Combined multiplex panel test results are a poor estimate of disease prevalence without adjustment for test error.

Multiplex panel tests identify many individual pathogens at once, using a set of component tests. In some panels the number of components can be large. If the panel is detecting causative pathogens for a single syndrome or disease then we might estimate the burden of that disease by combining the results of the panel, for example determining the prevalence of pneumococcal pneumonia as caused by many individual pneumococcal serotypes. When we are dealing with multiplex test panels with many components, test error in the individual components of a panel, even when present at very low levels, can cause significant overall error. Uncertainty in the sensitivity and specificity of the individual tests, and statistical fluctuations in the numbers of false positives and false negatives, will cause large uncertainty in the combined estimates of disease prevalence. In many cases this can be a source of significant bias. In this paper we develop a mathematical framework to characterise this issue, we determine expressions for the sensitivity and specificity of panel tests. In this we identify a counter-intuitive relationship between panel test sensitivity and disease prevalence that means panel tests become more sensitive as prevalence increases. We present novel statistical methods that adjust for bias and quantify uncertainty in prevalence estimates from panel tests, and use simulations to test these methods. As multiplex testing becomes more commonly used for screening in routine clinical practice, accumulation of test error due to the combination of large numbers of test results needs to be identified and corrected for.

Association of ABO and Rhesus blood groups with severe outcomes from non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infection: A prospective observational cohort study in Bristol, UK 2020-2022.

Despite significant global morbidity associated with respiratory infection, there is a paucity of data examining the association between severity of non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infection and blood group. We analysed a prospective cohort of adults hospitalised in Bristol, UK, from 1 August 2020 to 31 July 2022, including patients with acute respiratory infection (pneumonia [n = 1934] and non-pneumonic lower respiratory tract infection [NP-LRTI] [n = 1184]), a negative SARS-CoV-2 test and known blood group status. The likelihood of cardiovascular complication, survival and hospital admission length was assessed using regression models with group O and RhD-negative status as reference groups. Group A and RhD-positive were over-represented in both pneumonia and NP-LRTI compared to a first-time donor population (p < 0.05 in all); contrastingly, group O was under-represented. ABO group did not influence cardiovascular complication risk; however, RhD-positive patients with pneumonia had a reduced odds ratio (OR) for cardiovascular complications (OR = 0.77 [95% CI = 0.59-0.98]). Compared to group O, group A individuals with NP-LRTI were more likely to be discharged within 60 days (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.17 [95% CI = 1.03-1.33]), while group B with pneumonia was less likely (HR = 0.8 [95% CI = 0.66-0.96]). This analysis provides some evidence that blood group status may influence clinical outcome following respiratory infection, with group A having increased risk of hospitalisation and RhD-positive patients having reduced cardiovascular complications.

Relative vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 boosters in people aged at least 75 years during the spring-summer (monovalent vaccine) and autumn-winter (bivalent vaccine) booster campaigns: a prospective test negative case-control study, United Kingdom, 2022.

