WHO's Investigations and Studies, Unity Studies: A global initiative creating equitable opportunities for enhanced surveillance, operational research, capacity building, and global knowledge sharing.

The World Health Organization's Unity Studies global initiative provides a generic preparedness and readiness framework for conducting detailed investigations and epidemiological studies critical for the early and ongoing assessment of emerging respiratory pathogens of pandemic potential. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the initiative produced standardized investigation protocols and supported Member States to generate robust and comparable data to inform public health decision making. The subsequent iteration of the initiative is being implemented to develop revised and new investigation protocols, implementation toolkits and work to build a sustainable global network of sites, enabling the global community to be better prepared for the next emerging respiratory pathogen with epidemic or pandemic potential.

Surveillance for variants of SARS-CoV-2 to inform risk assessments.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, numerous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants have emerged, some leading to large increases in infections, hospitalizations and deaths globally. The virus's impact on public health depends on many factors, including the emergence of new viral variants and their global spread. Consequently, the early detection and surveillance of variants and characterization of their clinical effects are vital for assessing their health risk. The unprecedented capacity for viral genomic sequencing and data sharing built globally during the pandemic has enabled new variants to be rapidly detected and assessed. This article describes the main variants circulating globally between January 2020 and June 2023, the genetic features driving variant evolution, and the epidemiological impact of these variants across countries and regions. Second, we report how integrating genetic variant surveillance with epidemiological data and event-based surveillance, through a network of World Health Organization partners, supported risk assessment and helped provide guidance on pandemic responses. In addition, given the evolutionary characteristics of circulating variants and the immune status of populations, we propose future directions for the sustainable genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 variants, both nationally and internationally: (i) optimizing variant surveillance by including environmental monitoring; (ii) coordinating laboratory assessment of variant evolution and phenotype; (iii) linking data on circulating variants with clinical data; and (iv) expanding genomic surveillance to additional pathogens. Experience during the COVID-19 pandemic has shown that genomic surveillance of pathogens can provide essential, timely and evidence-based information for public health decision-making.

Depuis le début de la pandémie de coronavirus survenue en 2019 (COVID-19), de nombreux variants du coronavirus 2 du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère (SARS-CoV-2) sont apparus, certains entraînant une forte augmentation du nombre d'infections, d'hospitalisations et de décès dans le monde. L'impact du virus sur la santé publique dépend de nombreux facteurs, notamment l'émergence de nouveaux variants viraux et leur propagation à l'échelle mondiale. Par conséquent, la détection précoce et la surveillance des variants ainsi que la caractérisation de leurs effets cliniques sont essentielles pour évaluer leur risque pour la santé. La capacité sans précédent de séquençage du génome viral et de partage des données, capacité mise en place à l'échelle mondiale pendant la pandémie, a permis de détecter et d'évaluer rapidement de nouveaux variants. Le présent article décrit les principaux variants circulant dans le monde entre janvier 2020 et juin 2023, les caractéristiques génétiques à l'origine de leur évolution et leur impact épidémiologique dans les différents pays et régions. Ensuite, nous expliquerons comment l'intégration de la surveillance des variants génétiques aux données épidémiologiques et à la surveillance fondée sur les événements, par l'intermédiaire d'un réseau de partenaires de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé, a permis de faciliter l'évaluation des risques et de fournir des orientations sur les mesures à prendre en période de pandémie. En outre, compte tenu des caractéristiques évolutives des variants en circulation et de l'état immunitaire des populations, nous proposons des orientations futures pour une surveillance génomique durable des variants du SARS-CoV-2, au niveau tant national qu'international: (i) optimiser la surveillance des variants en incluant le suivi environnemental; (ii) coordonner l'évaluation en laboratoire de l'évolution des variants et du phénotype; (iii) établir un lien entre les données sur les variants en circulation et les données cliniques; et (iv) étendre la surveillance génomique à d'autres agents pathogènes. L'expérience de la pandémie de COVID-19 a mis en évidence que la surveillance génomique des agents pathogènes peut fournir en temps utile des informations essentielles fondées sur des preuves en vue de la prise de décisions en matière de santé publique.

