Infection and transmission risks of COVID-19 in schools and their contribution to population infections in Germany: A retrospective observational study using nationwide and regional health and education agency notification data.

BACKGROUND: School-level infection control measures in Germany during the early Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic differed across the 16 federal states and lacked a dependable evidence base, with available evidence limited to regional data restricted to short phases of the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the (a) infection risks in students and staff; (b) transmission risks and routes in schools; (c) effects of school-level infection control measures on school and population infection dynamics; and (d) contribution of contacts in schools to population cases. METHODS AND FINDINGS: For this retrospective observational study, we used German federal state (NUTS-2) and county (NUTS-3) data from public health and education agencies from March 2020 to April 2022. We assessed (a) infection risk as cumulative risk and crude risk ratios and (b) secondary attack rates (SARs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We used (c) multiple regression analysis for the effects of infection control measures such as reduced attendance, mask mandates, and vaccination coverage as absolute reduction in case incidence per 100,000 inhabitants per 14 days and in percentage relative to the population, and (d) infection dynamic modelling to determine the percentage contribution of school contacts to population cases. We included (a) nationwide NUTS-2 data from calendar weeks (W) 46-50/2020 and W08/2021-W15/2022 with 3,521,964 cases in students and 329,283 in teachers; (b) NUTS-3 data from W09-25/2021 with 85,788 student and 9,427 teacher cases; and (c) detailed data from 5 NUTS-3 regions from W09/2020 to W27/2021 with 12,814 cases (39% male, 37% female; median age 14, range 5 to 63), 43,238 contacts and 4,165 secondary cases for students (for teachers, 14,801 [22% male, 50% female; median age 39, range 16 to 75], 5,893 and 472). Infection risk (a) for students and teachers was higher than the population risk in all phases of normal presence class and highest in the early 2022 omicron wave with 30.6% (95% CI 30.5% to 32.6%) of students and 32.7% (95% CI 32.6% to 32.8%) of teachers infected in Germany. SARs (b) for students and staff were below 5% in schools throughout the study period, while SARs in households more than doubled from 13.8% (95% CI 10.6% to 17.6%) W21-39/2020 to 28.7% (95% CI 27% to 30.4%) in W08-23/2021 for students and 10.9% (95% CI 7% to 16.5%) to 32.7% (95% CI 28.2% to 37.6%) for staff. Most contacts were reported for schools, yet most secondary cases originated in households. In schools, staff predominantly infected staff. Mandatory surgical mask wearing during class in all schools was associated with a reduction in the case incidence of students and teachers (c), by 56/100,000 persons per 14 days (students: 95% CI 47.7 to 63.4; teachers: 95% CI 39.6 to 71.6; p < 0.001) and by 29.8% (95% CI 25% to 35%, p < 0.001) and 24.3% (95% CI 13% to 36%, p < 0.001) relative to the population, respectively, as were reduced attendance and higher vaccination coverage. The contribution of contacts in schools to population cases (d) was 2% to 20%, lowest during school closures/vacation and peaked during normal presence class intervals, with the overall peak early during the omicron wave. Limitations include underdetection, misclassification of contacts, interviewer/interviewee dependence of contact-tracing, and lack of individual-level confounding factors in aggregate data regression analysis. CONCLUSION: In this study, we observed that open schools under hygiene measures and testing strategies contributed up to 20% of population infections during the omicron wave early 2022, and as little as 2% during vacations/school closures; about a third of students and teachers were infected during the omicron wave in early 2022 in Germany. Mandatory mask wearing during class in all school types and reduced attendance models were associated with a reduced infection risk in schools.

Diminished neutralization responses towards SARS-CoV-2 Omicron VoC after mRNA or vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations.

SARS-CoV-2 variants accumulating immune escape mutations provide a significant risk to vaccine-induced protection against infection. The novel variant of concern (VoC) Omicron BA.1 and its sub-lineages have the largest number of amino acid alterations in its Spike protein to date. Thus, they may efficiently escape recognition by neutralizing antibodies, allowing breakthrough infections in convalescent and vaccinated individuals in particular in those who have only received a primary immunization scheme. We analyzed neutralization activity of sera from individuals after vaccination with all mRNA-, vector- or heterologous immunization schemes currently available in Europe by in vitro neutralization assay at peak response towards SARS-CoV-2 B.1, Omicron sub-lineages BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.3, BA.4/5, Beta and Delta pseudotypes and also provide longitudinal follow-up data from BNT162b2 vaccinees. All vaccines apart from Ad26.CoV2.S showed high levels of responder rates (96-100%) towards the SARS-CoV-2 B.1 isolate, and minor to moderate reductions in neutralizing Beta and Delta VoC pseudotypes. The novel Omicron variant and its sub-lineages had the biggest impact, both in terms of response rates and neutralization titers. Only mRNA-1273 showed a 100% response rate to Omicron BA.1 and induced the highest level of neutralizing antibody titers, followed by heterologous prime-boost approaches. Homologous BNT162b2 vaccination, vector-based AZD1222 and Ad26.CoV2.S performed less well with peak responder rates of 48%, 56% and 9%, respectively. However, Omicron responder rates in BNT162b2 recipients were maintained in our six month longitudinal follow-up indicating that individuals with cross-protection against Omicron maintain it over time. Overall, our data strongly argue for booster doses in individuals who were previously vaccinated with BNT162b2, or a vector-based primary immunization scheme.

