{2} 

            o 19 high-risk health zones 

            o 115 at-risk health zones 

        Epidemiological links and the full chain of transmission are not yet clearly established, and the source of the outbreak remains under investigation.  

        Retrospective investigations identified suspected viral haemorrhagic fever cases occurring back in March 2026,  several weeks before outbreak confirmation, suggesting prolonged undetected transmission prior to May 2026 and the establishment of multiple disconnected transmission chains across affected communities and provinces. 

        The affected area is characterized by intense population mobility linked to mining activities, trade, social ties and care seeking, with movement between rural and urban centres and across neighbouring provinces.  

        Reports of patients avoiding or leaving treatment facilities, together with evidence of ongoing community mistrust of BVD prevention and response measures, raise concerns about reduced healthcare-seeking behaviour and under-detection of cases. As observed during previous Ebola disease outbreaks, community  fear and misinformation have hindered case detection, contact tracing, and isolation efforts, contributing to sustained transmission. Such challenges may facilitate ongoing spread within affected communities and complicate outbreak control measures. 

        Reports of numerous community deaths and challenges in the implementation and community acceptance of safe and dignified burial (SDB) practices are of concern. Traditional burial practices often involve direct contact with the deceased, which may facilitate transmission and contribute to the persistence of community-based transmission chains. 

        Ongoing conflict in Ituri and North Kivu provinces restricts the movement of surveillance teams, limits the deployment of Rapid Response Teams, and hinders the secure transport of laboratory samples, as well as posing challenges to contact tracing, safe and dignified burials and control of movement of high-risk contacts in those conflict zones. 

        Limited healthcare infrastructure, combined with inadequate and insufficient Ebola Treatment Centre (ETC) and isolation capacity, may hinder effective case management and infection prevention and control measures. The mixing of suspected and confirmed cases in healthcare facilities increases the risk of nosocomial transmission and may further amplify the outbreak. 

        Delays in laboratory confirmation resulting from stockouts of testing supplies and limited diagnostic capacity have hindered the timely detection, isolation, and management of cases. 

        Infection among at least 16 healthcare workers, including a laboratory technician, together with low infection prevention and control (IPC) scorecard performance in affected areas, indicate a high risk of exposure in healthcare settings and significant gaps in IPC. 

        Early and intensive  supportive care remains the only treatment option for BVD, for which no licensed vaccine or specific therapeutics are currently available for prevention and treatment.  

        Community protection capacities remain insufficient in several affected areas, including limited social listening, community feedback mechanisms, rumour management, engagement of trusted local leaders and Community Health Workers (CHWs), and systematic use of community insights to inform operational decision-making. These gaps may contribute to delayed care-seeking, underreporting, reduced acceptance of response measures and continued transmission. 

    The level of risk for Uganda is still assessed as High due to

        Confirmed cross-border spread through imported cases to Uganda. 

        As of 6 June 2026, Uganda had reported 19 cases linked to the outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, following the importation of two cases who travelled to Uganda to seek medical care. Among the reported cases, five are healthcare workers, indicating transmission in healthcare settings. 

        Despite the suspension of passenger transport services between Uganda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including flights, buses, and ferries, cross-border population movement is likely to continue through informal and uncontrolled crossing points. The porous border, together with intense cross-border mobility associated with mining, trade, family visits, healthcare-seeking, displacement or population movements linked to insecurity, increases the likelihood of continued cross-border transmission. 

        Potential for undetected chains of transmission in border communities. 

        Preliminary analyses of population movement and cross-border mobility patterns have identified Kisoro, Kabale, Kanungu, Rukungiri, Kasese, Kikuube, Hoima, Pakwach, Nebbi, Arua, Zombo, Koboko, and Yumbe as the districts at increased risk of importation and subsequent transmission of BVD from the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

        Ongoing epidemiological links along the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo–western Uganda corridor, historically affected by Ebola outbreaks, including Bundibugyo and Sudan virus disease outbreaks. 

    The risk for countries with land borders adjoining countries with documented BDBV detection, is assessed as high  based on the following factors: 

        Sustained population mobility across porous borders linked to cross-border trade and mining activities, combined with operational constraints resulting from insecurity, displacement, and limited healthcare access, increase the risk of continued transmission and hinder outbreak control measures. 

        Insufficient laboratory capacity, coupled with limited experience in BVD surveillance, case management, infection prevention and control, contact tracing, and outbreak response, may reduce the ability of some neighbouring countries to rapidly detect and contain imported cases. 

        Variable levels of readiness for community engagement, community-based surveillance, social listening, rumor management and community feedback systems may limit the ability of some neighbouring countries to rapidly identify, understand and respond to community concerns following an imported case. 

        There are variations in capacities and experiences across these countries.  

    The level of risk for the rest of the Africa region and at the global level is assessed as low due to

        At present the outbreak remains geographically limited to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with exportation of cases only to Uganda. 

        No evidence suggests sustained international transmission of BVD beyond the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda border areas currently. 

        The exportation of cases through international travel, particularly during the asymptomatic incubation period, is possible and may be anticipated; however, this does not change the overall risk assessment, and the risk of global spread remains low. 

(...)

1 Confidence refers to the level of confidence in the data/information or the quality of the evidence available at the time the RRA is conducted. Poor quality information may increase the overall perceived risk due to the incertitude in the assessment. 

2 ‘Hotspot’ health zones refer to those with the highest burden of active transmission among those with confirmed cases reported; ‘active’ refers to all other health zones with confirmed cases reported 

(...)

Source: 


Link: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/who-rapid-risk-assessment-ebola-disease-caused-by-bundibugyo-virus--democratic-republic-of-the-congo--uganda-and-countries-with-land-borders-adjoining-countries-with-documented-bdbv-detection-v3

____

Monday, June 8, 2026

#Ebola disease caused by #Bundibugyo virus, #DRC & #Uganda (#WHO D.O.B., June 8 '26): 515 confirmed cases and 95 deaths in DRC

 


Situation at a glance

    The Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo continues to evolve rapidly, with increasing case numbers, geographic spread, and cross-border transmission to Uganda

    As of 6 June, a total of 515 confirmed cases, with 91 deaths among these confirmed cases, have been reported from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; Uganda has reported 19 confirmed cases including two deaths, as well as one probable case who has died

    In Uganda, the outbreak remains epidemiologically linked to transmission originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with evidence of both imported infections and secondary transmission among contacts and healthcare workers

    National authorities, in collaboration with WHO and partners, are undertaking a wide-ranging package of response measures

    On 5 June, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) and WHO, together with partners, launched a joint Ebola continental preparedness and response plan, with an ask of US$ 518 million to support African countries to prepare for, rapidly detect and respond to the outbreak.


Description of the situation

    Since the last Disease Outbreak News was published on 29 May 2026, the number of confirmed cases and deaths have increased rapidly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda

    In total, 534 confirmed cases including 93 deaths (case fatality rate [CFR] 17.4%) have been reported from both countries, while at least 17 people have recovered from the disease.

