Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 32
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Epidemiol ; 2024 May 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38808625

RESUMO

Detecting and quantifying changes in growth rates of infectious diseases is vital to informing public health strategy and can inform policymakers' rationale for implementing or continuing interventions aimed at reducing impact. Substantial changes in SARS-CoV-2 prevalence with emergence of variants provides opportunity to investigate different methods to do this. We included PCR results from all participants in the UK's COVID-19 Infection Survey between August 2020-June 2022. Change-points for growth rates were identified using iterative sequential regression (ISR) and second derivatives of generalised additive models (GAMs). Consistency between methods and timeliness of detection were compared. Of 8,799,079 visits, 147,278 (1.7%) were PCR-positive. Change-points associated with emergence of major variants were estimated to occur a median 4 days earlier (IQR 0-8) in GAMs versus ISR. When estimating recent change-points using successive data periods, four change-points (4/96) identified by GAMs were not found when adding later data or by ISR. Change-points were detected 3-5 weeks after they occurred in both methods but could be detected earlier within specific subgroups. Change-points in growth rates of SARS-CoV-2 can be detected in near real-time using ISR and second derivatives of GAMs. To increase certainty about changes in epidemic trajectories both methods could be run in parallel.

2.
BMC Med ; 22(1): 143, 2024 Mar 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38532381

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Syndromic surveillance often relies on patients presenting to healthcare. Community cohorts, although more challenging to recruit, could provide additional population-wide insights, particularly with SARS-CoV-2 co-circulating with other respiratory viruses. METHODS: We estimated the positivity and incidence of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and RSV, and trends in self-reported symptoms including influenza-like illness (ILI), over the 2022/23 winter season in a broadly representative UK community cohort (COVID-19 Infection Survey), using negative-binomial generalised additive models. We estimated associations between test positivity and each of the symptoms and influenza vaccination, using adjusted logistic and multinomial models. RESULTS: Swabs taken at 32,937/1,352,979 (2.4%) assessments tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, 181/14,939 (1.2%) for RSV and 130/14,939 (0.9%) for influenza A/B, varying by age over time. Positivity and incidence peaks were earliest for RSV, then influenza A/B, then SARS-CoV-2, and were highest for RSV in the youngest and for SARS-CoV-2 in the oldest age groups. Many test positives did not report key symptoms: middle-aged participants were generally more symptomatic than older or younger participants, but still, only ~ 25% reported ILI-WHO and ~ 60% ILI-ECDC. Most symptomatic participants did not test positive for any of the three viruses. Influenza A/B-positivity was lower in participants reporting influenza vaccination in the current and previous seasons (odds ratio = 0.55 (95% CI 0.32, 0.95)) versus neither season. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom profiles varied little by aetiology, making distinguishing SARS-CoV-2, influenza and RSV using symptoms challenging. Most symptoms were not explained by these viruses, indicating the importance of other pathogens in syndromic surveillance. Influenza vaccination was associated with lower rates of community influenza test positivity.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Influenza Humana , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial , Viroses , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Estações do Ano , Autorrelato , Vírus Sinciciais Respiratórios , Reino Unido , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/epidemiologia
3.
Proc Biol Sci ; 290(2009): 20231284, 2023 10 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37848057

RESUMO

The Office for National Statistics Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey (ONS-CIS) is the largest surveillance study of SARS-CoV-2 positivity in the community, and collected data on the United Kingdom (UK) epidemic from April 2020 until March 2023 before being paused. Here, we report on the epidemiological and evolutionary dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 determined by analysing the sequenced samples collected by the ONS-CIS during this period. We observed a series of sweeps or partial sweeps, with each sweeping lineage having a distinct growth advantage compared to their predecessors, although this was also accompanied by a gradual fall in average viral burdens from June 2021 to March 2023. The sweeps also generated an alternating pattern in which most samples had either S-gene target failure (SGTF) or non-SGTF over time. Evolution was characterized by steadily increasing divergence and diversity within lineages, but with step increases in divergence associated with each sweeping major lineage. This led to a faster overall rate of evolution when measured at the between-lineage level compared to within lineages, and fluctuating levels of diversity. These observations highlight the value of viral sequencing integrated into community surveillance studies to monitor the viral epidemiology and evolution of SARS-CoV-2, and potentially other pathogens.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Epidemias , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(1): e329-e337, 2022 08 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34748629