BackgroundUnderstanding the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of new COVID-19 vaccine formulations against SARS-CoV-2 infection is a public health priority. A precise analysis of the rVE of monovalent and bivalent boosters given during the 2022 spring-summer and autumn-winter campaigns, respectively, in a defined population remains of interest.AimWe assessed rVE against hospitalisation for the spring-summer (fourth vs third monovalent mRNA vaccine doses) and autumn-winter (fifth BA.1/ancestral bivalent vs fourth monovalent mRNA vaccine dose) boosters.MethodsWe performed a prospective single-centre test-negative design case-control study in ≥ 75-year-old people hospitalised with COVID-19 or other acute respiratory disease. We conducted regression analyses controlling for age, sex, socioeconomic status, patient comorbidities, community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, vaccine brand and time between baseline dose and hospitalisation.ResultsWe included 682 controls and 182 cases in the spring-summer booster analysis and 572 controls and 152 cases in the autumn-winter booster analysis. A monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine as fourth dose showed 46.6% rVE (95% confidence interval (CI): 13.9-67.1) vs those not fully boosted. A bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine as fifth dose had 46.7% rVE (95% CI: 18.0-65.1), compared with a fourth monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose.ConclusionsBoth fourth monovalent and fifth BA.1/ancestral mRNA bivalent COVID-19 vaccine doses demonstrated benefit as a booster in older adults. Bivalent mRNA boosters offered similar protection against hospitalisation with Omicron infection to monovalent mRNA boosters given earlier in the year. These findings support immunisation programmes in several European countries that advised the use of BA.1/ancestral bivalent booster doses.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 infective exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on clinical outcomes in a prospective cohort study of hospitalised adults.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) triggered by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), have worse outcomes than AECOPD caused by other infectious agents or non-infective AECOPD (NI-COPD). DESIGN: A two-hospital prospective cohort study of adults hospitalised with acute respiratory disease. We compared outcomes with AECOPD and a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 (n = 816), AECOPD triggered by other infections (n = 3038) and NI-COPD (n = 994). We used multivariable modelling to adjust for potential confounders and assessed variation by seasons associated with different SARS-CoV-2 variants. SETTING: Bristol UK, August 2020-May 2022. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 y) hospitalised with AECOPD. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We determined the risk of positive pressure support, longer hospital admission and mortality following hospitalisation with AECOPD due to non-SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with SARS-CoV-2 AECOPD and NI-COPD. RESULTS: Patients with SARS-CoV-2 AECOPD, in comparison to non-SARS-CoV-2 infective AECOPD or NI-COPD, more frequently required positive pressure support (18.5% and 7.5% vs. 11.7%, respectively), longer hospital stays (median [interquartile range, IQR]: 7 [3-15] and 5 [2-10] vs. 4 [2-9] days, respectively) and had higher 30-day mortality (16.9% and 11.1% vs. 5.9%, respectively) (all p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, SARS-CoV-2 AECOPD was associated with a 55% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 24-93), 26% (95% CI: 15-37) and 35% (95% CI: 10-65) increase in the risk of positive pressure support, hospitalisation length and 30-day mortality, respectively, relative to non-SARS-CoV-2 infective AECOPD. The difference in risk remained similar during periods of wild-type, Alpha and Delta SARS-CoV-2 strain dominance, but diminished during Omicron dominance. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2-related AECOPD had worse patient outcomes compared with non-SARS-CoV-2 AECOPD or NI-AECOPD, although the difference in risks was less pronounced during Omicron dominance.

Parapneumonic effusions related to Streptococcus pneumoniae: serotype and disease severity trends from 2006 to 2018 in Bristol, UK.

RATIONALE: Streptococcus pneumoniae epidemiology is changing in response to vaccination and some data suggest that empyema incidence is increasing. However, differences exist between the UK and US studies. We describe trends in the clinical phenotype of adult pneumococcal pleural infection, including simple parapneumonic effusions (SPE) in the pneumococcal conjugate vaccination (PCV) era. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there were differences in pneumococcal disease presentation and severity associated with pleural infection. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study, all adults ≥16 years admitted to three large UK hospitals, 2006-2018 with pneumococcal disease. 2477 invasive pneumococcal cases were identified: 459 SPE and 100 pleural infection cases. Medical records were reviewed for each clinical episode. Serotype data were obtained from the UK Health Security Agency national reference laboratory. RESULTS: Incidence increased over time, including non-PCV-serotype disease. PCV7-serotype disease declined following paediatric PCV7 introduction, but the effect of PCV13 was less apparent as disease caused by the additional six serotypes plateaued with serotypes 1 and 3 causing such parapneumonic effusions from 2011 onwards.Patients with pleural infection had a median survival 468 days (95% CI 340 to 590) vs 286 days (95% CI 274 to 335) in those with SPE. Pleural infection associated with frank pus had lower 90-day mortality than pleural infection without pus (0% vs 29%, p<0.0001). 90-day mortality could be predicted by baseline increased RAPID (Renal, Age, Purulence, Infection source, and Dietary factors) score (HR 15.01, 95% CI 1.24 to 40.06, p=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Pneumococcal infection continues to cause severe disease despite the introduction of PCVs. The predominance of serotype 1 and 3 in this adult UK cohort is in keeping with previous studies in paediatric and non-UK studies. Rising non-PCV serotype disease and limited impact of PCV13 on cases caused by serotypes 1 and 3 offset the reductions in adult pneumococcal parapneumonic effusion disease burden observed following the introduction of the childhood PCV7 programme.