(...)


Democratic Republic of the Congo

    Since 29 May, an additional 390 confirmed cases including 74 confirmed deaths have been reported from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

    The increase is in part due to the scale up of testing and diagnostic capacities, enabling testing of the backlog of previously collected samples

    As of 6 June 2026, a total of 515 confirmed cases including 91 deaths (CFR 17.7%) have been reported from the Democratic Republic of Congo. 

    The reported CFR is likely an underestimation as many deaths that occurred before the outbreak declaration remain under investigation. 

    So far, 12 patients have recovered

    Cases have been reported from 25 health zones (HZ) from Ituri (17/36 HZ), North Kivu (7/35 HZ) and South Kivu Provinces (1/34 HZ)[1]. 

    Sixteen confirmed cases have been reported among health and care workers to date.

    The outbreak remains concentrated in Ituri Province, which accounts for 94% (487) of confirmed cases. 

    The CFR in Ituri is 15% (74/487); significantly lower than the CFR in North Kivu which is 64% (16/25). 

    The highest confirmed case numbers in Ituri Province are reported from Bunia (142 cases), Rwampara (98 cases), Mongbwalu (92 cases), and Nyankunde (24 cases) HZ.

    As of 6 June, 5040 contacts had been identified and were under follow-up across Ituri (4118), North Kivu (699), and South Kivu (223) provinces. 

    Of these, 2535 contacts were followed up in the last 24 hours, corresponding to follow-up rates of 43.2% in Ituri, 82.5% in North Kivu, and 80.3% in South Kivu.

    Increasing security-related incidents affecting health facilities have posed additional operational challenges in affected provinces. These conditions are constraining access for the response, disrupting surveillance and response activities, and increasing the risk of undetected transmission. Such incidents underline the challenges of the context and the importance of working closely with local leaders and communities. 


Figure 2: Number of confirmed cases (n = 515), including deaths,  in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, by date of reporting and as of 6 June 2026




{Click on Image to Enlarge}

NB: Newly reported confirmed cases/deaths may be part of the back log of samples and therefore not necessarily newly acquired infections. 


Uganda

    Since the last update dated 29 May, an additional 10 confirmed cases and one death have been reported from Uganda. 

    As of 6 June 2026, a total of 19 confirmed cases including two deaths in imported cases, and one probable case who has died, have been reported. 

    Five recoveries have been reported

    Of the total cases, 14 cases are imported and five are Ugandans

    The cases were reported from two districts Kampala and Wakiso

    To date, all cases in Uganda can be linked to travelers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or secondary infections linked to them; there has been no documented community transmission in Uganda. 

    Exposure risks are associated with healthcare settings and cross-border movements.

    About 70% of the cases are Congolese nationals who came to Uganda to seek medical care. 

    This includes a Congolese national who travelled from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, via Uganda, to the United Arab Emirates and then back to Uganda. 

    WHO is working with public health authorities in the United Arab Emirates and Uganda to gather additional information to assess the risk of exposure and facilitate contact tracing through the National International Health Regulations (IHR) Focal Point mechanism. 

    Based on the information available to date, there is no evidence that the case exhibited clearly recognized symptoms consistent with BVD during travel to or from the United Arab Emirates. 

    Following notification of the case, UAE authorities rapidly implemented risk assessment, contact tracing activities, follow-up of identified contacts, public health investigations, enhanced preparedness measures at points of entry, and coordination with relevant national and international partners. 

    Epidemiological investigations to date have not identified any secondary cases, local transmission, or evidence of onward spread in the. The findings support the conclusion that the risk of transmission associated with this event in the United Arab Emirates was very low.

    As of 2 June, a total of 668 contacts linked to the cases have been identified and are under follow-up. These include close residential contacts and hospital contacts where the cases were hospitalized. 


Figure 3: Number of confirmed cases (n = 19), including deaths, in Uganda by date of reporting and as of 6 June 2026  Number of confirmed cases and deaths in Uganda


{Click on Image to Enlarge}


Epidemiology

    Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) is a severe and often fatal form of Ebola disease caused by the Bundibugyo virus, one of the Orthoebolavirus species

    It is a zoonotic disease, with fruit bats suspected to be the natural reservoir. 

    Human infection is thought to occur through close contact with the blood or secretions of infected wildlife, such as bats or non-human primates, and it subsequently spreads from person to person through direct contact with the blood, secretions, organs, or other bodily fluids of infected individuals or contaminated surfaces or items. 

    Transmission is particularly amplified in health-care settings when infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are inadequate, and during unsafe burial practices involving direct contact with the deceased.

    The incubation period for BVD ranges from two to 21 days, and individuals are not infectious until symptom onset

    Early symptoms such as fever, fatigue, muscle pain, headache, and sore throat, are non-specific, which complicates clinical diagnosis and can delay detection. 

    These symptoms then progress to gastrointestinal symptoms, organ dysfunction, and in some cases haemorrhagic manifestations. 

    Case fatality rates in the past two BVD outbreaks, reported in Uganda and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2007 and 2012 were 30% and 50% respectively.

    Differentiating BVD from other endemic febrile illnesses such as malaria is challenging without laboratory confirmation using PCR or antigen/antibody-based assays. 

    Control relies on rapid case identification, isolation and care, contact tracing, safe burials, and strong community engagement, as no approved vaccines or specific treatments currently exist for BVD.


Public health response

    Health authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, in collaboration with WHO and partners, are implementing comprehensive public health measures including implementing the continental response plan, engaging donors and mobilizing additional resources to address critical funding gaps and sustain response operations across affected and at-risk areas.

    Key response activities also include interagency coordination and deployment of field teams, delivery of medical supplies, strengthening surveillance, increasing laboratory capacity, infection prevention and control, the set-up of safe and optimized treatment centers, risk communication and community engagement, and research on potential medical countermeasures.

    For further information about public health response actions by the respective Ministry of Health, WHO, and partners, please refer to the latest situation reports published by the WHO Regional Office for Africa:  Ebola Bundibugyo Virus Disease Outbreak Democratic Republic of the Congo | Uganda Weekly External Situation Report 03, Data as of 31 May 2026 | WHO | Regional Office for Africa


WHO risk assessment

    On 6 June 2026, WHO reassessed the risk of the outbreak of BVD to incorporate newly available information and the WHO Temporary Recommendations. 

    The risk for countries sharing land borders with countries with documented Bundibugyo virus (BVDV) detection, as of this report Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, has been separated out from the risk for other countries in the African Region.

    The risk in the Democratic Republic of the Congo remains assessed as very high due to ongoing transmission and the continued expansion of the outbreak into new health zones, increasing the potential for further national and regional spread.

    The risk in Uganda is still assessed as high due to confirmed cross-border spread through imported cases and ongoing epidemiological links along the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo–western Uganda corridor, historically affected by Ebola outbreaks, including Bundibugyo and Sudan virus disease outbreaks.