Comparative Magnitude and Persistence of Humoral SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination Responses in the Adult Population in Germany.

Recent increases in SARS-CoV-2 infections have led to questions about duration and quality of vaccine-induced immune protection. While numerous studies have been published on immune responses triggered by vaccination, these often focus on studying the impact of one or two immunisation schemes within subpopulations such as immunocompromised individuals or healthcare workers. To provide information on the duration and quality of vaccine-induced immune responses against SARS-CoV-2, we analyzed antibody titres against various SARS-CoV-2 antigens and ACE2 binding inhibition against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and variants of concern in samples from a large German population-based seroprevalence study (MuSPAD) who had received all currently available immunisation schemes. We found that homologous mRNA-based or heterologous prime-boost vaccination produced significantly higher antibody responses than vector-based homologous vaccination. Ad26.CoV2S.2 performance was particularly concerning with reduced titres and 91.7% of samples classified as non-responsive for ACE2 binding inhibition, suggesting that recipients require a booster mRNA vaccination. While mRNA vaccination induced a higher ratio of RBD- and S1-targeting antibodies, vector-based vaccines resulted in an increased proportion of S2-targeting antibodies. Given the role of RBD- and S1-specific antibodies in neutralizing SARS-CoV-2, their relative over-representation after mRNA vaccination may explain why these vaccines have increased efficacy compared to vector-based formulations. Previously infected individuals had a robust immune response once vaccinated, regardless of which vaccine they received, which could aid future dose allocation should shortages arise for certain manufacturers. Overall, both titres and ACE2 binding inhibition peaked approximately 28 days post-second vaccination and then decreased.

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Until now, information on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany has been based mainly on data from the public health offices. It may be assumed that these data do not include many cases of asymptomatic and mild infection. METHODS: We determined seroprevalence over the course of the pandemic in a sequential, multilocal seroprevalence study (MuSPAD). Study participants were recruited at random in seven administrative districts (Kreise) in Germany from July 2020 onward; each participant was tested at two different times 3-5 months apart. Test findings on blood samples were used to determine the missed-case rate of reported infections, the infection fatality rate (IFR), and the association between seropositivity and demographic, socio-economic, and health-related factors, as well as to evaluate the self-reported results of PCR and antigenic tests. The registration number of this study is DRKS00022335. RESULTS: Among non-vaccinated persons, the seroprevalence from July to December 2020 was 1.3-2.8% and rose between February and May 2021 to 4.1-13.1%. In July 2021, 35% of tested persons in Chemnitz were not vaccinated, and the seroprevalence among these persons was 32.4% (07/2021). The surveillance detection ratio (SDR), i.e., the ratio between the true number of infections estimated from seroprevalence and the actual number or reported infections, varied among the districts included in the study from 2.2 to 5.1 up to December 2020 and from 1.3 to 2.9 up to June 2021, and subsequently declined. The IFR was in the range of 0.8% to 2.4% in all regions except Magdeburg, where a value of 0.3% was calculated for November 2020. A lower educational level was associated with a higher seropositivity rate, smoking with a lower seropositivity rate. On average, 1 person was infected for every 8.5 persons in quarantine. CONCLUSION: Seroprevalence was low after the first wave of the pandemic but rose markedly during the second and third waves. The missed-case rate trended downward over the course of the pandemic.

Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions targeted at COVID-19 pandemic on influenza burden - a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To better understand the impact of comprehensive COVID-19 targeted non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on influenza burden worldwide. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in selected databases (PubMed, WHO COVID-19), preprint servers (medRxiv, bioRxiv) and websites of European Public Health institutes. Documents that compared influenza estimates in the 2019/2020 season with previous seasons were included. Information synthesis was qualitative due to a high heterogeneity in the number and periods of comparative seasons, outcome measures and statistical methods. RESULTS: We included 23 records reporting from 15 countries/regions as well as 8 reports from European Public Health agencies. Estimates in the 2019/2020 season based on influenza virus tests (4 out of 7 countries/regions), defined influenza cases (8 out of 9), influenza positivity rate (7 out of 8), and severe complications (1 out of 2) were lower than in former seasons. Results from syndromic indicators, such as influenza-like-illness (ILI), were less clear or even raised (4 out of 7) after the influenza season indicating a misclassification with COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence synthesis suggests that NPIs targeted at SARS-CoV-2-transmission reduce influenza burden as well. Low threshold NPIs need to be more strongly emphasized in influenza prevention strategies.