Ethical frameworks should be applied to computational modelling of infectious disease interventions.

This perspective is part of an international effort to improve epidemiological models with the goal of reducing the unintended consequences of infectious disease interventions. The scenarios in which models are applied often involve difficult trade-offs that are well recognised in public health ethics. Unless these trade-offs are explicitly accounted for, models risk overlooking contested ethical choices and values, leading to an increased risk of unintended consequences. We argue that such risks could be reduced if modellers were more aware of ethical frameworks and had the capacity to explicitly account for the relevant values in their models. We propose that public health ethics can provide a conceptual foundation for developing this capacity. After reviewing relevant concepts in public health and clinical ethics, we discuss examples from the COVID-19 pandemic to illustrate the current separation between public health ethics and infectious disease modelling. We conclude by describing practical steps to build the capacity for ethically aware modelling. Developing this capacity constitutes a critical step towards ethical practice in computational modelling of public health interventions, which will require collaboration with experts on public health ethics, decision support, behavioural interventions, and social determinants of health, as well as direct consultation with communities and policy makers.

Time Scales of Human Mpox Transmission in The Netherlands.

Mpox has spread rapidly to many countries in nonendemic regions. After reviewing detailed exposure histories of 109 pairs of mpox cases in the Netherlands, we identified 34 pairs where transmission was likely and the infectee reported a single potential infector with a mean serial interval of 10.1 days (95% credible interval, 6.6-14.7 days). Further investigation into pairs from 1 regional public health service revealed that presymptomatic transmission may have occurred in 5 of 18 pairs. These findings emphasize that precaution remains key, regardless of the presence of recognizable symptoms of mpox.

Prior infections and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in test-negative studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 can provide protection against infection and severe COVID-19. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-existing immunity on the vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed 66 test-negative design (TND) studies that examined VE against infection or severe disease (hospitalization, ICU admission, or death) for primary vaccination series. Pooled VE among studies that included people with prior COVID-19 infection was lower against infection (pooled VE: 77%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 72%, 81%) and severe disease (pooled VE: 86%; 95% CI: 83%, 89%), compared with studies that excluded people with prior COVID-19 infection (pooled VE against infection: 87%; 95% CI: 85%, 89%; pooled VE against severe disease: 93%; 95% CI: 91%, 95%). There was a negative correlation between VE estimates against infection and severe disease, and the cumulative incidence of cases before the start of the study or incidence rates during the study period. We found clear empirical evidence that higher levels of pre-existing immunity were associated with lower VE estimates. Prior infections should be treated as both a confounder and effect modificatory when the policies target the whole population or stratified by infection history, respectively.

Trends in SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence during England's roadmap out of lockdown, January to July 2021.

BACKGROUND: Following rapidly rising COVID-19 case numbers, England entered a national lockdown on 6 January 2021, with staged relaxations of restrictions from 8 March 2021 onwards. AIM: We characterise how the lockdown and subsequent easing of restrictions affected trends in SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence. METHODS: On average, risk of infection is proportional to infection prevalence. The REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-1 (REACT-1) study is a repeat cross-sectional study of over 98,000 people every round (rounds approximately monthly) that estimates infection prevalence in England. We used Bayesian P-splines to estimate prevalence and the time-varying reproduction number (Rt) nationally, regionally and by age group from round 8 (beginning 6 January 2021) to round 13 (ending 12 July 2021) of REACT-1. As a comparator, a separate segmented-exponential model was used to quantify the impact on Rt of each relaxation of restrictions. RESULTS: Following an initial plateau of 1.54% until mid-January, infection prevalence decreased until 13 May when it reached a minimum of 0.09%, before increasing until the end of the study to 0.76%. Following the first easing of restrictions, which included schools reopening, the reproduction number Rt increased by 82% (55%, 108%), but then decreased by 61% (82%, 53%) at the second easing of restrictions, which was timed to match the Easter school holidays. Following further relaxations of restrictions, the observed Rt increased steadily, though the increase due to these restrictions being relaxed was offset by the effects of vaccination and also affected by the rapid rise of Delta. There was a high degree of synchrony in the temporal patterns of prevalence between regions and age groups. CONCLUSION: High-resolution prevalence data fitted to P-splines allowed us to show that the lockdown was effective at reducing risk of infection with school holidays/closures playing a significant part.