    The risk for countries with land borders adjoining countries with documented BDBV detection, is assessed as high due to sustained population mobility linked to cross-border trade and mining activities, variation in capacities and experience of BVD response and variable levels of readiness.

    The risk for the rest of the Africa region and at the global level is assessed as low.


WHO advice

    WHO advises against any restriction of travel to, or trade with, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Uganda based on the currently available information. WHO continues to closely monitor and, where necessary, verify travel and trade measures in relation to this event.

    For further information on the considerations for implementing border health and international travel-related temporary recommendations, please see the relevant technical note issued on 26 May 2026

    The temporary recommendations issued to State Parties on 22 May 2026 underscore the importance of coordinated outbreak control, enhanced cross‑border collaboration, and sustained surveillance and preparedness to prevent further regional spread and ensure an effective public health response.

    WHO has convened several technical advisory groups, including the Strategic Advisory group of Experts (SAGE) to assess candidate vaccines and therapeutics for BVD. Key recommendations made are available in the news release published on 28 May 2026.

(...)

Source: 


Link: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON606

____

Saturday, June 6, 2026

#Bundibugyo virus disease #outbreak in #DRC: current #trajectory and potential #risk for a Pandemic Emergency

 


{Excerpt}

On May 15, 2026, DR Congo declared the 17th orthoebolavirus disease outbreak—the third in the country in two decades caused by the Bundibugyo virus variant (Orthoebolavirus bundibugyoense)—in the conflict affected north-eastern province of Ituri.1 The next day, the WHO Director-General determined this event a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) and on May 18, the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared a Public Health Emergency of Continental Security.2 10 days earlier, WHO received an alert about a cluster of unexplained deaths, including deaths among health workers, in the Mongbwalu Health Zone. Initial laboratory results were negative for orthoebolavirus and reagents from Ituri were reasonably provisioned for Ebola virus.1

(...)

Source: 


____

Friday, June 5, 2026

#Assessment of #Risk to the #US #Population from the #Ebola Disease #Outbreak Caused by #Bundibugyo Virus, 2026 (MMWR)

 


Summary

    -- What is already known about this topic?

        ° An outbreak of Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD), a type of Ebola disease, is currently occurring, centered in the Ituri province of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

    -- What is added by this report?

        ° CDC assessed the risk posed by this ongoing outbreak to the U.S. population during the next 3 months as low.

    -- What are the implications for public health practice?

        ° Ensuring sufficient public health resources to control the outbreak in DRC will be necessary for maintaining a low risk to the U.S. population. If cases arise in the United States, there is public health capacity to contain and control an outbreak, and CDC guidance for U.S. clinicians and public health practitioners can help prevent the potential spread.


Abstract

On May 15, 2026, the ministries of health in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda declared outbreaks of Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD), a type of Ebola disease. In response to reports of high numbers of suspected cases and deaths in the affected countries, CDC assessed the risk posed by the BVD outbreak to the U.S. population during the next 3 months. This analysis used a standardized risk assessment approach that included epidemiologic data from the ongoing outbreak and historical data from previous Ebola outbreaks; the overall risk was determined by taking into account independent assessments of the likelihood of infection and the impact of infection. The assessment found that the overall risk to the U.S. population posed by the current BVD outbreak during the next 3 months is low, based on the extremely low likelihood of transmission, despite the high impact that potential infection could have and the resources that would be required to respond to the outbreak. Limitations to this assessment included uncertainties around the epidemiology of BVD as well as the current and future scope and geographic spread of the outbreak. CDC continues to monitor factors that could change this risk assessment.

Source: 


Link: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/75/wr/mm7522e2.htm?s_cid=mm7522e2_e&ACSTrackingID=USCDC_921-DM155686&ACSTrackingLabel=Early%20Release%20%E2%80%93%20Vol.%2075%2C%20June%205%2C%202026&deliveryName=USCDC_921-DM155686

____

Thursday, June 4, 2026

Why #Andes #hantavirus is not the next #SARS-CoV-2: contrasting viral shedding, #transmissibility and #genomic patterns

 


Abstract

A cruise ship-associated Andes hantavirus outbreak has raised questions usually associated with respiratory viruses, including transmissibility and pandemic risk. Although Andes virus may enter through the respiratory route, cause severe respiratory disease and under close contact spread between humans, it differs fundamentally from SARS-CoV-2. The ecology is rodent-borne, pathogenesis is vascular, diagnosis is centred on blood PCR and serology, and genetic diversity is mainly shaped by reservoir ecology and geography rather than by sustained human-to-human transmission and immune selection.

Source: 


Link: https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2026.31.22.2600428?emailalert=true#abstract_content

____

Wednesday, June 3, 2026

CEIRR #Risk #Assessment Pipeline executive reports on #H5N1 highly pathogenic avian influenza 2.3.4.4b, swine H1 1B.2, and #H9N2 low pathogenicity avian influenza B4.7.2

 


ABSTRACT

The Centers of Excellence for Influenza Research and Response (CEIRR) Risk Assessment Pipeline (RAP) integrates surveillance, phenotypic analysis, and computational modeling across six CEIRR centers to evaluate the pandemic potential of influenza A viruses. By generating coordinated data sets from wild and domestic animals and linking them to viral evolution and functional traits, CEIRR RAP supports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s and the World Health Organization’s risk-assessment efforts. The RAP’s data packages thereby enable evidence-based prioritization of global influenza preparedness and response strategies.

Source: 


Link: https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00545-26

____

#WHO DG's opening #remarks at the media #briefing on the #Bundibugyo Ebola #outbreak – 3 June 2026 (Edited): 344 confirmed cases in #DRC, 15 in #Uganda

 


    Good afternoon to everyone in the room, and good morning, good afternoon and good evening to those joining us online.

    Yesterday I returned from a visit to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, including to the epicentre of the Ebola outbreak in the province of Ituri.

    I met with political leaders, senior health officials, Ambassadors, partners, WHO colleagues, frontline responders, community and faith leaders, women’s groups, business leaders, traditional healers and more.

    I’m very encouraged by the level of commitment I saw everywhere I went. What I saw gave me hope, although challenges remain.

    In DRC, 344 cases have been confirmed, including 60 deaths, in 24 health zones across three different provinces: Ituri, North Kivu and South Kivu.

    The number of suspected cases has now been reduced to 116 from over 1000 last week, as we work through the backlog, either confirming them or ruling them out.

    In Uganda, there is one confirmed death and 15 confirmed cases, including a Congolese resident who travelled to the United Arab Emirates, and then to Uganda.

    WHO is working with public health authorities in Uganda and the UAE to gather additional information, assess the risk of exposure during travel, and to facilitate contact tracing.

    We thank both the UAE and Uganda for their collaboration to mitigate the risks related to this case.