Voluntary risk mitigation behaviour can reduce impact of SARS-CoV-2: a real-time modelling study of the January 2022 Omicron wave in England.

BACKGROUND: Predicting the likely size of future SARS-CoV-2 waves is necessary for public health planning. In England, voluntary "plan B" mitigation measures were introduced in December 2021 including increased home working and face coverings in shops but stopped short of restrictions on social contacts. The impact of voluntary risk mitigation behaviours on future SARS-CoV-2 burden is unknown. METHODS: We developed a rapid online survey of risk mitigation behaviours ahead of the winter 2021 festive period and deployed in two longitudinal cohort studies in the UK (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) and TwinsUK/COVID Symptom Study (CSS) Biobank) in December 2021. Using an individual-based, probabilistic model of COVID-19 transmission between social contacts with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant parameters and realistic vaccine coverage in England, we predicted the potential impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron wave in England in terms of the effective reproduction number and cumulative infections, hospital admissions and deaths. Using survey results, we estimated in real-time the impact of voluntary risk mitigation behaviours on the Omicron wave in England, if implemented for the entire epidemic wave. RESULTS: Over 95% of survey respondents (NALSPAC = 2686 and NTwins = 6155) reported some risk mitigation behaviours, with vaccination and using home testing kits reported most frequently. Less than half of those respondents reported that their behaviour was due to "plan B". We estimate that without risk mitigation behaviours, the Omicron variant is consistent with an effective reproduction number between 2.5 and 3.5. Due to the reduced vaccine effectiveness against infection with the Omicron variant, our modelled estimates suggest that between 55% and 60% of the English population could be infected during the current wave, translating into between 12,000 and 46,000 cumulative deaths, depending on assumptions about severity and vaccine effectiveness. The actual number of deaths was 15,208 (26 November 2021-1 March 2022). We estimate that voluntary risk reduction measures could reduce the effective reproduction number to between 1.8 and 2.2 and reduce the cumulative number of deaths by up to 24%. CONCLUSIONS: Predicting future infection burden is affected by uncertainty in disease severity and vaccine effectiveness estimates. In addition to biological uncertainty, we show that voluntary measures substantially reduce the projected impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant but that voluntary measures alone would be unlikely to completely control transmission.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in prevention of hospitalisations and severe disease in adults with SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant between June 2021 and July 2022: A prospective test negative case-control study.

Background: Whilst other studies have reported the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against hospitalisation, including emergency department or intensive care admission, few have assessed effectiveness against other more clinically robust indices of COVID-19 severity. Methods: A prospective single-centre test-negative design case-control study of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 disease or other acute respiratory disease between 1 June 2021 and 20 July 2022. We assessed VE (vaccine effectiveness) against hospitalisation, length of stay [LOS] >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5 and supplementary oxygen FiO2 (fraction inspired oxygen) >28%, conducting regression analyses controlling for age, gender, index of multiple deprivation, Charlson comorbidity index, time, and community infection prevalence. Findings: 935 controls and 546 cases were hospitalised during the Delta period, with 721 controls and 372 cases hospitalised during the Omicron study period. Two-dose BNT162b2 was associated with VE 82.5% [95% confidence interval 76.2%-87.2%] against hospitalisation following Delta infection, 63.3% [26.9-81.8%], 58.5% [24.8-77.3%], and 51.5% [16.7-72.1%] against LOS >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5, and requirement for FiO2 >28% respectively. Three-dose BNT162b2 protection against hospitalisation with Omicron infection was 30.9% [5.9-49.3%], with sensitivity analyses ranging from 28.8-72.6%. Protection against LOS >3 days, WHO COVID Score >5 and requirement for FiO2 >28% was 56.1% [20.6-76.5%], 58.8% [31.2-75.8%], and 41.5% [-0.4-66.3%], respectively. In the UK, BNT162b2 was prioritised for high-risk individuals and those aged >75 years. In the latter group we found a higher estimate of VE against hospitalisation of 47.2% [16.8-66.6%]. Interpretation: BNT162b2 vaccination results in risk reductions for hospitalisation and multiple patient outcomes following Delta and Omicron COVID-19 infection, particularly in older adults. BNT162b2 remains effective against severe SARS-CoV-2 disease. Funding: AvonCAP is an investigator-led project funded under a collaborative agreement by Pfizer.