Desde el inicio de la pandemia de la enfermedad por coronavirus de 2019 (COVID-19), han aparecido numerosas variantes del coronavirus de tipo 2 causante del síndrome respiratorio agudo severo (SRAS-CoV-2), algunas de las que han provocado un gran aumento de las infecciones, hospitalizaciones y muertes en todo el mundo. El impacto del virus en la salud pública depende de muchos factores, entre ellos la aparición de nuevas variantes víricas y su propagación mundial. En consecuencia, la detección y vigilancia tempranas de las variantes y la caracterización de sus efectos clínicos son vitales para evaluar su riesgo sanitario. La capacidad sin precedentes de secuenciación genómica viral y de intercambio de datos creada a nivel mundial durante la pandemia ha permitido detectar y evaluar rápidamente variantes nuevas. En este artículo se describen las principales variantes que circulan a nivel mundial entre enero de 2020 y junio de 2023, la característica genética que impulsa la evolución de las variantes y el impacto epidemiológico de estas variantes en los diferentes países y regiones. En segundo lugar, se informa de cómo la integración de la vigilancia de variantes genéticas con los datos epidemiológicos y la vigilancia basada en eventos, a través de una red de asociados de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, apoyó la evaluación de riesgos y ayudó a proporcionar orientación sobre las respuestas a la pandemia. Además, dadas las características evolutivas de las variantes circulantes y el estado inmunitario de las poblaciones, se proponen orientaciones futuras para la vigilancia genómica sostenible de las variantes del SRAS-CoV-2, tanto a nivel nacional como internacional: (i) optimizar la vigilancia de las variantes mediante la inclusión de la monitorización ambiental; (ii) coordinar la evaluación de laboratorio de la evolución y el fenotipo de las variantes; (iii) vincular los datos sobre las variantes circulantes con los datos clínicos; y (iv) ampliar la vigilancia genómica a patógenos adicionales. La experiencia durante la pandemia de la COVID-19 ha demostrado que la vigilancia genómica de patógenos puede proporcionar información esencial, oportuna y basada en evidencias para la toma de decisiones en materia de salud pública.

Towards the development of a SARS-CoV-2 variant risk assessment tool: expert consultation on the assessment of scientific evidence on emerging variants.

A systematic approach is required for the development of an evidence-based risk assessment tool to robustly estimate the risks and implications of SARS-CoV-2 variants. We conducted a survey among experts involved in technical advisory roles for WHO to capture their assessment of the robustness of different study types that provide evidence for potential changes in transmissibility, antigenicity, virulence, treatability, and detectability of SARS-CoV-2 variants. The views of 62 experts indicated that studies could be grouped on the basis of robustness and reliability for the different risk indicators mentioned. Several study types that experts scored as providing reliable evidence and that can be performed in a timely manner were identified. Although experts from different technical areas had varying responses, there was agreement on the highest and lowest scoring study types. These findings can help to prioritise, harmonise, and optimise study designs for the further development of a systematic, evidence-based, SARS-CoV-2 variant risk assessment tool.

WHO Global Situational Alert System: a mixed methods multistage approach to identify country-level COVID-19 alerts.

BACKGROUND: Globally, since 1 January 2020 and as of 24 January 2023, there have been over 664 million cases of COVID-19 and over 6.7 million deaths reported to WHO. WHO developed an evidence-based alert system, assessing public health risk on a weekly basis in 237 countries, territories and areas from May 2021 to June 2022. This aimed to facilitate the early identification of situations where healthcare capacity may become overstretched. METHODS: The process involved a three-stage mixed methods approach. In the first stage, future deaths were predicted from the time series of reported cases and deaths to produce an initial alert level. In the second stage, this alert level was adjusted by incorporating a range of contextual indicators and accounting for the quality of information available using a Bayes classifier. In the third stage, countries with an alert level of 'High' or above were added to an operational watchlist and assistance was deployed as needed. RESULTS: Since June 2021, the system has supported the release of more than US$27 million from WHO emergency funding, over 450 000 rapid antigen diagnostic testing kits and over 6000 oxygen concentrators. Retrospective evaluation indicated that the first two stages were needed to maximise sensitivity, where 44% (IQR 29%-67%) of weekly watchlist alerts would not have been identified using only reported cases and deaths. The alerts were timely and valid in most cases; however, this could only be assessed on a non-representative sample of countries with hospitalisation data available. CONCLUSIONS: The system provided a standardised approach to monitor the pandemic at the country level by incorporating all available data on epidemiological analytics and contextual assessments. While this system was developed for COVID-19, a similar system could be used for future outbreaks and emergencies, with necessary adjustments to parameters and indicators.