    In addition, a U.S. citizen who was infected in DRC is still receiving care in Germany.

    WHO’s risk assessment remains unchanged: very high at the national level, high at the regional level, and low at the global level.

    The outbreak had a big head start, and we’re still behind, but under the leadership of the Government of DRC, we are catching up.

    In Bunia there are now three treatment centres with a capacity of 80 beds, and there are also treatment units in Mongbwalu, Rwampara, Beni, Goma and Bukavu, and more are on the way.

    So far, six people have recovered in DRC and two in Uganda, showing that people can survive Ebola if they have access to care and go to health facilities as soon as they show symptoms.

    But we still face several challenges.

    First, testing.

    One of our key priorities is to scale up laboratory and diagnostic capacity, to reduce delays in case confirmation and support faster response decisions.

    Accordingly, we are working to decentralize laboratory and diagnostic capacity in priority locations, including Mongbwalu, Beni, Aru, Nyakunde, and Tchomia.

    We also need to scale up readiness, including surveillance, laboratory diagnostics and access to health services in neighbouring provinces and countries.

    Second, contact tracing in the DRC is not yet where it needs to be.

    Only about 45% of contacts have been followed up, and to get ahead of the outbreak we need to get that number up to above 90%.

    Insecurity, displacement and mobile populations make contact tracing especially difficult.

    Third, blanket travel restrictions imposed by some countries are disrupting supply chains and hindering the response.

    WHO recommends exit screening at airports, ports and border crossings to prevent the exportation of cases and contacts.

    We ask countries that have imposed blanket travel restrictions to lift them.

    Fourth, community mistrust is a serious barrier. Some community leaders told me that they believe Ebola is not real.

    Building trust with the communities is therefore critical to bringing the outbreak under control.

    And fifth, as you know, we are fighting this outbreak without vaccines or therapeutics.

    WHO and partners are working on advancing clinical trials as quickly as possible.

    Today, I convened for the second time the principals of the interim Medical Countermeasures Network to align on three priorities:

        ° First, increasing support for decentralized diagnostics;

        ° Second, mobilizing immediate support for the affected countries to lead clinical trials, in cooperation with communities;

        ° And third, accelerating the investments to support all pillars of the response.

    Although vaccines and therapeutics would be a big help, the key to ending this outbreak is not biomedical.

    It’s leadership, ownership, partnership and trust:

        ° Government leadership;

        ° Community ownership;

        ° Strong partnership between the many actors involved, working with one budget, one plan and one report;

        ° And building trust in the affected communities.

    We also need to remember that Ebola is only one health threat among many that these communities face.

    One of the things I heard from the community leaders is that they worry that the response to Ebola may take resources away from the health and humanitarian services they rely on for their many other needs.

    Our ultimate measure of success is not whether we stop this outbreak.

    We will. The Government of DRC has extensive experience with Ebola, and has stopped 16 previous outbreaks.

    It’s just a matter of how quickly we can do it.

    The real measure of success is what we do to prevent the 18th outbreak, and the 19th.

    If the people of Ituri survive Ebola only to die from malaria or malnutrition, or pneumonia or diarrheal disease or HIV or diabetes, we have not really helped them.

    For now, WHO and our partners are committed to ending this outbreak, under the leadership of the government.

    And when it does end, we will remain equally committed to supporting the government and the local communities to build the health and humanitarian services they need and deserve.

    Amna, back to you.

Source: 


Link: https://www.who.int/news-room/speeches/item/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing---3-june-2026

____

Monday, June 1, 2026

#Bundibugyo #ebolavirus #outbreak in #DRC and #Uganda: rapid #assessment from the #ESCMID Emerging Infections Subcommittee

 


Introduction

The ongoing outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) caused by Bundibugyo ebolavirus (BDBV) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Uganda represents a major regional public health emergency with international implications. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the event a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 17 May 2026, while clarifying that it did not meet the criteria for a pandemic emergency [1]. This distinction reflects the revised International Health Regulations framework, which allows WHO to distinguish a PHEIC from a pandemic emergency when an event is serious and internationally relevant but does not meet the additional criteria for a pandemic emergency.

(...)

Source: 


Link: https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.org/article/S1198-743X(26)00285-5/fulltext

____

Friday, May 29, 2026

#Ebola disease caused by #Bundibugyo virus, #DRC & #Uganda (WHO D.O.N., May 29 '26)

 


Situation at a glance

    The Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda continues to evolve rapidly, with increasing case numbers, geographic spread, and ongoing cross-border transmission

    As of 27 May, a total of 906 suspected cases and 223 deaths among suspected cases have been reported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

    As of 29 May, a total of 134 confirmed cases, including nine in Uganda, with 18 deaths among the confirmed cases, have been reported across both countries. 

    This is an additional 49 confirmed cases, eight confirmed deaths, 160 suspected cases and 47 suspected deaths since the last update on 21 May. 

    In addition, there is one confirmed case, an individual from the United States of America, who had treated patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and is currently receiving care in Germany

    In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, transmission is concentrated in Ituri, as well as North Kivu and South Kivu provinces, with challenges in contact tracing and follow-up, insecurity, inadequate isolation, care, and referral systems for patients complicating response efforts. 

    National authorities, in collaboration with WHO and partners, are implementing response measures including deployment of rapid response teams, delivery of medical supplies, strengthened surveillance, laboratory confirmation, infection prevention and control, the set-up of safe and optimized treatment centers, and community engagement.


Description of the situation

    Since the last Disease Outbreak News was published on 21 May 2026, the number of suspected and confirmed cases has increased rapidly in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

    In total, 906 suspected cases, including 223 deaths among suspected cases have been reported from Democratic Republic of the Congo; and 134 confirmed cases (nine in Uganda), including 18 deaths (one in Uganda) (CFR 14%) have been reported from the two countries as of 29 May. 

    Additionally, a medical doctor from the United States of America who was exposed as part of their work caring for patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo tested positive on 17 May and was transported to Germany for treatment and care.

(...)


Democratic Republic of the Congo

    Since the last update dated 21 May, an additional 42 confirmed cases including eight deaths and 160 suspected cases including 47 deaths have been reported from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

    As of 27 May 2026, a total of 125 confirmed cases including 17 deaths (CFR 14%); and 906 suspected cases including 223 deaths have been reported from 13 health zones (HZ) in Ituri (7/36 HZ), North Kivu (5/35 HZ) and South Kivu Provinces (1/34 HZ) [1]. 

    Sixteen confirmed cases have been reported among health and care workers to date. 

    Epidemiological and laboratory investigations are ongoing to reclassify all suspected cases and deaths reported in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

    The outbreak remains concentrated in Ituri Province, which accounts for 88% (110) of confirmed cases

    The highest confirmed case numbers in Ituri Province are reported from Bunia (37 cases), Rwampara (33 cases), Mongbwalu (20 cases), and Nyankunde (10 cases) HZ. 