Optimal vaccine allocation for COVID-19 in the Netherlands: A data-driven prioritization.

For the control of COVID-19, vaccination programmes provide a long-term solution. The amount of available vaccines is often limited, and thus it is crucial to determine the allocation strategy. While mathematical modelling approaches have been used to find an optimal distribution of vaccines, there is an excessively large number of possible allocation schemes to be simulated. Here, we propose an algorithm to find a near-optimal allocation scheme given an intervention objective such as minimization of new infections, hospitalizations, or deaths, where multiple vaccines are available. The proposed principle for allocating vaccines is to target subgroups with the largest reduction in the outcome of interest. We use an approximation method to reconstruct the age-specific transmission intensity (the next generation matrix), and express the expected impact of vaccinating each subgroup in terms of the observed incidence of infection and force of infection. The proposed approach is firstly evaluated with a simulated epidemic and then applied to the epidemiological data on COVID-19 in the Netherlands. Our results reveal how the optimal allocation depends on the objective of infection control. In the case of COVID-19, if we wish to minimize deaths, the optimal allocation strategy is not efficient for minimizing other outcomes, such as infections. In simulated epidemics, an allocation strategy optimized for an outcome outperforms other strategies such as the allocation from young to old, from old to young, and at random. Our simulations clarify that the current policy in the Netherlands (i.e., allocation from old to young) was concordant with the allocation scheme that minimizes deaths. The proposed method provides an optimal allocation scheme, given routine surveillance data that reflect ongoing transmissions. This approach to allocation is useful for providing plausible simulation scenarios for complex models, which give a more robust basis to determine intervention strategies.

A scenario modelling analysis to anticipate the impact of COVID-19 vaccination in adolescents and children on disease outcomes in the Netherlands, summer 2021.

BackgroundSince the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines in late 2020 and throughout 2021, European governments have relied on mathematical modelling to inform policy decisions about COVID-19 vaccination.AimWe present a scenario-based modelling analysis in the Netherlands during summer 2021, to inform whether to extend vaccination to adolescents (12-17-year-olds) and children (5-11-year-olds).MethodsWe developed a deterministic, age-structured susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) model and compared modelled incidences of infections, hospital and intensive care admissions, and deaths per 100,000 people across vaccination scenarios, before the emergence of the Omicron variant.ResultsOur model projections showed that, on average, upon the release of all non-pharmaceutical control measures on 1 November 2021, a large COVID-19 wave may occur in winter 2021/22, followed by a smaller, second wave in spring 2022, regardless of the vaccination scenario. The model projected reductions in infections/severe disease outcomes when vaccination was extended to adolescents and further reductions when vaccination was extended to all people over 5 years-old. When examining projected disease outcomes by age group, individuals benefitting most from extending vaccination were adolescents and children themselves. We also observed reductions in disease outcomes in older age groups, particularly of parent age (30-49 years), when children and adolescents were vaccinated, suggesting some prevention of onward transmission from younger to older age groups.ConclusionsWhile our scenarios could not anticipate the emergence/consequences of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, we illustrate how our approach can assist decision making. This could be useful when considering to provide booster doses or intervening against future infection waves.

An open source tool to infer epidemiological and immunological dynamics from serological data: serosolver.

We present a flexible, open source R package designed to obtain biological and epidemiological insights from serological datasets. Characterising past exposures for multi-strain pathogens poses a specific statistical challenge: observed antibody responses measured in serological assays depend on multiple unobserved prior infections that produce cross-reactive antibody responses. We provide a general modelling framework to jointly infer infection histories and describe immune responses generated by these infections using antibody titres against current and historical strains. We do this by linking latent infection dynamics with a mechanistic model of antibody kinetics that generates expected antibody titres over time. Our aim is to provide a flexible package to identify infection histories that can be applied to a range of pathogens. We present two case studies to illustrate how our model can infer key immunological parameters, such as antibody titre boosting, waning and cross-reaction, as well as latent epidemiological processes such as attack rates and age-stratified infection risk.