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: "Classic" symptoms (cough, fever, loss of taste/smell) prompt severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in the United Kingdom. Studies have assessed the ability of different symptoms to identify infection, but few have compared symptoms over time (reflecting variants) and by vaccination status. METHODS: Using the COVID-19 Infection Survey, sampling households across the United Kingdom, we compared symptoms in PCR-positives vs PCR-negatives, evaluating sensitivity of combinations of 12 symptoms (percentage symptomatic PCR-positives reporting specific symptoms) and tests per case (TPC) (PCR-positives or PCR-negatives reporting specific symptoms/ PCR-positives reporting specific symptoms). RESULTS: Between April 2020 and August 2021, 27 869 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive episodes occurred in 27 692 participants (median 42 years), of whom 13 427 (48%) self-reported symptoms ("symptomatic PCR-positives"). The comparator comprised 3 806 692 test-negative visits (457 215 participants); 130 612 (3%) self-reported symptoms ("symptomatic PCR-negatives"). Symptom reporting in PCR-positives varied by age, sex, and ethnicity, and over time, reflecting changes in prevalence of viral variants, incidental changes (eg, seasonal pathogens (with sore throat increasing in PCR-positives and PCR-negatives from April 2021), schools reopening) and vaccination rollout. After May 2021 when Delta emerged, headache and fever substantially increased in PCR-positives, but not PCR-negatives. Sensitivity of symptom-based detection increased from 74% using "classic" symptoms, to 81% adding fatigue/weakness, and 90% including all 8 additional symptoms. However, this increased TPC from 4.6 to 5.3 to 8.7. CONCLUSIONS: Expanded symptom combinations may provide modest benefits for sensitivity of PCR-based case detection, but this will vary between settings and over time, and increases tests/case. Large-scale changes to targeted PCR-testing approaches require careful evaluation given substantial resource and infrastructure implications.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Teste para COVID-19 , Febre/etiologia , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Reino Unido/epidemiologia
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Aug 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35917440

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant has been replaced by the highly transmissible Omicron BA.1 variant, and subsequently by Omicron BA.2. It is important to understand how these changes in dominant variants affect reported symptoms, while also accounting for symptoms arising from other co-circulating respiratory viruses. METHODS: In a nationally representative UK community study, the COVID-19 Infection Survey, we investigated symptoms in PCR-positive infection episodes vs. PCR-negative study visits over calendar time, by age and vaccination status, comparing periods when the Delta, Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants were dominant. RESULTS: Between October-2020 and April-2022, 120,995 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive episodes occurred in 115,886 participants, with 70,683 (58%) reporting symptoms. The comparator comprised 4,766,366 PCR-negative study visits (483,894 participants); 203,422 (4%) reporting symptoms. Symptom reporting in PCR-positives varied over time, with a marked reduction in loss of taste/smell as Omicron BA.1 dominated, maintained with BA.2 (44%/45% 17 October 2021, 16%/13% 2 January 2022, 15%/12% 27 March 2022). Cough, fever, shortness of breath, myalgia, fatigue/weakness and headache also decreased after Omicron BA.1 dominated, but sore throat increased, the latter to a greater degree than concurrent increases in PCR-negatives. Fatigue/weakness increased again after BA.2 dominated, although to a similar degree to concurrent increases in PCR-negatives. Symptoms were consistently more common in adults aged 18-65 years than in children or older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in sore throat (also common in the general community), and a marked reduction in loss of taste/smell, make Omicron harder to detect with symptom-based testing algorithms, with implications for institutional and national testing policies.