    Of the 17 deaths among confirmed cases in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 10 were male (nine were over 15 years old and one under 15) and seven were female (five over 15 years old and two under 15).

    A total of 774 samples have been collected as of 27 May. Of these, 648 samples (84%) have been analyzed, with 125 testing positive, representing a test positivity rate (TPR) of 19.2%. This is likely an underestimation of the actual positivity rate as over 100 samples are still awaiting testing and have been sent to Kinshasa for further analysis.

    As of 27 May, 2635 contacts have been listed in Ituri and North Kivu provinces.

    Security incidents against health facilities, and community resistance, have recently emerged as major operational challenges in Ituri Province, with three recent incidents reported in Mongbwalu and Rwampara HZ. These create additional risks for undetected transmission, disrupt outbreak response efforts, and reinforce the need to strengthen community protection and engagement activities

(...)


Uganda

    Since the last update dated 21 May, an additional seven confirmed cases have been reported from Uganda

    As of 29 May 2026, a total of nine confirmed cases including one death have been reported in Kampala (n=8) and Wakiso (n=1), Uganda. 

    Recent cases include a Ugandan driver who transported the first reported case, a Congolese health worker with linkage to the index case, a Congolese woman who travelled to Uganda for medical care, and two Ugandan health workers linked to earlier confirmed case.

    As of 26 May, a total of 436 contacts linked to the cases have been identified and are under follow-up. These include close household contacts and hospital contacts where the cases were hospitalized.

    Exposure risks are associated with healthcare settings and cross-border movements.

(...)


Epidemiology

    Bundibugyo virus disease (BVD) is a severe and often fatal form of Ebola disease caused by the Bundibugyo virus, one of the Orthoebolavirus species. 

    It is a zoonotic disease, with fruit bats suspected to be the natural reservoir. 

    Human infection is thought to occur through close contact with the blood or secretions of infected wildlife, such as bats or non-human primates, and it subsequently spreads from person to person through direct contact with the blood, secretions, organs, or other bodily fluids of infected individuals or contaminated surfaces or items. 

    Transmission is particularly amplified in health-care settings when infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are inadequate, and during unsafe burial practices involving direct contact with the deceased.

    The incubation period for BVD ranges from 2 to 21 days, and individuals are not infectious until symptom onset

    Early symptoms such as fever, fatigue, muscle pain, headache, and sore throat, are non-specific, which complicates clinical diagnosis and can delay detection. These symptoms then progress to gastrointestinal symptoms, organ dysfunction, and in some cases haemorrhagic manifestations. Case fatality rates in the past two BVD outbreaks, reported in Uganda and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2007 and 2012, have ranged from approximately 30% to 50%.

    Differentiating BVD from other endemic febrile illnesses such as malaria is challenging without laboratory confirmation using PCR or antigen/antibody-based assays. 

    Control relies on rapid case identification, isolation and care, contact tracing, safe burials, and strong community engagement, as no approved vaccines or specific treatments currently exist for BVD.


Public health response

    Health authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda, in collaboration with WHO and partners, are implementing comprehensive public health measures. WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, traveled to the Democratic Republic of the Congo on 28 May to support the ongoing response.

(...)


WHO risk assessment

    On 22 May 2026, WHO assessed the risk of the outbreak of BVD to be very high at the national level in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, high at the regional level, and low at the global level

    The risk assessment will be continuously reassessed in the coming days based on available and shared information.

(...)


WHO advice

    On 19 May 2026, the Director-General of WHO convened the first meeting of the IHR Emergency Committee, which issued the temporary recommendations on 22 May 2026 to States Parties. These recommendations underscore the importance of coordinated outbreak control, enhanced cross‑border collaboration, and sustained surveillance and preparedness to prevent further regional spread and ensure an effective public health response

    WHO advises against any restriction of travel to, or trade with, the Democratic Republic of the Congo or Uganda based on the currently available information. 

    WHO continues to closely monitor and, where necessary, verify travel and trade measures in relation to this event.

(...)

___

[1] Data source: Centre des opĂ©rations d'urgences de sante publique (COUSP-DRC) available at : SitRep MVE N° 013/2026 – National Institute of Public Health


Citable reference: World Health Organization (29 May 2026). Disease Outbreak News; Bundibugyo Virus Disease, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda. Available at https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON605

Source: 


Link: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON605

____

Thursday, May 28, 2026

#Hantavirus #outbreak linked to cruise ship #travel, Multi-locations (WHO D.O.N., May 28 '26)

 


Situation at a glance

    -- This is the fourth Disease Outbreak News report on the Andes hantavirus outbreak linked to cruise ship travel, following the notification to the World Health Organization (WHO) on 2 May 2026 of severe respiratory illness cases aboard M/V Hondius, a cruise ship

    -- Since the last DON was published on 13 May, three additional confirmed cases were reported, from Canada, the Netherlands, and Spain

    -- The previously reported inconclusive case from the United States of America was subsequently determined to be negative following further laboratory testing and has been removed from the total case count. 

    -- All cases to date have been passengers or crew members on the ship. 

    -- As of 27 May, a total of 13 cases, including three deaths, have been reported (case fatality ratio 23%). 

    -- Eleven cases have been laboratory-confirmed for Andes virus (ANDV) infection, and two are probable cases

    -- Given the long incubation period of up to six weeks, it is not unexpected that cases continue to be reported until the end of the six weeks since last exposure. 

    -- Through the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) channels, National IHR Focal Points (NFPs) have all been informed and are supporting international contact tracing and monitoring efforts. 

    -- WHO has assessed the risk posed by this event to the global population as low and will continue to monitor the epidemiological situation and update the risk assessment as needed.


Description of the situation

    -- On 2 May 2026, WHO received notification from the IHR NFP of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (hereafter referred to as the United Kingdom) regarding a cluster of severe acute respiratory illness, including two deaths and one critically ill passenger, aboard the Netherlands-flagged cruise ship M/V Hondius.

    -- As of 27 May, a total of 13 cases (eleven confirmed and two probable cases), including three deaths (two confirmed and one probable), have been reported. 

    -- Since the last Disease Outbreak News was published on 13 May, three additional confirmed cases have been reported among passengers or crew members, one each from Canada, the Netherlands, and Spain

    -- The case in Canada developed symptoms during contact follow-up, whereas the cases in the Netherlands and Spain were identified through routine weekly testing of high-risk contacts during follow-up. 

    -- The previously reported inconclusive case from the United States of America was subsequently determined to be negative following further laboratory testing and has been removed from the total count on 15 May. 

    -- All confirmed cases are among people who travelled onboard the M/V Hondius.

