Explainer: What to Know About the Nipah Virus After Cases Emerge in India – An Academic Analysis of Epidemiology, Transmission, and Public Health Preparedness in Asiactious Diseases
Abstract
The emergence of two confirmed cases of Nipah virus (NiV) infection in West Bengal, India, in late January 2026, has triggered regional public health alerts across South and Southeast Asia. This paper provides a comprehensive academic review of the Nipah virus, including its virology, epidemiology, modes of transmission, clinical manifestations, and the evolving public health response. Drawing on data from global health agencies, surveillance reports, and recent field investigations—including those cited in Reuters’ “Bat Lands” series—we analyze the implications of the 2026 outbreak in India and assess the risk of regional spread. The deployment of health screening at Suvarnabhumi International Airport in Bangkok and precautionary measures in Singapore highlight cross-border concerns, though scientific evidence suggests limited utility of airport screenings due to the virus’s incubation period. Despite high case fatality rates (40–75%), NiV remains constrained by inefficient human-to-human transmission. However, its inclusion in the WHO R&D Blueprint list of priority pathogens underscores its pandemic potential. Ongoing vaccine development, particularly a ChAdOx1-based candidate currently in Phase II trials in Bangladesh, offers hope for future prevention. This article concludes with policy recommendations for surveillance, outbreak response, and regional cooperation in light of Asia’s rapidly evolving zoonotic disease landscape.
Keywords
Nipah virus, zoonotic diseases, encephalitis, fruit bats, outbreak preparedness, public health surveillance, India, Southeast Asia, airport screening, vaccine development
Introduction
In late January 2026, India reported two confirmed cases of Nipah virus (NiV) infection in the state of West Bengal, reigniting concerns about one of the most lethal emerging pathogens in the Asia-Pacific region. The incident prompted neighboring countries such as Thailand and Malaysia to implement enhanced health screening measures at international airports, including thermal scanning and passenger health declarations for arrivals from affected regions. While no secondary cases have been detected outside India as of January 28, 2026, the event underscores the persistent threat of spillover zoonotic infections in densely populated, ecologically strained regions.
First identified during a 1998–1999 outbreak among pig farmers in Malaysia [1], Nipah virus belongs to the Henipavirus genus within the family Paramyxoviridae. It is maintained in nature primarily by fruit bats of the Pteropus genus (flying foxes), which serve as asymptomatic reservoir hosts. The virus has since caused recurrent outbreaks in Bangladesh and India, with case fatality rates ranging from 40% to 75% [2]. Due to its high mortality, potential for nosocomial transmission, and lack of approved therapeutics, NiV is classified as a Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) pathogen and listed among the WHO’s priority diseases for urgent R&D investment [3].
This paper synthesizes current scientific understanding of Nipah virus, contextualizes the 2026 Indian outbreak, and evaluates the effectiveness of regional containment measures. We examine virological characteristics, transmission dynamics, clinical outcomes, diagnostic challenges, and ongoing vaccine development, offering evidence-based insights into the current risk assessment and future preparedness strategies.
Virology and Natural Reservoir
Nipah virus is an enveloped, single-stranded, negative-sense RNA virus that shares genetic and structural similarities with Hendra virus, another henipavirus found in Australia. The virus enters host cells via two surface glycoproteins: the attachment (G) protein binds to ephrin-B2 and ephrin-B3 receptors, which are highly conserved across mammalian species, enabling broad host range and neurotropism [4].
The primary reservoir hosts are frugivorous bats of the genus Pteropus, particularly Pteropus giganteus in South Asia. These bats shed the virus intermittently in saliva, urine, and feces, often without showing symptoms. Environmental contamination of food sources—especially raw date palm sap collected in open containers during winter months—has been repeatedly linked to human infections in Bangladesh and eastern India [5].
Deforestation, agricultural encroachment, and climate change have intensified human-bat interactions, increasing spillover risk. A 2023 Reuters investigative series, Bat Lands, documented how habitat fragmentation in West Bengal and Assam has driven Pteropus colonies closer to human settlements, creating “hot zones” for zoonotic transmission [6].
Epidemiology of Nipah Virus Infections
As of December 2025, global surveillance data compiled by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) reported 750 laboratory-confirmed cases of NiV infection, with 415 fatalities (case fatality rate: 55.3%) across Bangladesh (567 cases), India (93 cases), Malaysia (266 cases, largely from the initial outbreak), and the Philippines (1 case) [7].
Country First Outbreak Total Cases (as of Dec 2025) Fatalities CFR (%) Primary Transmission Route
Malaysia 1999 266 105 39.5 Pig-to-human
India 2001 93 61 65.6 Bat-to-human, human-to-human
Bangladesh 2001 567 349 61.6 Raw date palm sap, human-to-human
Philippines 2014 1 1 100 Unknown (likely bat)
Data source: CEPI, WHO, NICD India, ICDDR,B [7–9]
In India, NiV outbreaks have occurred primarily in Kerala (2018, 2019, 2021, 2023) and West Bengal (2001, 2023, 2026). The 2026 West Bengal cluster marks the third outbreak in the state, likely linked to bat-contaminated palm sap consumption in rural Murshidabad district. Preliminary sequencing data from the National Institute of Virology (NIV) Pune indicates the strain is closely related to previous Indian lineages (NiV-India genotype), distinct from Malaysian and Bangladesh strains [10].