6.
Lancet ; 398(10307): 1217-1229, 2021 10 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34534517

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: School-based COVID-19 contacts in England have been asked to self-isolate at home, missing key educational opportunities. We trialled daily testing of contacts as an alternative to assess whether this resulted in similar control of transmission, while allowing more school attendance. METHODS: We did an open-label, cluster-randomised, controlled trial in secondary schools and further education colleges in England. Schools were randomly assigned (1:1) to self-isolation of school-based COVID-19 contacts for 10 days (control) or to voluntary daily lateral flow device (LFD) testing for 7 days with LFD-negative contacts remaining at school (intervention). Randomisation was stratified according to school type and size, presence of a sixth form, presence of residential students, and proportion of students eligible for free school meals. Group assignment was not masked during procedures or analysis. Coprimary outcomes in all students and staff were COVID-19-related school absence and symptomatic PCR-confirmed COVID-19, adjusted for community case rates, to estimate within-school transmission (non-inferiority margin <50% relative increase). Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis using quasi-Poisson regression, also estimating complier average causal effects (CACE). This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN18100261. FINDINGS: Between March 18 and May 4, 2021, 204 schools were taken through the consent process, during which three decided not to participate further. 201 schools were randomly assigned (control group n=99, intervention group n=102) in the 10-week study (April 19-May 10, 2021), which continued until the pre-appointed stop date (June 27, 2021). 76 control group schools and 86 intervention group schools actively participated; additional national data allowed most non-participating schools to be included in analysis of coprimary outcomes. 2432 (42·4%) of 5763 intervention group contacts participated in daily contact testing. There were 657 symptomatic PCR-confirmed infections during 7 782 537 days-at-risk (59·1 per 100 000 per week) in the control group and 740 during 8 379 749 days-at-risk (61·8 per 100 000 per week) in the intervention group (intention-to-treat adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] 0·96 [95% CI 0·75-1·22]; p=0·72; CACE aIRR 0·86 [0·55-1·34]). Among students and staff, there were 59 422 (1·62%) COVID-19-related absences during 3 659 017 person-school-days in the control group and 51 541 (1·34%) during 3 845 208 person-school-days in the intervention group (intention-to-treat aIRR 0·80 [95% CI 0·54-1·19]; p=0·27; CACE aIRR 0·61 [0·30-1·23]). INTERPRETATION: Daily contact testing of school-based contacts was non-inferior to self-isolation for control of COVID-19 transmission, with similar rates of symptomatic infections among students and staff with both approaches. Infection rates in school-based contacts were low, with very few school contacts testing positive. Daily contact testing should be considered for implementation as a safe alternative to home isolation following school-based exposures. FUNDING: UK Government Department of Health and Social Care.


Assuntos
Teste Sorológico para COVID-19/métodos , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis/métodos , Quarentena/métodos , Instituições Acadêmicas , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/transmissão , Teste de Ácido Nucleico para COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19/métodos , Criança , Pessoal de Educação , Inglaterra , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto Jovem
7.
Eur J Epidemiol ; 36(6): 605-617, 2021 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34132940

RESUMO

Ethnic minorities have experienced disproportionate COVID-19 mortality rates in the UK and many other countries. We compared the differences in the risk of COVID-19 related death between ethnic groups in the first and second waves the of COVID-19 pandemic in England. We also investigated whether the factors explaining differences in COVID-19 death between ethnic groups changed between the two waves. Using data from the Office for National Statistics Public Health Data Asset, a linked dataset combining the 2011 Census with primary care and hospital records and death registrations, we conducted an observational cohort study to examine differences in the risk of death involving COVID-19 between ethnic groups in the first wave (from 24th January 2020 until 31st August 2020) and the first part of the second wave (from 1st September to 28th December 2020). We estimated age-standardised mortality rates (ASMR) in the two waves stratified by ethnic groups and sex. We also estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for ethnic-minority groups compared with the White British population, adjusted for geographical factors, socio-demographic characteristics, and pre-pandemic health conditions. The study population included over 28.9 million individuals aged 30-100 years living in private households. In the first wave, all ethnic minority groups had a higher risk of COVID-19 related death compared to the White British population. In the second wave, the risk of COVID-19 death remained elevated for people from Pakistani (ASMR: 339.9 [95% CI: 303.7-376.2] and 166.8 [141.7-191.9] deaths per 100,000 population in men and women) and Bangladeshi (318.7 [247.4-390.1] and 127.1 [91.1-171.3] in men and women) background but not for people from Black ethnic groups. Adjustment for geographical factors explained a large proportion of the differences in COVID-19 mortality in the first wave but not in the second wave. Despite an attenuation of the elevated risk of COVID-19 mortality after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and health status, the risk was substantially higher in people from Bangladeshi and Pakistani background in both the first and the second waves. Between the first and second waves of the pandemic, the reduction in the difference in COVID-19 mortality between people from Black ethnic background and people from the White British group shows that ethnic inequalities in COVID-19 mortality can be addressed. The continued higher rate of mortality in people from Bangladeshi and Pakistani background is alarming and requires focused public health campaign and policy changes.