Severity and outcomes of Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 compared to Delta variant and severity of Omicron sublineages: a systematic review and metanalysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare severity and clinical outcomes from Omicron as compared with the Delta variant and to compare outcomes between Omicron sublineages. METHODS: We searched the WHO COVID-19 Research database for studies that compared clinical outcomes for patients with Omicron variant and the Delta variant, and separately Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates of relative risk (RR) between variants and sublineages. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 index. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool developed by the Clinical Advances through Research and Information Translation team. RESULTS: Our search identified 1494 studies and 42 met the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were published as preprints. Of the 42 studies, 29 adjusted for vaccination status; 12 had no adjustment; and for 1, the adjustment was unclear. Three of the included studies compared the sublineages of Omicron BA.1 versus BA.2. As compared with Delta, individuals infected with Omicron had 61% lower risk of death (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.46) and 56% lower risk of hospitalisation (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.56). Omicron was similarly associated with lower risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, oxygen therapy, and non-invasive and invasive ventilation. The pooled risk ratio for the outcome of hospitalisation when comparing sublineages BA.1 versus BA.2 was 0.55 (95% 0.23 to 1.30). DISCUSSION: Omicron variant was associated with lower risk of hospitalisation, ICU admission, oxygen therapy, ventilation and death as compared with Delta. There was no difference in the risk of hospitalisation between Omicron sublineages BA.1 and BA.2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022310880.

Share all SARS-CoV-2 data immediately.

When the first cases of human infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were reported from Wuhan, China, in December 2019, there was quick agreement across scientific and health communities that understanding the facts about its emergence would help prevent future outbreaks. Never could I have imagined the degree of politicization that would cloud this quest. Over the past 39 months, while reported deaths from COVID-19 increased to nearly 7 million worldwide, science on the virus's origins has gotten smaller while the politics surrounding this question has grown ever bigger. Last month, the World Health Organization (WHO) learned that scientists in China possessed data on viral samples from Wuhan that had been gathered in January 2020, which should have been shared immediately-not 3 years later-with the global research community. The lack of data disclosure is simply inexcusable. The longer it takes to understand the origins of the pandemic, the harder it becomes to answer the question, and the more unsafe the world becomes.

COVID-19 Mortality and Progress Toward Vaccinating Older Adults - World Health Organization, Worldwide, 2020-2022.

After the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019, transmission expanded globally, and on January 30, 2020, COVID-19 was declared a public health emergency of international concern.* Analysis of the early Wuhan, China outbreak (1), subsequently confirmed by multiple other studies (2,3), found that 80% of deaths occurred among persons aged ≥60 years. In anticipation of the time needed for the global vaccine supply to meet all needs, the World Health Organization (WHO) published the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) Values Framework and a roadmap for prioritizing use of COVID-19 vaccines in late 2020 (4,5), followed by a strategy brief to outline urgent actions in October 2021.† WHO described the general principles, objectives, and priorities needed to support country planning of vaccine rollout to minimize severe disease and death. A July 2022 update to the strategy brief§ prioritized vaccination of populations at increased risk, including older adults,¶ with the goal of 100% coverage with a complete COVID-19 vaccination series** for at-risk populations. Using available public data on COVID-19 mortality (reported deaths and model estimates) for 2020 and 2021 and the most recent reported COVID-19 vaccination coverage data from WHO, investigators performed descriptive analyses to examine age-specific mortality and global vaccination rollout among older adults (as defined by each country), stratified by country World Bank income status. Data quality and COVID-19 death reporting frequency varied by data source; however, persons aged ≥60 years accounted for >80% of the overall COVID-19 mortality across all income groups, with upper- and lower-middle-income countries accounting for 80% of the overall estimated excess mortality. Effective COVID-19 vaccines were authorized for use in December 2020, with global supply scaled up sufficiently to meet country needs by late 2021 (6). COVID-19 vaccines are safe and highly effective in reducing severe COVID-19, hospitalizations, and mortality (7,8); nevertheless, country-reported median completed primary series coverage among adults aged ≥60 years only reached 76% by the end of 2022, substantially below the WHO goal, especially in middle- and low-income countries. Increased efforts are needed to increase primary series and booster dose coverage among all older adults as recommended by WHO and national health authorities.

Protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against the omicron variant and severe disease: a systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: The global surge in the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has resulted in many individuals with hybrid immunity (immunity developed through a combination of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We aimed to systematically review the magnitude and duration of the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against infection and severe disease caused by the omicron variant. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched for cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the WHO COVID-19 database, and Europe PubMed Central from Jan 1, 2020, to June 1, 2022, using keywords related to SARS-CoV-2, reinfection, protective effectiveness, previous infection, presence of antibodies, and hybrid immunity. The main outcomes were the protective effectiveness against reinfection and against hospital admission or severe disease of hybrid immunity, hybrid immunity relative to previous infection alone, hybrid immunity relative to previous vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity relative to hybrid immunity with fewer vaccine doses. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool. We used log-odds random-effects meta-regression to estimate the magnitude of protection at 1-month intervals. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022318605). FINDINGS: 11 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and 15 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of hybrid immunity were included. For previous infection, there were 97 estimates (27 with a moderate risk of bias and 70 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of previous infection against hospital admission or severe disease was 74·6% (95% CI 63·1-83·5) at 12 months. The effectiveness of previous infection against reinfection waned to 24·7% (95% CI 16·4-35·5) at 12 months. For hybrid immunity, there were 153 estimates (78 with a moderate risk of bias and 75 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of hybrid immunity against hospital admission or severe disease was 97·4% (95% CI 91·4-99·2) at 12 months with primary series vaccination and 95·3% (81·9-98·9) at 6 months with the first booster vaccination after the most recent infection or vaccination. Against reinfection, the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following primary series vaccination waned to 41·8% (95% CI 31·5-52·8) at 12 months, while the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following first booster vaccination waned to 46·5% (36·0-57·3) at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: All estimates of protection waned within months against reinfection but remained high and sustained for hospital admission or severe disease. Individuals with hybrid immunity had the highest magnitude and durability of protection, and as a result might be able to extend the period before booster vaccinations are needed compared to individuals who have never been infected. FUNDING: WHO COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

Global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from January 2020 to April 2022: A systematic review and meta-analysis of standardized population-based studies.

BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the global scale of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains incomplete: Routine surveillance data underestimate infection and cannot infer on population immunity; there is a predominance of asymptomatic infections, and uneven access to diagnostics. We meta-analyzed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies, standardized to those described in the World Health Organization's Unity protocol (WHO Unity) for general population seroepidemiological studies, to estimate the extent of population infection and seropositivity to the virus 2 years into the pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, preprints, and grey literature for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence published between January 1, 2020 and May 20, 2022. The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183634). We included general population cross-sectional and cohort studies meeting an assay quality threshold (90% sensitivity, 97% specificity; exceptions for humanitarian settings). We excluded studies with an unclear or closed population sample frame. Eligible studies-those aligned with the WHO Unity protocol-were extracted and critically appraised in duplicate, with risk of bias evaluated using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. We meta-analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, pooling to estimate regional and global seroprevalence over time; compared seroprevalence from infection to confirmed cases to estimate underascertainment; meta-analyzed differences in seroprevalence between demographic subgroups such as age and sex; and identified national factors associated with seroprevalence using meta-regression. We identified 513 full texts reporting 965 distinct seroprevalence studies (41% low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) sampling 5,346,069 participants between January 2020 and April 2022, including 459 low/moderate risk of bias studies with national/subnational scope in further analysis. By September 2021, global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from infection or vaccination was 59.2%, 95% CI [56.1% to 62.2%]. Overall seroprevalence rose steeply in 2021 due to infection in some regions (e.g., 26.6% [24.6 to 28.8] to 86.7% [84.6% to 88.5%] in Africa in December 2021) and vaccination and infection in others (e.g., 9.6% [8.3% to 11.0%] in June 2020 to 95.9% [92.6% to 97.8%] in December 2021, in European high-income countries [HICs]). After the emergence of Omicron in March 2022, infection-induced seroprevalence rose to 47.9% [41.0% to 54.9%] in Europe HIC and 33.7% [31.6% to 36.0%] in Americas HIC. In 2021 Quarter Three (July to September), median seroprevalence to cumulative incidence ratios ranged from around 2:1 in the Americas and Europe HICs to over 100:1 in Africa (LMICs). Children 0 to 9 years and adults 60+ were at lower risk of seropositivity than adults 20 to 29 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). In a multivariable model using prevaccination data, stringent public health and social measures were associated with lower seroprevalence (p = 0.02). The main limitations of our methodology include that some estimates were driven by certain countries or populations being overrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that global seroprevalence has risen considerably over time and with regional variation; however, over one-third of the global population are seronegative to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Our estimates of infections based on seroprevalence far exceed reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Quality and standardized seroprevalence studies are essential to inform COVID-19 response, particularly in resource-limited regions.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of standardised seroprevalence studies, from January 2020 to December 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Estimating COVID-19 cumulative incidence in Africa remains problematic due to challenges in contact tracing, routine surveillance systems and laboratory testing capacities and strategies. We undertook a meta-analysis of population-based seroprevalence studies to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Africa to inform evidence-based decision making on public health and social measures (PHSM) and vaccine strategy. METHODS: We searched for seroprevalence studies conducted in Africa published 1 January 2020-30 December 2021 in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Europe PMC (preprints), grey literature, media releases and early results from WHO Unity studies. All studies were screened, extracted, assessed for risk of bias and evaluated for alignment with the WHO Unity seroprevalence protocol. We conducted descriptive analyses of seroprevalence and meta-analysed seroprevalence differences by demographic groups, place and time. We estimated the extent of undetected infections by comparing seroprevalence and cumulative incidence of confirmed cases reported to WHO. PROSPERO: CRD42020183634. RESULTS: We identified 56 full texts or early results, reporting 153 distinct seroprevalence studies in Africa. Of these, 97 (63%) were low/moderate risk of bias studies. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rose from 3.0% (95% CI 1.0% to 9.2%) in April-June 2020 to 65.1% (95% CI 56.3% to 73.0%) in July-September 2021. The ratios of seroprevalence from infection to cumulative incidence of confirmed cases was large (overall: 100:1, ranging from 18:1 to 954:1) and steady over time. Seroprevalence was highly heterogeneous both within countries-urban versus rural (lower seroprevalence for rural geographic areas), children versus adults (children aged 0-9 years had the lowest seroprevalence)-and between countries and African subregions. CONCLUSION: We report high seroprevalence in Africa suggesting greater population exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and potential protection against COVID-19 severe disease than indicated by surveillance data. As seroprevalence was heterogeneous, targeted PHSM and vaccination strategies need to be tailored to local epidemiological situations.