Response to COVID-19 in South Korea and implications for lifting stringent interventions.

BACKGROUND: After experiencing a sharp growth in COVID-19 cases early in the pandemic, South Korea rapidly controlled transmission while implementing less stringent national social distancing measures than countries in Europe and the USA. This has led to substantial interest in their "test, trace, isolate" strategy. However, it is important to understand the epidemiological peculiarities of South Korea's outbreak and characterise their response before attempting to emulate these measures elsewhere. METHODS: We systematically extracted numbers of suspected cases tested, PCR-confirmed cases, deaths, isolated confirmed cases, and numbers of confirmed cases with an identified epidemiological link from publicly available data. We estimated the time-varying reproduction number, Rt, using an established Bayesian framework, and reviewed the package of interventions implemented by South Korea using our extracted data, plus published literature and government sources. RESULTS: We estimated that after the initial rapid growth in cases, Rt dropped below one in early April before increasing to a maximum of 1.94 (95%CrI, 1.64-2.27) in May following outbreaks in Seoul Metropolitan Region. By mid-June, Rt was back below one where it remained until the end of our study (July 13th). Despite less stringent "lockdown" measures, strong social distancing measures were implemented in high-incidence areas and studies measured a considerable national decrease in movement in late February. Testing the capacity was swiftly increased, and protocols were in place to isolate suspected and confirmed cases quickly; however, we could not estimate the delay to isolation using our data. Accounting for just 10% of cases, individual case-based contact tracing picked up a relatively minor proportion of total cases, with cluster investigations accounting for 66%. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst early adoption of testing and contact tracing is likely to be important for South Korea's successful outbreak control, other factors including regional implementation of strong social distancing measures likely also contributed. The high volume of testing and the low number of deaths suggest that South Korea experienced a small epidemic relative to other countries. Caution is needed in attempting to replicate the South Korean response in populations with larger more geographically widespread epidemics where finding, testing, and isolating cases that are linked to clusters may be more difficult.

A Dynamic Model for Evaluation of the Bias of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates From Observational Studies.

Given that influenza vaccination is now widely recommended in the United States, observational studies based on patients with acute respiratory illness (ARI) remain as the only option to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). We developed a dynamic probability model to evaluate bias of VE estimates from passive surveillance cohort, test-negative, and traditional case-control studies. The model includes 2 covariates (health status and health awareness) that might affect the probabilities of vaccination, developing ARI, and seeking medical care. Our results suggest that test-negative studies produce unbiased estimates of VE against medically attended influenza when: 1) Vaccination does not affect the probability of noninfluenza ARI; and 2) health status has the same effect on the probability of influenza and noninfluenza ARIs. The same estimate might be severely biased (i.e., estimated VE - true VE ≥ 0.20) for estimating VE against symptomatic influenza if the vaccine affects the probability of seeking care against influenza ARI. VE estimates from test-negative studies might also be severely biased for both outcomes of interest when vaccination affects the probability of noninfluenza ARI, but estimates from passive surveillance cohort studies are unbiased in this case. Finally, VE estimates from traditional case-control studies suffer from bias regardless of the source of bias.

Maximum likelihood estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness against transmission from the household and from the community.