Severity of Omicron (B.1.1.529) and Delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 infection among hospitalised adults: A prospective cohort study in Bristol, United Kingdom.

Background: There is an urgent public health need to evaluate disease severity in adults hospitalised with Delta and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant infections. However, limited data exist assessing severity of disease in adults hospitalised with Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infections, and to what extent patient-factors, including vaccination, age, frailty and pre-existing disease, affect variant-dependent disease severity. Methods: A prospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years of age) hospitalised with acute lower respiratory tract disease at acute care hospitals in Bristol, UK conducted over 10-months. Delta or Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR and variant identification or inferred by dominant circulating variant. We constructed adjusted regression analyses to assess disease severity using three different measures: FiO2 >28% (fraction inspired oxygen), World Health Organization (WHO) outcome score >5 (assessing need for ventilatory support), and hospital length of stay (LOS) >3 days following admission for Omicron or Delta infection. Findings: Independent of other variables, including vaccination, Omicron variant infection in hospitalised adults was associated with lower severity than Delta. Risk reductions were 58%, 67%, and 16% for supplementary oxygen with >28% FiO2 [Relative Risk (RR) = 0.42 (95%CI: 0.34-0.52), P < 0.001], WHO outcome score >5 [RR = 0.33 (95%CI: 0.21-0.50), P < 0.001], and to have had a LOS > 3 days [RR = 0.84 (95%CI: 0.76-0.92), P < 0.001]. Younger age and vaccination with two or three doses were also independently associated with lower COVID-19 severity. Interpretation: We provide reassuring evidence that Omicron infection results in less serious adverse outcomes than Delta in hospitalised patients. Despite lower severity relative to Delta, Omicron infection still resulted in substantial patient and public health burden and an increased admission rate of older patients with Omicron which counteracts some of the benefit arising from less severe disease. Funding: AvonCAP is an investigator-led project funded under a collaborative agreement by Pfizer.

Incidence of community acquired lower respiratory tract disease in Bristol, UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective cohort study.

Background: The emergence of COVID-19 and public health measures implemented to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infections have both affected acute lower respiratory tract disease (aLRTD) epidemiology and incidence trends. The severity of COVID-19 and non-SARS-CoV-2 aLRTD during this period have not been compared in detail. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study of adults age ≥18 years admitted to either of two acute care hospitals in Bristol, UK, from August 2020 to November 2021. Patients were included if they presented with signs or symptoms of aLRTD (e.g., cough, pleurisy), or a clinical or radiological aLRTD diagnosis. Findings: 12,557 adult aLRTD hospitalisations occurred: 10,087 were associated with infection (pneumonia or non-pneumonic lower respiratory tract infection [NP-LRTI]), 2161 with no infective cause, with 306 providing a minimal surveillance dataset. Confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection accounted for 32% (3178/10,087) of respiratory infections. Annual incidences of overall, COVID-19, and non- SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia were 714.1, 264.2, and 449.9, and NP-LRTI were 346.2, 43.8, and 302.4 per 100,000 adults, respectively. Weekly incidence trends in COVID-19 aLRTD showed large surges (median 6.5 [IQR 0.7-10.2] admissions per 100,000 adults per week), while other infective aLRTD events were more stable (median 14.3 [IQR 12.8-16.4] admissions per 100,000 adults per week) as were non-infective aLRTD events (median 4.4 [IQR 3.5-5.5] admissions per 100,000 adults per week). Interpretation: While COVID-19 disease was a large component of total aLRTD during this pandemic period, non- SARS-CoV-2 infection still caused the majority of respiratory infection hospitalisations. COVID-19 disease showed significant temporal fluctuations in frequency, which were less apparent in non-SARS-CoV-2 infection. Despite public health interventions to reduce respiratory infection, disease incidence remains high. Funding: AvonCAP is an investigator-led project funded under a collaborative agreement by Pfizer.