The recurrence of outbreaks reflects persistent gaps in rural surveillance, limited access to healthcare, and cultural practices that increase exposure risk.
Transmission Dynamics
The transmission of Nipah virus occurs through multiple pathways:
- Zoonotic (Bat-to-Human) Transmission
The most common initial route involves ingestion of food contaminated by bat excreta. In Bangladesh and parts of India, raw date palm sap (“khejurer rosh”) is collected in open pots overnight, allowing bats to drink from them and contaminate the fluid. A 2020 study found NiV RNA in 2% of tested sap samples collected near bat roosts [11].
- Animal-to-Human Transmission
In the original Malaysian outbreak, transmission occurred via direct contact with infected pigs. Farmers and abattoir workers inhaled aerosolized virus from porcine respiratory secretions or had skin exposure to infected tissues. This led to mass culling of over one million pigs, with massive economic consequences [12].
- Human-to-Human Transmission
Person-to-person transmission occurs through close contact with infected individuals’ bodily fluids (saliva, urine, respiratory droplets), particularly in household and healthcare settings. The 2018 Kerala outbreak demonstrated significant nosocomial spread, with 18 secondary cases among healthcare workers and caregivers [13]. However, the basic reproduction number (R₀) remains low—estimated between 0.4 and 0.5 in community settings and up to 0.9 in hospitals—indicating limited sustained transmission [14].
Despite fears of airborne spread, no evidence supports efficient aerosol transmission. The virus appears to require prolonged, close contact for secondary infections.
Clinical Manifestations and Diagnosis
The incubation period for NiV ranges from 4 to 14 days, though WHO reports cases with up to 45 days [15]. The clinical presentation is nonspecific initially, posing diagnostic challenges.
Symptoms by Stage:
Incubation Period: Asymptomatic (4–14 days)
Prodromal Phase: Fever, headache, myalgia, sore throat, vomiting (3–14 days)
Neurological Phase: Acute encephalitis, disorientation, seizures, altered consciousness
Respiratory Involvement: Atypical pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)
Severe Cases: Coma within 5–7 days; neurological sequelae in survivors (e.g., persistent tremor, cognitive deficits)
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis may show lymphocytic pleocytosis. Brain MRI often reveals subcortical lesions, particularly in the basal ganglia and brainstem.
Diagnosis:
RT-PCR: Detects viral RNA in blood, CSF, and throat swabs; most reliable in early symptomatic phase
Serology: IgM ELISA and neutralizing antibodies (useful after 7–10 days)
Virus Isolation: Requires BSL-4 containment; not routinely performed
Due to symptom overlap with Japanese encephalitis, dengue, and leptospirosis—common in rural Asia—NiV is often misdiagnosed without targeted testing.
Public Health Response and Regional Alertness
The 2026 West Bengal outbreak has activated India’s Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme (IDSP), with rapid contact tracing, quarantine of 120 individuals, and isolation of both patients at a designated Infectious Diseases Hospital in Kolkata. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) has coordinated with the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) for technical support.
In response, regional neighbors have taken precautionary measures:
Thailand: Implemented thermal screening and health declaration forms at Suvarnabhumi Airport (Bangkok) for passengers arriving from West Bengal as of January 25, 2026.
Malaysia: Enhanced surveillance at Kuala Lumpur International Airport; issued travel advisories.
Singapore: Communicable Diseases Centre activated monitoring; airport health screening initiated (though no cases detected) [16].
However, experts question the efficacy of airport screening. Given the long and variable incubation period (up to 45 days), infected individuals may pass through undetected during asymptomatic phases. A 2020 meta-analysis concluded that temperature screening detects less than 20% of infected travelers [17].
Furthermore, the low R₀ and lack of efficient community transmission reduce the risk of international spread. As Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, former WHO Chief Scientist, noted: “Nipah is a devastating disease locally, but not a global pandemic threat—at least not yet” [18].
Nonetheless, the political and economic consequences of perceived risk—such as travel restrictions and trade disruptions—can exceed the actual health impact.
Therapeutics and Vaccine Development
Currently, there are no approved antiviral drugs or vaccines against Nipah virus. Treatment remains supportive: mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure, seizure management, and intensive care.
Promising candidates in development include:
Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs): m102.4, a human monoclonal antibody developed by Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), has shown efficacy in non-human primates and was used under compassionate use in India (2018, 2023). Phase I trials completed; larger efficacy studies pending [19].
Antivirals: Remdesivir and favipiravir have demonstrated in vitro and animal model activity but lack clinical trial data in humans.
Vaccines:
The ChAdOx1 NiV vaccine, developed by Oxford’s Jenner Institute using the same chimpanzee adenovirus vector as the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, entered Phase II clinical trials in Bangladesh in December 2025, funded by CEPI and conducted in collaboration with ICDDR,B.