Influenza vaccination is recommended as the best way to protect against influenza infection and illness. Due to seasonal changes in influenza virus types and subtypes, a new vaccine must be produced, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) must be estimated, annually. Since 2010, influenza vaccination has been recommended universally in the United States, making randomized clinical trials unethical. Recent studies have used a monitored household cohort study design to determine separate VE estimates against influenza transmission from the household and community. We developed a probability model and accompanying maximum likelihood procedure to estimate vaccine-related protection against transmission of influenza from the household and the community. Using agent-based stochastic simulations, we validated that we can obtain maximum likelihood estimates of transmission parameters and VE close to their true values. Sensitivity analyses to examine the effect of deviations from our assumptions were conducted. We used our method to estimate transmission parameters and VE from data from a monitored household study in Michigan during the 2012-2013 influenza season and were able to detect a significant protective effect of influenza vaccination against community-acquired transmission.

Gene integrated set profile analysis: a context-based approach for inferring biological endpoints.

The identification of genes with specific patterns of change (e.g. down-regulated and methylated) as phenotype drivers or samples with similar profiles for a given gene set as drivers of clinical outcome, requires the integration of several genomic data types for which an 'integrate by intersection' (IBI) approach is often applied. In this approach, results from separate analyses of each data type are intersected, which has the limitation of a smaller intersection with more data types. We introduce a new method, GISPA (Gene Integrated Set Profile Analysis) for integrated genomic analysis and its variation, SISPA (Sample Integrated Set Profile Analysis) for defining respective genes and samples with the context of similar, a priori specified molecular profiles. With GISPA, the user defines a molecular profile that is compared among several classes and obtains ranked gene sets that satisfy the profile as drivers of each class. With SISPA, the user defines a gene set that satisfies a profile and obtains sample groups of profile activity. Our results from applying GISPA to human multiple myeloma (MM) cell lines contained genes of known profiles and importance, along with several novel targets, and their further SISPA application to MM coMMpass trial data showed clinical relevance.

A comparison of the test-negative and the traditional case-control study designs for estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness under nonrandom vaccination.

BACKGROUND: As annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all U.S. persons aged 6 months or older, it is unethical to conduct randomized clinical trials to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). Observational studies are being increasingly used to estimate VE. We developed a probability model for comparing the bias and the precision of VE estimates from two case-control designs: the traditional case-control (TCC) design and the test-negative (TN) design. In both study designs, acute respiratory illness (ARI) patients seeking medical care testing positive for influenza infection are considered cases. In the TN design, ARI patients seeking medical care who test negative serve as controls, while in the TCC design, controls are randomly selected individuals from the community who did not contract an ARI. METHODS: Our model assigns each study participant a covariate corresponding to the person's health status. The probabilities of vaccination and of contracting influenza and non-influenza ARI depend on health status. Hence, our model allows non-random vaccination and confounding. In addition, the probability of seeking care for ARI may depend on vaccination and health status. We consider two outcomes of interest: symptomatic influenza (SI) and medically-attended influenza (MAI). RESULTS: If vaccination does not affect the probability of non-influenza ARI, then VE estimates from TN studies usually have smaller bias than estimates from TCC studies. We also found that if vaccinated influenza ARI patients are less likely to seek medical care than unvaccinated patients because the vaccine reduces symptoms' severity, then estimates of VE from both types of studies may be severely biased when the outcome of interest is SI. The bias is not present when the outcome of interest is MAI. CONCLUSIONS: The TN design produces valid estimates of VE if (a) vaccination does not affect the probabilities of non-influenza ARI and of seeking care against influenza ARI, and (b) the confounding effects resulting from non-random vaccination are similar for influenza and non-influenza ARI. Since the bias of VE estimates depends on the outcome against which the vaccine is supposed to protect, it is important to specify the outcome of interest when evaluating the bias.