An analysis of 45 large-scale wastewater sites in England to estimate SARS-CoV-2 community prevalence.

Accurate surveillance of the COVID-19 pandemic can be weakened by under-reporting of cases, particularly due to asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic infections, resulting in bias. Quantification of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater can be used to infer infection prevalence, but uncertainty in sensitivity and considerable variability has meant that accurate measurement remains elusive. Here, we use data from 45 sewage sites in England, covering 31% of the population, and estimate SARS-CoV-2 prevalence to within 1.1% of estimates from representative prevalence surveys (with 95% confidence). Using machine learning and phenomenological models, we show that differences between sampled sites, particularly the wastewater flow rate, influence prevalence estimation and require careful interpretation. We find that SARS-CoV-2 signals in wastewater appear 4-5 days earlier in comparison to clinical testing data but are coincident with prevalence surveys suggesting that wastewater surveillance can be a leading indicator for symptomatic viral infections. Surveillance for viruses in wastewater complements and strengthens clinical surveillance, with significant implications for public health.

Safety and immunogenicity of the inactivated whole-virus adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine VLA2001: A randomized, dose escalation, double-blind phase 1/2 clinical trial in healthy adults.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the safety and optimal dose of a novel inactivated whole-virus adjuvanted vaccine against SARS-CoV-2: VLA2001. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, dose-escalation study followed by a double-blind randomized trial using low, medium and high doses of VLA2001 (1:1:1). The primary safety outcome was the frequency and severity of solicited local and systemic reactions within 7 days after vaccination. The primary immunogenicity outcome was the geometric mean titre (GMT) of neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 two weeks after the second vaccination. The study is registered as NCT04671017. RESULTS: Between December 16, 2020, and June 3, 2021, 153 healthy adults aged 18-55 years were recruited in the UK. Overall, 81.7% of the participants reported a solicited AE, with injection site tenderness (58.2%) and headache (46.4%) being the most frequent. Only 2 participants reported a severe solicited event. Up to day 106, 131 (85.6%) participants had reported any AE. All observed incidents were transient and non-life threatening in nature. Immunogenicity measured at 2 weeks after completion of the two-dose priming schedule, showed significantly higher GMTs of SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody titres in the highest dose group (GMT 545.6; 95% CI: 428.1, 695.4) which were similar to a panel of convalescent sera (GMT 526.9; 95% CI: 336.5, 825.1). Seroconversion rates of neutralizing antibodies were also significantly higher in the high-dose group (>90%) compared to the other dose groups. In the high dose group, antigen-specific IFN-γ expressing T-cells reactive against the S, M and N proteins were observed in 76, 36 and 49%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: VLA2001 was well tolerated in all tested dose groups, and no safety signal of concern was identified. The highest dose group showed statistically significantly stronger immunogenicity with similar tolerability and safety, and was selected for phase 3 clinical development.

Population disruption: estimating changes in population distribution of the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mobility data have demonstrated major changes in human movement patterns in response to COVID-19 and associated interventions in many countries. This can involve sub-national redistribution, short-term relocations as well as international migration. In this paper, we combine detailed location data from Facebook measuring the location of approximately 6 million daily active Facebook users in 5km2 tiles in the UK with census-derived population estimates to measure population mobility and redistribution. We provide time-varying population estimates and assess spatial population changes with respect to population density and four key reference dates in 2020 (First lockdown, End of term, Beginning of term, Christmas). We also show how population estimates derived from the distribution of Facebook users vary compared to mid-2020 small area population estimates by the UK national statistics agencies. We estimate that between March 2020 and March 2021, the total population of the UK declined and we identify important spatial variations in this population change, showing that low-density areas have experienced lower population decreases than urban areas. We estimate that, for the top 10% highest population tiles, the population has decreased by 6.6%. Further, we provide evidence that geographic redistributions of population within the UK coincide with dates of non-pharmaceutical interventions including lockdowns and movement restrictions, as well as seasonal patterns of migration around holiday dates. The methods used in this study reveal significant changes in population distribution at high spatial and temporal resolutions that have not previously been quantified by available demographic surveys in the UK. We found early indicators of potential longer-term changes in the population distribution of the UK although it is not clear if these changes may persist after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Meta-analysis of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 serial intervals and the impact of parameter uncertainty on the coronavirus disease 2019 reproduction number.