Assuntos
COVID-19/mortalidade , Etnicidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Grupos Minoritários/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2
9.
Nat Commun ; 15(1): 1008, 2024 Feb 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38307854

RESUMO

SARS-CoV-2 reinfections increased substantially after Omicron variants emerged. Large-scale community-based comparisons across multiple Omicron waves of reinfection characteristics, risk factors, and protection afforded by previous infection and vaccination, are limited. Here we studied ~45,000 reinfections from the UK's national COVID-19 Infection Survey and quantified the risk of reinfection in multiple waves, including those driven by BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/5, and BQ.1/CH.1.1/XBB.1.5 variants. Reinfections were associated with lower viral load and lower percentages of self-reporting symptoms compared with first infections. Across multiple Omicron waves, estimated protection against reinfection was significantly higher in those previously infected with more recent than earlier variants, even at the same time from previous infection. Estimated protection against Omicron reinfections decreased over time from the most recent infection if this was the previous or penultimate variant (generally within the preceding year). Those 14-180 days after receiving their most recent vaccination had a lower risk of reinfection than those >180 days from their most recent vaccination. Reinfection risk was independently higher in those aged 30-45 years, and with either low or high viral load in their most recent previous infection. Overall, the risk of Omicron reinfection is high, but with lower severity than first infections; both viral evolution and waning immunity are independently associated with reinfection.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2/genética , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Reinfecção/epidemiologia , Reino Unido/epidemiologia
10.
J Infect ; 88(6): 106164, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38692359

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated Nanopore sequencing for influenza surveillance. METHODS: Influenza A and B PCR-positive samples from hospital patients in Oxfordshire, UK, and a UK-wide population survey from winter 2022-23 underwent Nanopore sequencing following targeted rt-PCR amplification. RESULTS: From 941 infections, successful sequencing was achieved in 292/388 (75 %) available Oxfordshire samples: 231 (79 %) A/H3N2, 53 (18 %) A/H1N1, and 8 (3 %) B/Victoria and in 53/113 (47 %) UK-wide samples. Sequencing was more successful at lower Ct values. Most same-sample replicate sequences had identical haemagglutinin segments (124/141, 88 %); 36/39 (92 %) Illumina vs. Nanopore comparisons were identical, and 3 (8 %) differed by 1 variant. Comparison of Oxfordshire and UK-wide sequences showed frequent inter-regional transmission. Infections were closely-related to 2022-23 vaccine strains. Only one sample had a neuraminidase inhibitor resistance mutation. 849/941 (90 %) Oxfordshire infections were community-acquired. 63/88 (72 %) potentially healthcare-associated cases shared a hospital ward with ≥ 1 known infectious case. 33 epidemiologically-plausible transmission links had sequencing data for both source and recipient: 8 were within ≤ 5 SNPs, of these, 5 (63 %) involved potential sources that were also hospital-acquired. CONCLUSIONS: Nanopore influenza sequencing was reproducible and antiviral resistance rare. Inter-regional transmission was common; most infections were genomically similar. Hospital-acquired infections are likely an important source of nosocomial transmission and should be prioritised for infection prevention and control.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza B , Influenza Humana , Sequenciamento por Nanoporos , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/virologia , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Sequenciamento por Nanoporos/métodos , Vírus da Influenza B/genética , Vírus da Influenza B/isolamento & purificação , Vírus da Influenza B/classificação , Feminino , Masculino , Vírus da Influenza A/genética , Vírus da Influenza A/classificação , Vírus da Influenza A/isolamento & purificação , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adolescente , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Criança , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/genética , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/isolamento & purificação , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/genética , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/isolamento & purificação , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/classificação
11.
Nat Commun ; 15(1): 5340, 2024 Jun 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38914564

