Physical activity and cognitive function: A comparison of rural and urban breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Increasing evidence suggests rural breast cancer survivors (BCS) may experience greater burden in symptoms known to be associated with cancer-associated cognitive decline (CACD). Yet, little is known about CACD in rural BCS. This study (1) examined differences in cognitive function, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), and other CACD correlates and (2) tested the effects of MVPA on cognitive function in rural versus urban BCS. METHODS: Rural and urban BCS (N = 80), matched on age, education, and time since diagnosis from a larger study, completed cognitive tasks assessing processing speed (Trails-B, Mazes, Task-Switch) and working memory (spatial working memory) and questionnaires assessing subjective memory impairment (SMI), MVPA, and CACD correlates (i.e., sleep quality, fatigue, anxiety/depression). Some participants (n = 62) wore an accelerometer to objectively estimate MVPA. Multiple linear regression and multivariate analysis of covariance were used to test study aims. RESULTS: Rural BCS (n = 40, M = 61.1±8.4 years-old) performed significantly slower on Trails-B (p<0.01) compared with urban BCS (n = 40, M = 61.0±8.2 years-old) and engaged in less objectively-estimated daily MVPA (mean difference = 13.83±4.73 minutes; p = 0.01). No significant differences in SMI, self-reported MVPA, or CACD correlates were observed (all p>0.28). Regression models did not reveal a significant interaction between MVPA and cognitive performance (all p>0.1); however, estimated marginal means models indicated that the effect of MVPA on processing speed was evident only among rural BCS (Trails-B, p = 0.04; Mazes, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest rural BCS may suffer greater CACD and engage in less MVPA. Additional research is warranted to further examine CACD and more effectively promote MVPA in rural BCS.

SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) Variant Transmission Within Households - Four U.S. Jurisdictions, November 2021-February 2022.

The B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant, first detected in November 2021, was responsible for a surge in U.S. infections with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, during December 2021-January 2022 (1). To investigate the effectiveness of prevention strategies in household settings, CDC partnered with four U.S. jurisdictions to describe Omicron household transmission during November 2021-February 2022. Persons with sequence-confirmed Omicron infection and their household contacts were interviewed. Omicron transmission occurred in 124 (67.8%) of 183 households. Among 431 household contacts, 227 were classified as having a case of COVID-19 (attack rate [AR] = 52.7%).† The ARs among household contacts of index patients who had received a COVID-19 booster dose, of fully vaccinated index patients who completed their COVID-19 primary series within the previous 5 months, and of unvaccinated index patients were 42.7% (47 of 110), 43.6% (17 of 39), and 63.9% (69 of 108), respectively. The AR was lower among household contacts of index patients who isolated (41.2%, 99 of 240) compared with those of index patients who did not isolate (67.5%, 112 of 166) (p-value <0.01). Similarly, the AR was lower among household contacts of index patients who ever wore a mask at home during their potentially infectious period (39.5%, 88 of 223) compared with those of index patients who never wore a mask at home (68.9%, 124 of 180) (p-value <0.01). Multicomponent COVID-19 prevention strategies, including up-to-date vaccination, isolation of infected persons, and mask use at home, are critical to reducing Omicron transmission in household settings.

Symptoms and Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Among Children - Utah and Wisconsin, March-May 2020.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in children. We described infection rates and symptom profiles among pediatric household contacts of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We enrolled individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 and their household contacts, assessed daily symptoms prospectively for 14 days, and obtained specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and serology testing. Among pediatric contacts (<18 years), we described transmission, assessed the risk factors for infection, and calculated symptom positive and negative predictive values. We compared secondary infection rates and symptoms between pediatric and adult contacts using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 58 households, 188 contacts were enrolled (120 adults; 68 children). Secondary infection rates for adults (30%) and children (28%) were similar. Among households with potential for transmission from children, child-to-adult transmission may have occurred in 2 of 10 (20%), and child-to-child transmission may have occurred in 1 of 6 (17%). Pediatric case patients most commonly reported headache (79%), sore throat (68%), and rhinorrhea (68%); symptoms had low positive predictive values, except measured fever (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 44% to 100%). Compared with symptomatic adults, children were less likely to report cough (odds ratio [OR]: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.57), loss of taste (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.74), and loss of smell (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) and more likely to report sore throat (OR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.04 to 11.18). CONCLUSIONS: Children and adults had similar secondary infection rates, but children generally had less frequent and severe symptoms. In two states early in the pandemic, we observed possible transmission from children in approximately one-fifth of households with potential to observe such transmission patterns.

Household Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. METHODS: We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020-25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. RESULTS: Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-36%) overall, 42% among children (aged <18 years) of the COVID-19 patient and 33% among spouses/partners. Household contacts to COVID-19 patients with immunocompromised conditions and household contacts who themselves had diabetes mellitus had increased odds of infection with ORs 15.9 (95% CI, 2.4-106.9) and 7.1 (95% CI: 1.2-42.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.