The serial interval of an infectious disease, commonly interpreted as the time between the onset of symptoms in sequentially infected individuals within a chain of transmission, is a key epidemiological quantity involved in estimating the reproduction number. The serial interval is closely related to other key quantities, including the incubation period, the generation interval (the time between sequential infections), and time delays between infection and the observations associated with monitoring an outbreak such as confirmed cases, hospital admissions, and deaths. Estimates of these quantities are often based on small data sets from early contact tracing and are subject to considerable uncertainty, which is especially true for early coronavirus disease 2019 data. In this paper, we estimate these key quantities in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 for the UK, including a meta-analysis of early estimates of the serial interval. We estimate distributions for the serial interval with a mean of 5.9 (95% CI 5.2; 6.7) and SD 4.1 (95% CI 3.8; 4.7) days (empirical distribution), the generation interval with a mean of 4.9 (95% CI 4.2; 5.5) and SD 2.0 (95% CI 0.5; 3.2) days (fitted gamma distribution), and the incubation period with a mean 5.2 (95% CI 4.9; 5.5) and SD 5.5 (95% CI 5.1; 5.9) days (fitted log-normal distribution). We quantify the impact of the uncertainty surrounding the serial interval, generation interval, incubation period, and time delays, on the subsequent estimation of the reproduction number, when pragmatic and more formal approaches are taken. These estimates place empirical bounds on the estimates of most relevant model parameters and are expected to contribute to modeling coronavirus disease 2019 transmission.

Estimation of reproduction numbers in real time: Conceptual and statistical challenges.

The reproduction number R has been a central metric of the COVID-19 pandemic response, published weekly by the UK government and regularly reported in the media. Here, we provide a formal definition and discuss the advantages and most common misconceptions around this quantity. We consider the intuition behind different formulations of R , the complexities in its estimation (including the unavoidable lags involved), and its value compared to other indicators (e.g. the growth rate) that can be directly observed from aggregate surveillance data and react more promptly to changes in epidemic trend. As models become more sophisticated, with age and/or spatial structure, formulating R becomes increasingly complicated and inevitably model-dependent. We present some models currently used in the UK pandemic response as examples. Ultimately, limitations in the available data streams, data quality and time constraints force pragmatic choices to be made on a quantity that is an average across time, space, social structure and settings. Effectively communicating these challenges is important but often difficult in an emergency.

Seroprevalencia de SARS-CoV-2 en niños y adolescentes mexicanos en edad escolar / Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Mexican children and adolescents in primary and secondary education age

Resumen: Objetivo: Estimar la seroprevalencia de SARS-CoV-2 en población de edad escolar en México. Material y métodos: Se categorizaron a niños y adolescentes que participaron en la Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2020 sobre Covid-19 (Ensanut 2020 Covid-19) por edad escolar y nivel educativo. En participantes seropositivos, se identificó la proporción de infecciones asintomáticas. Se estimaron razones de prevalencia usando un modelo de regresión log-binomial. Resultados: La seroprevalencia en educación básica y media fue de 18.7% (IC95%: 14.9, 22.5) y 26.7% (IC95%: 22.1, 31.3), respectivamente. La infección asintomática fue más frecuente en educación básica (88.5% [IC95%: 80.5, 93.5]). Conclusiones: En población de educación básica la infección por SARS-CoV-2 es baja y usualmente asintomática.