RESUMO

Population-representative estimates of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence and antibody levels in specific geographic areas at different time points are needed to optimise policy responses. However, even population-wide surveys are potentially impacted by biases arising from differences in participation rates across key groups. Here, we used spatio-temporal regression and post-stratification models to UK's national COVID-19 Infection Survey (CIS) to obtain representative estimates of PCR positivity (6,496,052 tests) and antibody prevalence (1,941,333 tests) for different regions, ages and ethnicities (7-December-2020 to 4-May-2022). Not accounting for vaccination status through post-stratification led to small underestimation of PCR positivity, but more substantial overestimations of antibody levels in the population (up to 21 percentage points), particularly in groups with low vaccine uptake in the general population. There was marked variation in the relative contribution of different areas and age-groups to each wave. Future analyses of infectious disease surveys should take into account major drivers of outcomes of interest that may also influence participation, with vaccination being an important factor to consider.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/virologia , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Adolescente , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Adulto Jovem , Criança , Masculino , Feminino , Prevalência , Pré-Escolar , Análise Espaço-Temporal , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Lactente , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais
12.
Int J Infect Dis ; 128: 230-243, 2023 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36621754

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Investigate risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infections in school students and staff. METHODS: In the 2020/2021 school year, we administered polymerase chain reaction, antibody tests, and questionnaires to a sample of primary and secondary school students and staff, with data linkage to COVID-19 surveillance. We fitted logistic regression models to identify the factors associated with infection. RESULTS: We included 6799 students and 5090 staff in the autumn and 11,952 students and 4569 staff in the spring/summer terms. Infections in students in autumn 2020 were related to the percentage of students eligible for free school meals. We found no statistical association between infection risk in primary and secondary schools and reported contact patterns between students and staff in either period in our study. Using public transports was associated with increased risk in autumn in students (adjusted odds ratio = 1.72; 95% confidence interval 1.31-2.25) and staff. One or more infections in the same household during either period was the strongest risk factor for infection in students and more so among staff. CONCLUSION: Deprivation, community, and household factors were more strongly associated with infection than contacts patterns at school; this suggests that the additional school-based mitigation measures in England in 2020/2021 likely helped reduce transmission risk in schools.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , SARS-CoV-2 , Fatores de Risco , Inglaterra , Instituições Acadêmicas , Estudantes
13.
Nat Commun ; 14(1): 2799, 2023 05 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37193713

RESUMO

Following primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, whether boosters or breakthrough infections provide greater protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection is incompletely understood. Here we investigated SARS-CoV-2 antibody correlates of protection against new Omicron BA.4/5 (re-)infections and anti-spike IgG antibody trajectories after a third/booster vaccination or breakthrough infection following second vaccination in 154,149 adults ≥18 y from the United Kingdom general population. Higher antibody levels were associated with increased protection against Omicron BA.4/5 infection and breakthrough infections were associated with higher levels of protection at any given antibody level than boosters. Breakthrough infections generated similar antibody levels to boosters, and the subsequent antibody declines were slightly slower than after boosters. Together our findings show breakthrough infection provides longer-lasting protection against further infections than booster vaccinations. Our findings, considered alongside the risks of severe infection and long-term consequences of infection, have important implications for vaccine policy.