Reported effectiveness of COVID-19 monovalent booster vaccines and hybrid immunity against mild and severe Omicron disease in adults: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

Background: Waning of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) has been observed across settings and epidemiological contexts. We conducted a systematic review of COVID-19 VE studies and performed a meta-regression analysis to improve understanding of determinants of waning. Methods: Systematic review of PubMed, medRxiv and the WHO-International Vaccine Access Center database summarizing VE studies on 31 December 2022. Studies were those presenting primary adult VE data from hybrid immunity or third/fourth mRNA COVID-19 monovalent vaccine doses [due to limited data with other vaccines] against Omicron, compared with unvaccinated individuals or individuals eligible for corresponding booster doses but who did not receive them. We used meta-regression models, adjusting for confounders, with weeks since vaccination as a restricted cubic spline, to estimate VE over time since vaccination. Results: We identified 55 eligible studies reporting 269 VE estimates. Most estimates (180/269; 67 %) described effectiveness of third dose vaccination; with 48 (18 %) and 41 (15 %) describing hybrid immunity and fourth dose effectiveness, respectively, mostly (200; 74 %) derived from test-negative design studies. Most estimates (176/269; 65 %) reported VE compared with unvaccinated comparison groups. Estimated VE against mild outcomes declined following third dose vaccination from 62 % (95 % CI: 58 % - 66 %) after 4 weeks to 48 % (41 % - 55 %) after 20 weeks. Fourth dose VE against mild COVID-19 declined from 48 % (41 % - 56 %) after 4 weeks to 47 % (19 % - 65 %) after 20 weeks. VE for severe outcomes was higher and declined in the three-dose group from 90 % (87 % - 92 %) after 4 weeks to 70 % (65 - 74 %) after 20 weeks. Conclusions: Time-since vaccination is an important determinant of booster dose VE, a finding which may support seasonal COVID-19 booster doses. Integration of VE and immunological parameters - and longer-term data including from other vaccine types - are needed to better-understand determinants of clinical protection.

Association of COVID-19 vaccination with duration of hospitalization in older adults in Hong Kong.

INTRODUCTION: The association between COVID-19 vaccination and length of hospital stay may provide further insight into vaccination benefits, but few studies have investigated such associations in detail. We aimed to investigate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and length of hospital stay in COVID-19 patients during Omicron waves in Hong Kong, and explore potential predictors. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted on local patients aged ≥60 years who were admitted due to COVID-19 infection in Hong Kong in 2022, from 1 February to 22 November, and with 28 days of follow-up since admission. The exposure was either not vaccinated; or having received 2/3/4 doses of CoronaVac (Sinovac); or 2/3/4 doses of BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Fosun Pharma/Pfizer). Length of stay in hospital was the main outcome. Accelerated failure time models were used to quantify variation in hospital stay for vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients, accounting for age, sex, comorbidity, type of vaccine and number of doses received, care home residence and admission timing; stratified by age groups and epidemic waves. RESULTS: This study included 32,398 patients aged 60 years and above for main analysis, their median (IQR) age was 79 (71-87) years, 53% were men, and 40% were unvaccinated. The patients were stratified by confirmation prior to or since 23 May 2022, resulting in a sample size of 15,803 and 16,595 in those two waves respectively. Vaccinated patients were found to have 13-39% shorter hospital stay compared to unvaccinated patients. More vaccine doses received were associated with shorter hospital stay, and BNT162b2 recipients had slightly shorter hospital stays than CoronaVac recipients. CONCLUSION: Vaccination was associated with reduced hospital stay in breakthrough infections. Increased vaccination uptake in older adults may improve hospital bed turnover and public health outcomes especially during large community epidemics.

Evaluating the impact of extended dosing intervals on mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in adolescents.

Extending the dosing interval of a primary series of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination has been employed to reduce myocarditis risk in adolescents, but previous evaluation of impact on vaccine effectiveness (VE) is limited to risk after second dose. Here, we quantified the impact of the dosing interval based on case notifications and vaccination uptake in Hong Kong from January to April 2022. We estimated that the hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) of infections after the second dose for extended (28 days or more) versus regular (21-27 days) dosing intervals ranged from 0.86 to 0.99 from calendar-time proportional hazards models, and from 0.85 to 0.87 from matching approaches, respectively. Adolescents in the extended dosing groups (including those who did not receive a second dose in the study period) had a higher hazard of infection than those with a regular dosing interval during the intra-dose period (HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.07, 2.59; p = 0.02) after the first dose. Implementing an extended dosing interval should consider multiple factors including the degree of myocarditis risk, the degree of protection afforded by each dose, and the extra protection achievable using an extended dosing interval.