Abstract: Objective: To estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in school aged children in Mexico. Materials and methods: We categorized children and adolescents who participated in the 2020 National Health and Nutrition Survey on Covid-19 according to school age and educational level. In seropositive participants, we identified the proportion of asymptomatic infections. We estimated prevalence ratios using a log-binomial regression model. Results: Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 for primary and secondary education were 18.7% (95%IC: 14.9, 22.5) and 26.7% (95%IC: 22.1, 31.3), respectively. Asymptomatic infection was more frequent among primary school children (88.5% [95%IC: 80.5, 93.5]). Conclusions: In primary schoolchildren seroprevalence for SARS-CoV-2 was low and infections were usually asymptomatic.

High COVID-19 transmission potential associated with re-opening universities can be mitigated with layered interventions.

Controlling COVID-19 transmission in universities poses challenges due to the complex social networks and potential for asymptomatic spread. We developed a stochastic transmission model based on realistic mixing patterns and evaluated alternative mitigation strategies. We predict, for plausible model parameters, that if asymptomatic cases are half as infectious as symptomatic cases, then 15% (98% Prediction Interval: 6-35%) of students could be infected during the first term without additional control measures. First year students are the main drivers of transmission with the highest infection rates, largely due to communal residences. In isolation, reducing face-to-face teaching is the most effective intervention considered, however layering multiple interventions could reduce infection rates by 75%. Fortnightly or more frequent mass testing is required to impact transmission and was not the most effective option considered. Our findings suggest that additional outbreak control measures should be considered for university settings.

Detecting behavioural changes in human movement to inform the spatial scale of interventions against COVID-19.

On March 23 2020, the UK enacted an intensive, nationwide lockdown to mitigate transmission of COVID-19. As restrictions began to ease, more localized interventions were used to target resurgences in transmission. Understanding the spatial scale of networks of human interaction, and how these networks change over time, is critical to targeting interventions at the most at-risk areas without unnecessarily restricting areas at low risk of resurgence. We use detailed human mobility data aggregated from Facebook users to determine how the spatially-explicit network of movements changed before and during the lockdown period, in response to the easing of restrictions, and to the introduction of locally-targeted interventions. We also apply community detection techniques to the weighted, directed network of movements to identify geographically-explicit movement communities and measure the evolution of these community structures through time. We found that the mobility network became more sparse and the number of mobility communities decreased under the national lockdown, a change that disproportionately affected long distance connections central to the mobility network. We also found that the community structure of areas in which locally-targeted interventions were implemented following epidemic resurgence did not show reorganization of community structure but did show small decreases in indicators of travel outside of local areas. We propose that communities detected using Facebook or other mobility data be used to assess the impact of spatially-targeted restrictions and may inform policymakers about the spatial extent of human movement patterns in the UK. These data are available in near real-time, allowing quantification of changes in the distribution of the population across the UK, as well as changes in travel patterns to inform our understanding of the impact of geographically-targeted interventions.

Vaccine escape in a heterogeneous population: insights for SARS-CoV-2 from a simple model.

As a countermeasure to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there has been swift development and clinical trial assessment of candidate vaccines, with subsequent deployment as part of mass vaccination campaigns. However, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has demonstrated the ability to mutate and develop variants, which can modify epidemiological properties and potentially also the effectiveness of vaccines. The widespread deployment of highly effective vaccines may rapidly exert selection pressure on the SARS-CoV-2 virus directed towards mutations that escape the vaccine-induced immune response. This is particularly concerning while infection is widespread. By developing and analysing a mathematical model of two population groupings with differing vulnerability and contact rates, we explore the impact of the deployment of vaccines among the population on the reproduction ratio, cases, disease abundance and vaccine escape pressure. The results from this model illustrate two insights: (i) vaccination aimed at reducing prevalence could be more effective at reducing disease than directly vaccinating the vulnerable; (ii) the highest risk for vaccine escape can occur at intermediate levels of vaccination. This work demonstrates a key principle: the careful targeting of vaccines towards particular population groups could reduce disease as much as possible while limiting the risk of vaccine escape.