Assuntos
Infecções Irruptivas , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticorpos Antivirais , Reinfecção , Reino Unido/epidemiologia , Vacinação
14.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 11(11): e34075, 2022 11 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35635843

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: One of the most debated questions in the COVID-19 pandemic has been the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The COVID-19 Schools Infection Survey (SIS) aims to provide much-needed evidence addressing this issue. OBJECTIVE: We present the study protocol and participation profile for the SIS study, aimed at assessing the role of schools in SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission within school settings, and investigating how transmission within and from schools could be mitigated through the implementation of school COVID-19 control measures. METHODS: SIS was a multisite, prospective, observational cohort study conducted in a stratified random sample of primary and secondary schools in selected local authorities in England. A total of 6 biobehavioral surveys were planned among participating students and staff during the 2020-2021 academic year, between November 2020 and July 2021. Key measurements were SARS-CoV-2 virus prevalence, assessed by nasal swab polymerase chain reaction; anti-SARS-CoV-2 (nucleocapsid protein) antibody prevalence and conversion, assessed in finger-prick blood for staff and oral fluid for students; student and staff school attendance rates; feasibility and acceptability of school-level implementation of SARS-CoV-2 control measures; and investigation of selected school outbreaks. The study was approved by the United Kingdom Health Security Agency Research Support and Governance Office (NR0237) and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Ethics Review Committee (reference 22657). RESULTS: Data collection and laboratory analyses were completed by September 2021. A total of 22,585 individuals-1891 staff and 4654 students from 59 primary schools and 5852 staff and 10,188 students from 97 secondary schools-participated in at least one survey. Across all survey rounds, staff and student participation rates were 45.2% and 16.4%, respectively, in primary schools and 30% and 15.2%, respectively, in secondary schools. Although primary student participation increased over time, and secondary student participation remained reasonably consistent, staff participation declined across rounds, especially for secondary school staff (3165/7583, 41.7% in round 1 and 2290/10,374, 22.1% in round 6). Although staff participation overall was generally reflective of the eligible staff population, student participation was higher in schools with low absenteeism, a lower proportion of students eligible for free school meals, and from schools in the least deprived locations (in primary schools, 446/4654, 9.6% of participating students were from schools in the least deprived quintile compared with 1262/22,225, 5.7% of eligible students). CONCLUSIONS: We outline the study design, methods, and participation, and reflect on the strengths of the SIS study as well as the practical challenges encountered and the strategies implemented to address these challenges. The SIS study, by measuring current and incident infection over time, alongside the implementation of control measures in schools across a range of settings in England, aims to inform national guidance and public health policy for educational settings. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/34075.

15.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 3748, 2022 06 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35768431

RESUMO

Given high SARS-CoV-2 incidence, coupled with slow and inequitable vaccine roll-out in many settings, there is a need for evidence to underpin optimum vaccine deployment, aiming to maximise global population immunity. We evaluate whether a single vaccination in individuals who have already been infected with SARS-CoV-2 generates similar initial and subsequent antibody responses to two vaccinations in those without prior infection. We compared anti-spike IgG antibody responses after a single vaccination with ChAdOx1, BNT162b2, or mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the COVID-19 Infection Survey in the UK general population. In 100,849 adults median (50 (IQR: 37-63) years) receiving at least one vaccination, 13,404 (13.3%) had serological/PCR evidence of prior infection. Prior infection significantly boosted antibody responses, producing higher peak levels and/or longer half-lives after one dose of all three vaccines than those without prior infection receiving one or two vaccinations. In those with prior infection, the median time above the positivity threshold was >1 year after the first vaccination. Single-dose vaccination targeted to those previously infected may provide at least as good protection to two-dose vaccination among those without previous infection.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas Virais , Adulto , Anticorpos Antivirais , Formação de Anticorpos , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação
16.
Nat Med ; 28(5): 1072-1082, 2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35165453

RESUMO

Antibody responses are an important part of immunity after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. However, antibody trajectories and the associated duration of protection after a second vaccine dose remain unclear. In this study, we investigated anti-spike IgG antibody responses and correlates of protection after second doses of ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2 vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the United Kingdom general population. In 222,493 individuals, we found significant boosting of anti-spike IgG by the second doses of both vaccines in all ages and using different dosing intervals, including the 3-week interval for BNT162b2. After second vaccination, BNT162b2 generated higher peak levels than ChAdOX1. Older individuals and males had lower peak levels with BNT162b2 but not ChAdOx1, whereas declines were similar across ages and sexes with ChAdOX1 or BNT162b2. Prior infection significantly increased antibody peak level and half-life with both vaccines. Anti-spike IgG levels were associated with protection from infection after vaccination and, to an even greater degree, after prior infection. At least 67% protection against infection was estimated to last for 2-3 months after two ChAdOx1 doses, for 5-8 months after two BNT162b2 doses in those without prior infection and for 1-2 years for those unvaccinated after natural infection. A third booster dose might be needed, prioritized to ChAdOx1 recipients and those more clinically vulnerable.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Formação de Anticorpos , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humanos , Imunoglobulina G , Masculino
17.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 21: 100471, 2022 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36035630