__

Figure 1. Epidemiological curve of Andes hantavirus cases (n = 13) reported to WHO as of 27 May 2026, 17:00


{Ckick on Image to Enlarge}

___

    -- Based on currently available information, the working hypothesis is that the first case acquired the infection prior to boarding the cruise, through exposure on land

    -- Investigations are ongoing to elucidate the potential circumstances of exposure and the source of the outbreak, in collaboration with authorities in Argentina and Chile, however, the time between the individual’s visit to Chile and the onset of symptoms exceeds the maximum incubation period. 

    -- Therefore, based on the information currently available, exposure in Chile can be ruled out

    -- Current evidence suggests subsequent human-to-human transmission onboard the ship. 

    -- This is also supported by a preliminary analysis of the sequences, which show a near-identical sequence from different cases.[1]

    -- This outbreak is being managed through a coordinated international response

    -- This includes comprehensive epidemiological investigations, case isolation and clinical management, medical evacuations, laboratory testing, and international contact tracing, as well as quarantine and monitoring measures. 

    -- Recommendations are subject to change as new epidemiological and laboratory evidence becomes available, including findings from genetic sequencing.

    -- Follow-up and contact tracing for all contacts of hantavirus cases linked to the cruise ship is ongoing. This includes passengers who disembarked in Saint Helena, United Kingdom, on 24 April; Ascension, United Kingdom, on 27 April; Praia, Cabo Verde, on 6 May; and Tenerife, Spain, on 10 and 11 May, the remaining 25 crew members and the two healthcare workers from the Netherlands who disembarked in the Netherlands on 18 May and 23 May. Passengers who travelled on flights who may have had exposure to subsequently confirmed cases have been identified and contacted.

    -- High-risk contacts are being quarantined and monitored by local health authorities either in their respective countries or in the ship’s flag country, the Netherlands, or third countries (Table 1). 

    -- As of 22 May 2026, more than 600 contacts, including 53% high-risk and 47% low-risk contacts, have been identified across 32 countries, territories and areas, and are either under close monitoring or self-monitoring in line with the updated guidance on management of contacts of Andes virus (ANDV) cases from the MV Hondius cruise ship   published on 17 May.

___

Table 1. Contacts being traced for the Andes hantavirus outbreak on a cruise ship reported to WHO as of 25 May 2026, 17:00.


{Click on Image to Enlarge}

___

Epidemiology

    -- Hantavirus disease is a zoonotic viral disease caused by hantaviruses of the genus Orthohantavirus, family Hantaviridae, order Bunyavirales. More than 20 viral species have been identified within this genus.  

    -- Human hantavirus infection is primarily acquired through contact with the urine, faeces, or saliva of certain species of (specific) infected rodents, or by touching contaminated surfaces. 

    -- Exposure typically occurs during activities such as cleaning buildings with rodent infestations, though it may also occur during routine activities in heavily infested areas. 

    -- Human cases are most commonly reported in rural settings, such as forests, fields, and farms, where rodents are present, and opportunities for exposure are greater.

    -- Human-to-human transmission has currently only been reported for hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS) associated with Andes virus infection

    -- Andes virus (ANDV) is endemic in South America, with confirmed circulation and human cases reported primarily in Argentina and Chile, and additional cases and related strains identified in Uruguay, southern Brazil, and Paraguay.


Andes virus transmission between humans

    -- Based on the available information and the existing observations of the current outbreak, limited human-to-human transmission of ANDV is known to occur

    -- However, no large-scale human-to-human outbreaks have been observed historically,[2] suggesting a low probability of transmission per contact. 

    -- ANDV circulates in specific species of rodents in the Americas, and there have been many sporadic cases reported in Argentina and Chile that have not led to onward transmission.[3] 

    -- Clusters of human cases have been reported in multiple past outbreaks and have been typically associated with close and prolonged interactions, often in shared indoor environments such as households.  

    -- The largest reported outbreak of ANDV was reported in Argentina in 2018-2019,[2] where high viral titres in combination with attendance at large social gatherings or extensive contacts among people were associated with higher transmission.  

    -- While the available evidence suggests that there are multiple modes of transmission that occur with ANDV, the probability of onward transmission between humans remains low.

    -- In this recent outbreak of ANDV infection reported on a cruise ship, human-to-human transmission has also occurred

    -- Considering the ongoing epidemiological studies and environmental sampling after the disembarkation of all passengers from MV Hondius, the exact mode(s) through which human-to-human transmission occurred and their relative contributions are yet to be fully understood

    -- Therefore, at present, WHO is operating under the assumption that ANDV transmission:

        ° may include contact with an infected individual or contaminated surfaces,

        ° and/or through-the-air transmission (via direct deposition of infectious respiratory particles onto exposed facial mucosal surfaces--mouth, nose or eyes)

        ° and/or airborne transmission (via inhalation of infectious respiratory particles).

    -- The virus does not exhibit transmission dynamics consistent with highly transmissible airborne pathogens (such as measles).

    -- This information is up to date as of 27 May 2026. It will be updated as new evidence becomes available and the understanding of transmission evolves.

    -- Using data from the previously documented human-to-human outbreaks in Argentina [2] and the 13 cases so far recorded from the cruise ship outbreak, WHO estimates that the mean incubation period is 22 days, corresponding to a probability of safe release from quarantine of 96% at 42 days, reducing to 91% at 35 days. This reaffirms WHO’s recommendation of 42 days of quarantine for high-risk contacts and self-monitoring for low-risk contacts.

    -- Using case incidence data from the ANDV outbreak associated with the cruise ship, the effective reproduction number (Rt) for this outbreak as of 22 May is estimated to be 0.7, where anything less than 1.0 indicates that the spread of disease is declining. 


Public health response

    -- Authorities from States Parties managing cases and/or contacts, WHO, and partners have initiated coordinated response measures, including:

        ° Ongoing engagement between WHO and the IHR NFPs of countries managing cases and/or contacts to ensure timely information sharing and coordination of response actions.

        ° International contact tracing and follow up of contacts is ongoing.

        ° WHO is requesting regular information sharing and periodic updates from States Parties through IHR channels regarding contact monitoring and the health status of high-risk contacts.

        ° Epidemiological investigations continue to better define epidemiological links between cases and exposure factors on the ship, as well as to try to understand the potential source of exposure.

    -- WHO has developed and published specific technical guidance documents to support response to the event, including:

        ° Technical guidance on the management of hantavirus onboard ships was shared with States Parties through IHR channels

        ° Technical note for the disembarkation and onward management of passengers and crew in the context of an Andes-virus-associated cluster;

        ° Management of contacts of Andes Virus (ANDV) cases from the MV Hondius cruise ship

    -- IHR NFPs of affected countries have been in contact about passenger and crew    information through established IHR channels for those who were on the ship, as well as on planes where a known case was on board. Nearly 1000 communications have occurred through these established channels.

    -- Risk communication coordination and support are being provided to ensure sharing of regular, timely and evidence-based information. WHO has activated three-level coordination and is supporting national authorities in implementing risk-based, evidence-informed public health measures in accordance with the provisions of the IHR and related WHO technical guidance documents.

    -- WHO regularly convenes expert calls across laboratory, clinical management, epidemiology, infection prevention and control (IPC), and border health and points of entry domains to facilitate timely experience sharing and coordinated expert support.

    -- WHO has supported the streamlining and development of research protocols on the natural clinical history in collaboration with national partner institutions and planned a hantavirus scientific consultation on medical countermeasures.


WHO risk assessment

    -- WHO continues to assess the risk for passengers and crew who were onboard the cruise ship as moderate, as individuals exposed prior to the implementation of control measures may still develop illness during the incubation period and should therefore be closely monitored.

    -- The risk at the global level is assessed as low for the following reasons:

        ° Andes virus has demonstrated limited human-to-human transmission in previous outbreaks, typically occurring among close contacts and within household settings, generally requiring prolonged close exposure. 

        ° Transmission can be contained through early detection, isolation of cases, clinical management, and contact management. However, the ship environment presented an increased risk due to close living quarters, shared indoor spaces, prolonged exposure, and frequent interpersonal interactions, all of which likely facilitated transmission.

        ° Human Pulmonary Syndrome caused by hantaviruses in the Americas, including Andes virus, can have a high case fatality ratio, reaching 40-50%, particularly among elderly individuals and those with co-morbidities. The average age of passengers on board the ship was 65 years old.

        ° Investigations on the travel history and potential exposures of the first case in the Southern Cone subregion of the Americas are ongoing and suggest possible exposure to rodents during recreational activities. Viral sequencing analyses are also ongoing and are comparing the ANDV strain associated with this outbreak with strains circulating in Argentina and Chile, where the disease is enzootic. The preliminary sequencing analysis for the cases indicates a high degree of genetic similarity amongst sequenced cases —showing no more than one single nucleotide polymorphisms difference per individual – which strongly indicates that the outbreak likely arose from a single zoonotic spillover event, or from a very small number of closely related spillover events.[1]

    -- Additional cases may occur among individuals exposed before implementation of containment measures. However, the current response, including quarantine for those who have left the ship and rapid isolation of any new suspect cases and the monitoring of contacts, is expected to limit the risk of further spread.

    -- As there is no specific antiviral treatment for HPS, suspected cases require prompt transfer to an adequately equipped emergency department or intensive care unit, where available, for close monitoring and supportive management to improve chances of recovery. Consequently, for remote areas, rapid transfer to a well-resourced healthcare facility is required, which may be challenging under the current conditions.

    -- For the general public, including people not exposed on board the ship or through close contact with a confirmed case, the overall probability of infection remains low

    -- Current evidence indicates that human-to-human transmission occurs through close and prolonged contact, and can be effectively limited through early detection, isolation of cases, and contact tracing. 


WHO advice

    -- WHO advises States Parties involved in this event to continue coordinated public health management efforts related to the management of cases and contacts associated with the affected ship and flights, as well as in countries where cases and/or contacts have been identified. 

    -- WHO has advised and continues to advise a precautionary approach for management of the outbreak related to the ship, with focus on total containment to minimize the onward risk of transmission to other persons. 

    -- This strategic decision is guided by:

        ° To date, most of the evidence of human-to-human transmission shows it has required prolonged close exposure, although it is possible that some highly infectious individuals could infect others through a lower degree of exposure.

        ° Mode(s) of transmission and which mode is dominant if multiple routes of transmission exist are still uncertain.

        ° Infection is a result of not only exposure, but the setting and duration where exposure has taken place, how infectious the infected person is, and whether personal protective equipment is used.

    -- Although the probability of infection is uncertain, if infection occurs, it can be severe. Currently, there is no specific treatment available and severe disease requires advanced critical care.

    -- There is a relatively low burden of additional infection prevention and control measures.

    -- At this time, WHO does not recommend any changes to routine activities for the general public. People who were on board the affected ship, or who have had close contact with a confirmed case, should follow national health advice. Guidance may be updated as further evidence becomes available.

    -- Recommendations remain dynamic and will be updated as additional epidemiological and laboratory evidence, including genetic sequencing data, becomes available.


Coordination

    -- WHO advises States Parties involved in this event to continue public health coordination related to the management of cases and contacts in countries where they are present or expected to return, as well as of affected conveyances, as applicable and in close coordination with travel and transport authorities, conveyance operators, and other relevant stakeholders at points of entry.

    -- Coordination should ensure the implementation of risk-based, evidence-informed public health measures.


Surveillance

    -- Ongoing epidemiological investigations include detection, investigation, and reporting of suspected cases, as well as contact tracing and monitoring.

    -- As a precautionary measure, high-risk contacts should undergo active monitoring and home or facility quarantine for 42 days following their last exposure.

    -- Current evidence does not support routine laboratory testing or quarantine of low-risk contacts; instead, they should undertake passive self-monitoring and seek medical evaluation if symptoms develop.

    -- Contact tracing and listing should utilize all available information sources, including interviews and relevant conveyance-related documentation (passenger manifests, passenger locator forms, and other relevant activity logs), to ensure completeness.

    -- Early recognition and prompt isolation of suspected cases remain critical to reduce further transmission.


Laboratory

    -- Laboratory testing of suspected cases should be conducted as part of the outbreak response.

    -- Laboratory investigations may include molecular detection, serology, and sequencing to support case confirmation and better understand the outbreak.

    -- Recommendations on laboratory approaches will continue to evolve as new evidence becomes available.


Case management

    -- Early identification, prompt isolation, and clinical evaluation of suspected cases are essential.

    -- When HPS is suspected, patients should be promptly referred for close monitoring and supportive care, including admission to emergency or intensive care settings when needed.

    -- Clinical management is primarily supportive and may include antipyretics, careful fluid management, hemodynamic monitoring, respiratory support, and escalation to advanced interventions for severe cases.

    -- Mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation[4] (ECMO), or dialysis may be required for severe disease.

    -- Antibiotics are not routinely indicated for confirmed hantavirus infection, but may be used empirically if bacterial infection cannot be ruled out or is suspected.

    -- Currently, there is no approved specific antiviral treatment for HPS.


Infection Prevention and Control

    -- Suspected or confirmed cases should be isolated in a single, well-ventilated room.

    -- Standard precautions* should be applied at all times for all patients, including hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and appropriate waste management, outlined in the interim guidance published on 8 May

    -- Transmission-based precautions should be implemented in addition to standard precautions. Health and care workers should use appropriate personal protective equipment, including respirators, eye protection, gowns, and gloves.

    -- Suspected or confirmed cases should be isolated in a single, well-ventilated room.

    -- Transmission-based precautions should be implemented in addition to standard precautions.

    -- Hand hygiene should be performed before and after the use of PPE.

    -- Waste from suspected or confirmed cases should be managed as infectious waste.

    -- Airborne precautions should be applied during aerosol-generating procedures.

    -- The duration of standard and transmission-based precautions should be determined on a case-by-case basis.


Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE)

    -- Communication strategies should prioritize transparent, timely, and culturally appropriate information to affected individuals and the general public.

    -- Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE) efforts should provide clear, consistent, and actionable information, including explanations of the public health measures being implemented.

    -- Messaging should address public concerns regarding transmissibility, severity, and international travel, and clarify recommended actions for different population groups.

    -- Public health awareness should focus on early detection, timely healthcare seeking, and reducing exposure risks, including occupational and environmental exposures.

    -- RCCE activities should be integrated throughout all phases of the response and align with broader public health measures.

    -- Environmental management strategies, including rodent control, should be included as part of prevention efforts.

    -- Based on the current information available on this event, WHO advises against the application of any travel or trade restrictions beyond the restriction of movement of identified high-risk contacts.

___

{*} Standard precautions refer to a set of practices that are applied to the care of patients, regardless of the state of infection (suspicion or confirmation), in any place where health services are provided. These practices aim to protect both healthcare professionals and patients and include hand hygiene, use of personal protective equipment, respiratory hygiene and cough etiquette, safe handling of sharps materials, safe injection practices, use of sterile instruments and equipment and cleaning of hospital environments and the environment. Adapted from “Standard precautions for the prevention and control of infections: aide-memoire”- WHO, 2022.  Available at https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-UHL-IHS-IPC-2022.1  


Further information

    -- World Health Organization. Management of contacts of Andes virus (ANDV) cases from the MV Hondius cruise ship. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/management-of-contacts-of-andes-virus-(andv)-cases-fromthe-mv-hondius-cruise-ship

    -- World Health Organization. WHO Technical note for the disembarkation and onward management of passengers and crew in the context of an Andes virus-associated cluster MV Hondius cruise ship. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/who-technical-note-for-the-disembarkation-and-onward-management-of-passengers-and-crew-in-the-context-of-an-andes-virus-associated-cluster-mv-hondius-cruise-ship

    -- World Health Organization. Hantavirus fact sheet. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hantavirus 

    -- World Health Organization.WHO’s response to hantavirus cases linked to a cruise ship. https://www.who.int/news/item/07-05-2026-who-s-response-to-hantavirus-cases-linked-to-a-cruise-ship

    -- World Health Organization. Handbook for management of public health events on board ships. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549462

    -- World Health Organization. Guide to Ship Sanitation, 3rd edition https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241546690

    -- World Health Organization. Handbook for management of public health events in air transport, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241510165

    -- World Health Organization. Guide to hygiene and sanitation in aviation, 3rd edition, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241547772

    -- Preliminary analysis of Orthohantavirus andesense virus sequences from a cruise-ship related cluster, May 2026. https://virological.org/t/preliminary-analysis-of-orthohantavirus-andesense-virus-sequences-from-a-cruise-ship-related-cluster-may-2026/1029

    -- World Health Organization. Standard precautions for the prevention and control of infections: aide-memoire. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-UHL-IHS-IPC-2022.1

    -- World Health Organization. Transmission-based precautions for the prevention and control of infections: aide-memoire. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-UHL-IHS-IPC-2022.2

    -- World Health Organization. Hantavirus outbreak toolbox. https://www.who.int/emergencies/outbreak-toolkit/disease-outbreak-toolboxes/hantavirus-outbreak-toolbox

    -- World Health Organization (8 May 2026). Disease Outbreak News. Hantavirus cluster linked to cruise ship travel, Multi-country. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON600

    -- World Health Organization (4 May 2026). Disease Outbreak News. Hantavirus cluster linked to cruise ship travel- Multi-country. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON599

    -- World Health Organization. A decision framework for effective, equitable and context-specific public health and social measures during public health emergencies: decision navigator: https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/ceaf4aa7-00c8-4681-9c35-965e231a3706/content

    -- Pan American Health Organization / World Health Organization. Infection prevention and control of hantavirus infection, including Andes virus disease. Interim regional guidance for suspected or confirmed cases. https://iris.paho.org/items/bc5a7b5a-5a0a-4407-829e-663c762ad615

    -- Pan American Health Organization / World Health Organization. Clinical management of hantavirus infection, including Andes virus disease: Interim regional guidance for suspected or confirmed cases. https://iris.paho.org/items/0fa0dcb1-4395-467d-a431-5408b4eff337    

    -- Pan American Health Organization / World Health Organization. PAHO supports the international response to hantavirus pulmonary syndrome cases linked to a cruise ship in the Atlantic. https://www.paho.org/en/news/7-5-2026-paho-supports-international-response-hantavirus-pulmonary-syndrome-cases-linked

    -- Epidemiological Alert Hantavirus Pulmonary Syndrome (HPS). https://www.paho.org/en/documents/epidemiological-alert-hantavirus-pulmonary-syndrome-americas-region-19-december-2025  

    -- Hantavirus in the Americas: Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, prevention and control. Available at: https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/40176

    -- Hantavirus Prevention, CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/hantavirus/prevention/?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/hantavirus/hps/prevention.html

    -- MartĂ­nez Valeria, Paola N, et al. (2020). “Super-Spreaders” and Person-to-Person Transmission of Andes Virus in Argentina. New England Journal of Medicine. 383. 2230-2241. 10.1056/NEJMoa2009040.

    -- US CDC. How to Clean Up After Rodents: https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-pets/rodent-control/clean-up.html

    -- Hantavirus, Washington State Department of Heath, https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2025-08/420-056-Guideline-Hantavirus.pdf

    -- Hantavirus Infection, MDS Manual, professional version: https://www.msdmanuals.com/professional/infectious-diseases/arboviruses-arenaviridae-and-filoviridae/hantavirus-infection

    -- Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hantavirus-pulmonary-syndrome/symptoms-causes/syc-20351838


___

[1] Preliminary analysis of Orthohantavirus andesense virus sequences from a cruise-ship related cluster, May 2026. https://virological.org/t/preliminary-analysis-of-orthohantavirus-andesense-virus-sequences-from-a-cruise-ship-related-cluster-may-2026/1029

[2] “Super-Spreaders” and Person-to-Person Transmission of Andes Virus in Argentina | New England Journal of Medicine. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2009040

[3] Padula PJ, Edelstein A, Miguel SD, LĂ³pez NM, Rossi CM, Rabinovich RD. Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome outbreak in Argentina: molecular evidence for person-to-person transmission of Andes virus. Virology. 1998 Feb 15;241(2):323-30. doi: 10.1006/viro.1997.8976. PMID: 9499807.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9499807/

[4] Dietl CA, Wernly JA, Pett SB, et al. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support improves survival of patients with severe Hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2008;135(3):579-584. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.11.020. 


Citable reference: World Health Organization (28 May 2026). Disease Outbreak News. Hantavirus outbreak linked to cruise ship travel, Multi-locations. Available at: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON604

Source: 


Link: https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2026-DON604

____

My New Space

Most Popular Posts