The trial targets high-risk populations (palm sap collectors, healthcare workers) and evaluates safety, immunogenicity, and cellular response.
Other platforms under investigation include mRNA vaccines (Moderna) and subunit vaccines (Novavax) [20].
Given the sporadic nature of outbreaks, traditional phase III efficacy trials are challenging. Regulatory pathways may rely on the FDA Animal Rule, which allows approval based on animal studies when human trials are unethical or impractical.
Risk Assessment: How Worried Should We Be?
While Nipah virus is biologically alarming, its epidemic potential is currently limited:
High Fatality, Low Transmissibility: CFRs exceed 60% in regions with limited ICU access, but sustained human-to-human transmission is rare.
Geographic Containment: Outbreaks remain localized due to rapid containment and lack of urban superspreading.
No Global Pandemic Risk: Unlike SARS-CoV-2 or influenza, NiV is not adapted for efficient respiratory transmission.
However, the pandemic potential exists if the virus mutates to enhance human-to-human spread. Climate change, urbanization, and wildlife trade increase the frequency of spillover events. The WHO emphasizes that NiV is a “prototype” for future emerging viruses—one that could evolve into a more transmissible form under selective pressure.
Thus, while panic is unwarranted, vigilance is essential.
Policy Recommendations
Strengthen Wildlife Surveillance: Establish bat monitoring networks in high-risk areas using environmental RNA sampling and serosurveys.
Community Education: Launch campaigns to discourage consumption of raw palm sap; promote covering collection pots with bamboo skirts to deter bats.
Healthcare Worker Protection: Mandate PPE use in suspected encephalitis cases; train clinicians in NiV differential diagnosis.
Regional Collaboration: Expand South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) health initiatives to include real-time outbreak data sharing and joint response drills.
Accelerate Vaccine Rollout: Support CEPI and Gavi funding for Phase III trials and future deployment in endemic zones.
Reevaluate Airport Screening: Redirect resources from low-yield thermal scans to exit screening, travel advisories, and port-of-entry healthcare worker readiness.
Conclusion
The 2026 Nipah virus cases in India are a sobering reminder of the fragile interface between human health, animal ecology, and environmental change. While the virus remains geographically and epidemiologically contained, its high mortality and potential for mutation demand sustained investment in surveillance, diagnostics, and vaccine development. The regional response—though partially performative—reflects growing awareness of cross-border health threats in Asia. Moving forward, coordinated, science-based policies—not fear-driven measures—will be critical to mitigating the impact of NiV and other emerging pathogens. As Asia continues to urbanize and expand into forested frontiers, the lessons from Nipah are clear: preventing the next pandemic begins in the trees.
References
Chua KB, et al. (2000). Nipah virus: A newly emergent deadly paramyxovirus. Science, 288(5470), 1432–1435.
WHO. (2023). Nipah virus – Fact Sheet. Geneva: World Health Organization.
WHO R&D Blueprint. (2023). List of Priority Pathogens. https://www.who.int/teams/blueprint
Negrete OA, et al. (2005). EphrinB2 is the entry receptor for Nipah virus. Nature, 436(7049), 401–405.
Luby SP, et al. (2006). Transmission of human infection with Nipah virus. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 43(8), 1097–1101.
Reuters. (2023). Bat Lands: The Human-Bat Interface in South Asia. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-nipah-batlands
CEPI. (2025). Nipah Virus: Global Case Data and R&D Landscape. Oslo: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.
ICDDR,B. (2024). Nipah Surveillance in Bangladesh: Annual Report 2023. Dhaka: International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research.
Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR). (2023). Nipah Virus Outbreaks in India: Epidemiological Summary. New Delhi.
NIV Pune. (2026). Genomic Sequencing of 2026 West Bengal Nipah Strain. Unpublished Report.
Hossain MJ, et al. (2020). Nipah virus in Bat-Harvested Date Palm Sap, Bangladesh. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 26(9), 2102–2108.
Chua KB. (2003). Fatal encephalitis due to Nipah virus among pig-farmers in Malaysia. Veterinary Microbiology, 96(3), 359–363.
ICMR. (2019). Outbreak Investigation Report: Nipah Virus in Kerala, 2018.
Kucharski AJ, et al. (2018). Early dynamics of transmission and control of Nipah virus. Epidemics, 23, 11–15.
WHO. (2020). Nipah virus: Clinical Management Guidelines.
Communicable Diseases Agency, Singapore. (2026). Press Release: Nipah Virus Monitoring, Jan 28, 2026.
Wilder-Smith A, et al. (2020). Airport screening for infectious diseases: A systematic review. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease, 33, 101535.
Swaminathan S. (2021). Interview: The Threat of Nipah and Other Henipaviruses. The Lancet Infectious Diseases.
Mire CE, et al. (2014). Recombinant human monoclonal antibody for treatment of Nipah virus infection. Science Translational Medicine, 6(226), 226ra31.
CEPI. (2025). ChAdOx1 NiV Phase II Trial Launch in Bangladesh. Press Release, Dec 5, 2025.
Conflict of Interest: None declared.
Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.
Ethics Approval: Not applicable (review article using publicly available data).