RESUMO

Background: There remains uncertainty about the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 among school students and staff and the extent to which non-pharmaceutical-interventions reduce the risk of school settings. Methods: We conducted an open cohort study in a sample of 59 primary and 97 secondary schools in 15 English local authority areas that were implementing government guidance to schools open during the pandemic. We estimated SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence among those attending school, antibody prevalence, and antibody negative to positive conversion rates in staff and students over the school year (November 2020-July 2021). Findings: 22,585 staff and students participated. SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence among those attending school was highest during the first two rounds of testing in the autumn term, ranging from 0.7% (95% CI 0.2, 1.2) among primary staff in November 2020 to 1.6% (95% CI 0.9, 2.3) among secondary staff in December 2020. Antibody conversion rates were highest in the autumn term. Infection patterns were similar between staff and students, and between primary and secondary schools. The prevalence of nucleoprotein antibodies increased over the year and was lower among students than staff. SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in the North-West region was lower among secondary students attending school on normal school days than the regional estimate for secondary school-age children. Interpretation: SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in staff and students attending school varied with local community infection rates. Non-pharmaceutical interventions intended to prevent infected individuals attending school may have partially reduced the prevalence of infection among those on the school site. Funding: UK Department of Health and Social Care.

18.
BMJ ; 372: n693, 2021 03 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33789877

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To quantify rates of organ specific dysfunction in individuals with covid-19 after discharge from hospital compared with a matched control group from the general population. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: NHS hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: 47 780 individuals (mean age 65, 55% men) in hospital with covid-19 and discharged alive by 31 August 2020, exactly matched to controls from a pool of about 50 million people in England for personal and clinical characteristics from 10 years of electronic health records. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of hospital readmission (or any admission for controls), all cause mortality, and diagnoses of respiratory, cardiovascular, metabolic, kidney, and liver diseases until 30 September 2020. Variations in rate ratios by age, sex, and ethnicity. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 140 days, nearly a third of individuals who were discharged from hospital after acute covid-19 were readmitted (14 060 of 47 780) and more than 1 in 10 (5875) died after discharge, with these events occurring at rates four and eight times greater, respectively, than in the matched control group. Rates of respiratory disease (P<0.001), diabetes (P<0.001), and cardiovascular disease (P<0.001) were also significantly raised in patients with covid-19, with 770 (95% confidence interval 758 to 783), 127 (122 to 132), and 126 (121 to 131) diagnoses per 1000 person years, respectively. Rate ratios were greater for individuals aged less than 70 than for those aged 70 or older, and in ethnic minority groups compared with the white population, with the largest differences seen for respiratory disease (10.5 (95% confidence interval 9.7 to 11.4) for age less than 70 years v 4.6 (4.3 to 4.8) for age ≥70, and 11.4 (9.8 to 13.3) for non-white v 5.2 (5.0 to 5.5) for white individuals). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals discharged from hospital after covid-19 had increased rates of multiorgan dysfunction compared with the expected risk in the general population. The increase in risk was not confined to the elderly and was not uniform across ethnicities. The diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of post-covid syndrome requires integrated rather than organ or disease specific approaches, and urgent research is needed to establish the risk factors.