Early epidemiological investigations: World Health Organization UNITY protocols provide a standardized and timely international investigation framework during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The declaration of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020 required rapid implementation of early investigations to inform appropriate national and global public health actions. METHODS: The suite of existing pandemic preparedness generic epidemiological early investigation protocols was rapidly adapted for COVID-19, branded the 'UNITY studies' and promoted globally for the implementation of standardized and quality studies. Ten protocols were developed investigating household (HH) transmission, the first few cases (FFX), population seroprevalence (SEROPREV), health facilities transmission (n = 2), vaccine effectiveness (n = 2), pregnancy outcomes and transmission, school transmission, and surface contamination. Implementation was supported by WHO and its partners globally, with emphasis to support building surveillance and research capacities in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). RESULTS: WHO generic protocols were rapidly developed and published on the WHO website, 5/10 protocols within the first 3 months of the response. As of 30 June 2021, 172 investigations were implemented by 97 countries, of which 62 (64%) were LMIC. The majority of countries implemented population seroprevalence (71 countries) and first few cases/household transmission (37 countries) studies. CONCLUSION: The widespread adoption of UNITY protocols across all WHO regions indicates that they addressed subnational and national needs to support local public health decision-making to prevent and control the pandemic.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in standardised first few X cases and household transmission investigations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to estimate the household secondary infection attack rate (hSAR) of SARS-CoV-2 in investigations aligned with the WHO Unity Studies Household Transmission Investigations (HHTI) protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and medRxiv/bioRxiv for "Unity-aligned" First Few X cases (FFX) and HHTIs published 1 December 2019 to 26 July 2021. Standardised early results were shared by WHO Unity Studies collaborators (to 1 October 2021). We used a bespoke tool to assess investigation methodological quality. Values for hSAR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted or calculated from crude data. Heterogeneity was assessed by visually inspecting overlap of CIs on forest plots and quantified in meta-analyses. Of 9988 records retrieved, 80 articles (64 from databases; 16 provided by Unity Studies collaborators) were retained in the systematic review; 62 were included in the primary meta-analysis. hSAR point estimates ranged from 2% to 90% (95% prediction interval: 3%-71%; I 2 = 99.7%); I 2 values remained >99% in subgroup analyses, indicating high, unexplained heterogeneity and leading to a decision not to report pooled hSAR estimates. FFX and HHTI remain critical epidemiological tools for early and ongoing characterisation of novel infectious pathogens. The large, unexplained variance in hSAR estimates emphasises the need to further support standardisation in planning, conduct and analysis, and for clear and comprehensive reporting of FFX and HHTIs in time and place, to guide evidence-based pandemic preparedness and response efforts for SARS-CoV-2, influenza and future novel respiratory viruses.

Surface‒Aerosol Stability and Pathogenicity of Diverse Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Strains, 2012‒2018.

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infects humans and dromedary camels and is responsible for an ongoing outbreak of severe respiratory illness in humans in the Middle East. Although some mutations found in camel-derived MERS-CoV strains have been characterized, most natural variation found across MERS-CoV isolates remains unstudied. We report on the environmental stability, replication kinetics, and pathogenicity of several diverse isolates of MERS-CoV, as well as isolates of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, to serve as a basis of comparison with other stability studies. Although most MERS-CoV isolates had similar stability and pathogenicity in our experiments, the camel-derived isolate C/KSA/13 had reduced surface stability, and another camel isolate, C/BF/15, had reduced pathogenicity in a small animal model. These results suggest that although betacoronaviruses might have similar environmental stability profiles, individual variation can influence this phenotype, underscoring the need for continual global viral surveillance.

Preparing for "Disease X".

The past 30 years have exposed the global public health and economic threats posed by the emergence of infectious pathogens with epidemic and pandemic potential. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS), influenza, Ebola, Marburg, Lassa, Nipah, Zika, and now SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) each have been the "Disease X" of their time. The risk of future emergence is driven by multiple forces, including climate change, ecosystem changes, and increasing urbanization. The next Disease X could appear at any time, and the world needs to be better prepared.

Increased transmissibility and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern as at June 2021.

We present a global analysis of the spread of recently emerged SARS-CoV-2 variants and estimate changes in effective reproduction numbers at country-specific level using sequence data from GISAID. Nearly all investigated countries demonstrated rapid replacement of previously circulating lineages by the World Health Organization-designated variants of concern, with estimated transmissibility increases of 29% (95% CI: 24-33), 25% (95% CI: 20-30), 38% (95% CI: 29-48) and 97% (95% CI: 76-117), respectively, for B.1.1.7, B.1.351, P.1 and B.1.617.2.

SARS-CoV-2 Variants and Vaccines.

Viral variants of concern may emerge with dangerous resistance to the immunity generated by the current vaccines to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Moreover, if some variants of concern have increased transmissibility or virulence, the importance of efficient public health measures and vaccination programs will increase. The global response must be both timely and science based.