Characterising information gains and losses when collecting multiple epidemic model outputs.

BACKGROUND: Collaborative comparisons and combinations of epidemic models are used as policy-relevant evidence during epidemic outbreaks. In the process of collecting multiple model projections, such collaborations may gain or lose relevant information. Typically, modellers contribute a probabilistic summary at each time-step. We compared this to directly collecting simulated trajectories. We aimed to explore information on key epidemic quantities; ensemble uncertainty; and performance against data, investigating potential to continuously gain information from a single cross-sectional collection of model results. METHODS: We compared projections from the European COVID-19 Scenario Modelling Hub. Five teams modelled incidence in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain. We compared July 2022 projections by incidence, peaks, and cumulative totals. We created a probabilistic ensemble drawn from all trajectories, and compared to ensembles from a median across each model's quantiles, or a linear opinion pool. We measured the predictive accuracy of individual trajectories against observations, using this in a weighted ensemble. We repeated this sequentially against increasing weeks of observed data. We evaluated these ensembles to reflect performance with varying observed data. RESULTS: By collecting modelled trajectories, we showed policy-relevant epidemic characteristics. Trajectories contained a right-skewed distribution well represented by an ensemble of trajectories or a linear opinion pool, but not models' quantile intervals. Ensembles weighted by performance typically retained the range of plausible incidence over time, and in some cases narrowed this by excluding some epidemic shapes. CONCLUSIONS: We observed several information gains from collecting modelled trajectories rather than quantile distributions, including potential for continuously updated information from a single model collection. The value of information gains and losses may vary with each collaborative effort's aims, depending on the needs of projection users. Understanding the differing information potential of methods to collect model projections can support the accuracy, sustainability, and communication of collaborative infectious disease modelling efforts.

The need for a clinical case definition in test-negative design studies estimating vaccine effectiveness.

Test negative studies have been used extensively for the estimation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Such studies are able to estimate VE against medically-attended illness under certain assumptions. Selection bias may be present if the probability of participation is associated with vaccination or COVID-19, but this can be mitigated through use of a clinical case definition to screen patients for eligibility, which increases the likelihood that cases and non-cases come from the same source population. We examined the extent to which this type of bias could harm COVID-19 VE through systematic review and simulation. A systematic review of test-negative studies was re-analysed to identify studies ignoring the need for clinical criteria. Studies using a clinical case definition had a lower pooled VE estimate compared with studies that did not. Simulations varied the probability of selection by case and vaccination status. Positive bias away from the null (i.e., inflated VE consistent with the systematic review) was observed when there was a higher proportion of healthy, vaccinated non-cases, which may occur if a dataset contains many results from asymptomatic screening in settings where vaccination coverage is high. We provide an html tool for researchers to explore site-specific sources of selection bias in their own studies. We recommend all groups consider the potential for selection bias in their vaccine effectiveness studies, particularly when using administrative data.

Revisiting assumptions in test-negative studies for estimating vaccine effectiveness: the need for a clinical case definition.

Test negative studies have been used extensively for the estimation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Such studies are able to estimate VE against medically-attended illness under certain assumptions. Selection bias may be present if the probability of participation is associated with vaccination or COVID-19, but this can be mitigated through use of a clinical case definition to screen patients for eligibility, which increases the likelihood that cases and non-cases come from the same source population. We examined the extent to which this type of bias could harm COVID-19 VE through systematic review and simulation. A systematic review of test-negative studies was re-analysed to identify studies ignoring the need for clinical criteria. Studies using a clinical case definition had a lower pooled VE estimate compared with studies that did not. Simulations varied the probability of selection by case and vaccination status. Positive bias away from the null (i.e., inflated VE consistent with the systematic review) was observed when there was a higher proportion of healthy, vaccinated non-cases, which may occur if a dataset contains many results from asymptomatic screening in settings where vaccination coverage is high. We provide an html tool for researchers to explore site-specific sources of selection bias in their own studies. We recommend all group consider the potential for selection bias in their vaccine effectiveness studies, particularly when using administrative data.

Reflections On Epidemiological Modeling To Inform Policy During The COVID-19 Pandemic In Western Europe, 2020-23.

We reflect on epidemiological modeling conducted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in Western Europe, specifically in Belgium, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. Western Europe was initially one of the worst-hit regions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Western European countries deployed a range of policy responses to the pandemic, which were often informed by mathematical, computational, and statistical models. Models differed in terms of temporal scope, pandemic stage, interventions modeled, and analytical form. This diversity was modulated by differences in data availability and quality, government interventions, societal responses, and technical capacity. Many of these models were decisive to policy making at key junctures, such as during the introduction of vaccination and the emergence of the Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants. However, models also faced intense criticism from the press, other scientists, and politicians around their accuracy and appropriateness for decision making. Hence, evaluating the success of models in terms of accuracy and influence is an essential task. Modeling needs to be supported by infrastructure for systems to collect and share data, model development, and collaboration between groups, as well as two-way engagement between modelers and both policy makers and the public.

Is annual vaccination best? A modelling study of influenza vaccination strategies in children.

INTRODUCTION: Annual vaccination of children against influenza is a key component of vaccination programs in many countries. However, past infection and vaccination may affect an individual's susceptibility to infection. Little research has evaluated whether annual vaccination is the best strategy. Using the United Kingdom as our motivating example, we developed a framework to assess the impact of different childhood vaccination strategies, specifically annual and biennial (every other year), on attack rate and expected number of infections. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We present a multi-annual, individual-based, stochastic, force of infection model that accounts for individual exposure histories and disease/vaccine dynamics influencing susceptibility. We simulate birth cohorts that experience yearly influenza epidemics and follow them until age 18 to determine attack rates and the number of infections during childhood. We perform simulations under baseline conditions, with an assumed vaccination coverage of 44%, to compare annual vaccination to no and biennial vaccination. We relax our baseline assumptions to explore how our model assumptions impact vaccination program performance. At baseline, we observed less than half the number of infections between the ages 2 and 10 under annual vaccination in children who had been vaccinated at least half the time compared to no vaccination. When averaged over all ages 0-18, the number of infections under annual vaccination was 2.07 (2.06, 2.08) compared to 2.63 (2.62, 2.64) under no vaccination, and 2.38 (2.37, 2.40) under biennial vaccination. When we introduced a penalty for repeated exposures, we observed a decrease in the difference in infections between the vaccination strategies. Specifically, the difference in childhood infections under biennial compared to annual vaccination decreased from 0.31 to 0.04 as exposure penalty increased. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that while annual vaccination averts more childhood infections than biennial vaccination, this difference is small. Our work confirms the value of annual vaccination in children, even with modest vaccination coverage, but also shows that similar benefits of vaccination may be obtained by implementing a biennial vaccination program. AUTHOR SUMMARY: Many countries include annual vaccination of children against influenza in their vaccination programs. In the United Kingdom (UK), annual vaccination of children aged of 2 to 10 against influenza is recommended. However, little research has evaluated whether annual vaccination is the best strategy, while accounting for how past infection and vaccination may affect an individual's susceptibility to infection in the current influenza season. Prior work has suggested that there may be a negative effect of repeated vaccination. In this work we developed a stochastic, individual-based model to assess the impact of repeated vaccination strategies on childhood infections. Specifically, we first compare annual vaccination to no vaccination and then annual vaccination to biennial (every other year) vaccination. We use the UK as our motivating example. We found that an annual vaccination strategy resulted in the fewest childhood infections, followed by biennial vaccination. The difference in number of childhood infections between the different vaccination strategies decreased when we introduced a penalty for repeated exposures. Our work confirms the value of annual vaccination in children, but also shows that similar benefits of vaccination can be obtained by implementing a biennial vaccination program, particularly when there is a negative effect of repeated vaccinations.