Assuntos
COVID-19/complicações , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Insuficiência de Múltiplos Órgãos/epidemiologia , Readmissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Idoso , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/virologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Etnicidade , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Alta do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Respiratórias/epidemiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2/genética , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação
19.
Int J Epidemiol ; 49(6): 1951-1962, 2021 01 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33349855

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We estimated population-level associations between ethnicity and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality using a newly linked census-based data set and investigated how ethnicity-specific mortality risk evolved during the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of respondents to the 2011 Census of England and Wales in private households, linked to death registrations and adjusted for emigration (n = 47 872 412). The outcome of interest was death involving COVID-19 between 2 March 2020 and 15 May 2020. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for ethnic-minority groups compared with the White population, controlling for individual, household and area characteristics. HRs were estimated on the full outcome period and separately for pre- and post-lockdown periods. RESULTS: In age-adjusted models, people from all ethnic-minority groups were at elevated risk of COVID-19 mortality; the HRs for Black males and females were 3.13 (95% confidence interval: 2.93 to 3.34) and 2.40 (2.20 to 2.61), respectively. However, in fully adjusted models for females, the HRs were close to unity for all ethnic groups except Black [1.29 (1.18 to 1.42)]. For males, the mortality risk remained elevated for the Black [1.76 (1.63 to 1.90)], Bangladeshi/Pakistani [1.35 (1.21 to 1.49)] and Indian [1.30 (1.19 to 1.43)] groups. The HRs decreased after lockdown for all ethnic groups, particularly Black and Bangladeshi/Pakistani females. CONCLUSION: Differences in COVID-19 mortality between ethnic groups were largely attenuated by geographical and socio-demographic factors, though some residual differences remained. Lockdown was associated with reductions in excess mortality risk in ethnic-minority populations, which has implications for a second wave of infection.


Assuntos
COVID-19/etnologia , COVID-19/mortalidade , Censos , Atestado de Óbito , Etnicidade/estatística & dados numéricos , Mortalidade/etnologia , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde , Adolescente , Adulto , Negro ou Afro-Americano , Fatores Etários , Povo Asiático , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Estudos de Coortes , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Características da Família , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Características de Residência/classificação , Características de Residência/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores Socioeconômicos , País de Gales/epidemiologia , População Branca , Adulto Jovem
20.
Lancet Digit Health ; 3(7): e425-e433, 2021 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34049834

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Public policy measures and clinical risk assessments relevant to COVID-19 need to be aided by risk prediction models that are rigorously developed and validated. We aimed to externally validate a risk prediction algorithm (QCovid) to estimate mortality outcomes from COVID-19 in adults in England. METHODS: We did a population-based cohort study using the UK Office for National Statistics Public Health Linked Data Asset, a cohort of individuals aged 19-100 years, based on the 2011 census and linked to Hospital Episode Statistics, the General Practice Extraction Service data for pandemic planning and research, and radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy records. The primary outcome was time to COVID-19 death, defined as confirmed or suspected COVID-19 death as per death certification. Two periods were used: (1) Jan 24 to April 30, 2020, and (2) May 1 to July 28, 2020. We assessed the performance of the QCovid algorithms using measures of discrimination and calibration. Using predicted 90-day risk of COVID-19 death, we calculated r2 values, Brier scores, and measures of discrimination and calibration with corresponding 95% CIs over the two time periods. FINDINGS: We included 34 897 648 adults aged 19-100 years resident in England. 26 985 (0·08%) COVID-19 deaths occurred during the first period and 13 177 (0·04%) during the second. The algorithms had good discrimination and calibration in both periods. In the first period, they explained 77·1% (95% CI 76·9-77·4) of the variation in time to death in men and 76·3% (76·0-76·6) in women. The D statistic was 3·761 (3·732-3·789) for men and 3·671 (3·640-3·702) for women and Harrell's C was 0·935 (0·933-0·937) for men and 0·945 (0·943-0·947) for women. Similar results were obtained for the second time period. In the top 5% of patients with the highest predicted risks of death, the sensitivity for identifying deaths in the first period was 65·94% for men and 71·67% for women. INTERPRETATION: The QCovid population-based risk algorithm performed well, showing high levels of discrimination for COVID-19 deaths in men and women for both time periods. QCovid has the potential to be dynamically updated as the pandemic evolves and, therefore, has potential use in guiding national policy. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research.


Assuntos
Algoritmos , COVID-19/mortalidade , Medição de Risco/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Bases de Dados Factuais , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA