RESUMO
Identifying linked cases of infection is a critical component of the public health response to viral infectious diseases. In a clinical context, there is a need to make rapid assessments of whether cases of infection have arrived independently onto a ward, or are potentially linked via direct transmission. Viral genome sequence data are of great value in making these assessments, but are often not the only form of data available. Here, we describe A2B-COVID, a method for the rapid identification of potentially linked cases of COVID-19 infection designed for clinical settings. Our method combines knowledge about infection dynamics, data describing the movements of individuals, and evolutionary analysis of genome sequences to assess whether data collected from cases of infection are consistent or inconsistent with linkage via direct transmission. A retrospective analysis of data from two wards at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust during the first wave of the pandemic showed qualitatively different patterns of linkage between cases on designated COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 wards. The subsequent real-time application of our method to data from the second epidemic wave highlights its value for monitoring cases of infection in a clinical context.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitais , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2/genéticaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: In May 2022, the World Health Organisation declared a multi-country monkeypox outbreak in non-endemic countries following cases reported from 12 member states that were not endemic for monkeypox virus. SOURCES OF DATA: Pubmed search. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: The virology, epidemiology, transmission, incubation and aspects of infection control are described. Clinical features of previous and current outbreaks are described, with growing observations that the current outbreak presents with clinical features distinct from previous outbreaks. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: There are variations in clinical presentations seen in the current outbreak that have not been seen in prior outbreaks. More research is needed to investigate the reasons for these differences. GROWING POINTS: The higher numbers of HIV-positive patients in the current outbreak has allowed better description of the disease in patients co-infected with HIV and monkeypox. The absence of more severe symptoms in HIV-positive patients in the current outbreak could possibly be due to the fact that most of these patients had well-controlled HIV, although further characterization of this cohort of patients would be useful. AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: Current treatment and vaccination options have been extrapolated from studies of other Orthopox viruses. There remains a need for more data on the safety and efficacy of these options in the context of monkeypox infections.
Assuntos
Infecções por HIV , Mpox , Humanos , Surtos de Doenças , Controle de Infecções , VacinaçãoRESUMO
Patients with chronic inflammatory diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ulcerative colitis (UC), have an increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ) infection, compared with the general population. This risk is further increased by the use of immunomodulatory therapies, with a higher incidence of HZ reported in patients receiving Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, compared with those receiving other immunomodulatory or biological therapies. Tofacitinib is an oral JAK inhibitor for the treatment of RA, PsA and UC. In this narrative review, we discuss the effects of tofacitinib and other JAK inhibitors on HZ risk in patients with RA, PsA and UC, and strategies for risk management. We also discuss current UK guidelines for HZ vaccination in healthy individuals and patients with chronic inflammatory diseases, consider selected international guidelines, and review current HZ vaccination strategies.
Assuntos
Artrite Psoriásica , Artrite Reumatoide , Colite Ulcerativa , Gastroenterologia , Herpes Zoster , Inibidores de Janus Quinases , Reumatologia , Artrite Reumatoide/tratamento farmacológico , Herpes Zoster/induzido quimicamente , Herpes Zoster/epidemiologia , Herpes Zoster/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Inibidores de Janus Quinases/efeitos adversos , Janus Quinases , Pirróis/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
Hepatitis C virus represents a global pathogen of human health significance. In the space of less than three decades, we have witnessed the discovery of the virus, a growing understanding of the structure and biology of the viral-encoded proteins and their interaction with the host cell and the sequencing of the viral genome. Most importantly, we have moved from early therapeutic strategies aimed at crude boosting of host anti-viral immunity, limited by side effects and with poor response rates, to therapies that directly exploit our understanding of viral biology. In this review, we discuss the significance of the virus, its' discovery and outline the advances in the molecular characterisation of the virus, before setting these within the context of contemporary and emerging therapeutic strategies as well as viral resistance mechanisms.
Assuntos
Antivirais/farmacologia , Hepacivirus/efeitos dos fármacos , Hepatite C/tratamento farmacológico , Hepatite C/virologia , Antivirais/química , Farmacorresistência Viral/efeitos dos fármacos , Genoma Viral/efeitos dos fármacos , Hepatite C/epidemiologia , Interações Hospedeiro-Patógeno/efeitos dos fármacos , Humanos , Replicação Viral/efeitos dos fármacosAssuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Doenças Assintomáticas , Infecções Assintomáticas , Atenção à Saúde , Humanos , PatologistasRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To describe the risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We conducted a prospective sero-epidemiological study of HCWs at a major UK teaching hospital using a SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay. Risk factors for seropositivity were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 410/5,698 (7·2%) staff tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Seroprevalence was higher in those working in designated COVID-19 areas compared with other areas (9·47% versus 6·16%) Healthcare assistants (aOR 2·06 [95%CI 1·14-3·71]; p=0·016) and domestic and portering staff (aOR 3·45 [95% CI 1·07-11·42]; p=0·039) had significantly higher seroprevalence than other staff groups after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity and COVID-19 working location. Staff working in acute medicine and medical sub-specialities were also at higher risk (aOR 2·07 [95% CI 1·31-3·25]; p<0·002). Staff from Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds had an aOR of 1·65 (95% CI 1·32 - 2·07; p<0·001) compared to white staff; this increased risk was independent of COVID-19 area working. The only symptoms significantly associated with seropositivity in a multivariable model were loss of sense of taste or smell, fever, and myalgia; 31% of staff testing positive reported no prior symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst HCWs is highly heterogeneous and influenced by COVID-19 working location, role, age and ethnicity. Increased risk amongst BAME staff cannot be accounted for solely by occupational factors.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticorpos Antivirais , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pessoal de Saúde , Hospitais de Ensino , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Estudos Soroepidemiológicos , Reino Unido/epidemiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: An estimated 250 million people worldwide are chronically infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV), the leading cause of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) globally. The novel Sars-cov2 virus continues to spread at an alarming rate, and with guidance at the onset of the pandemic recommending the deferral of HCC surveillance, the implications on liver cancer care are now emerging and highlight the urgent need for reorganisation of services. METHODS: We analysed how five HCC risk prediction scores could aid stratification of patients with chronic HBV. We calculated scores using parameters measured from 3 years prior (where available, n = 17) and at the time of HCC diagnosis in all adult patients with chronic HBV diagnosed with HCC (n = 46), and controls (n = 100). We compared the number of patients requiring cancer surveillance according to each score and regional surveillance guidance. RESULTS: The aMAP score had the highest discriminatory performance in HCC risk prediction at 3 years (area under receiver-operating characteristic curve (auROC) of 0.824), followed by the mREACH B score (auROC of 0.719), and mPAGE B score (auROC of 0.742). However, only the mREACH B score had a negative predictive value (NPV) >99%. Applying the mREACH B score to our HBV cohort identified 11 patients requiring HCC surveillance, compared with 62 under current guidelines. CONCLUSION: The use of HCC risk prediction scores could streamline the surveillance of patients with chronic HBV at a time of extremely limited resources. Overall, the mREACH B score had both a strong discriminatory performance and a high NPV, thus safely identifying low risk patients not requiring surveillance.
RESUMO
The BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) is being utilised internationally for mass COVID-19 vaccination. Evidence of single-dose protection against symptomatic disease has encouraged some countries to opt for delayed booster doses of BNT162b2, but the effect of this strategy on rates of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unknown. We previously demonstrated frequent pauci- and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection amongst healthcare workers (HCWs) during the UK's first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, using a comprehensive PCR-based HCW screening programme (Rivett et al., 2020; Jones et al., 2020). Here, we evaluate the effect of first-dose BNT162b2 vaccination on test positivity rates and find a fourfold reduction in asymptomatic infection amongst HCWs ≥12 days post-vaccination. These data provide real-world evidence of short-term protection against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection following a single dose of BNT162b2 vaccine, suggesting that mass first-dose vaccination will reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, as well as the burden of COVID-19 disease.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Infecções Assintomáticas/terapia , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Esquemas de Imunização , Imunização Secundária , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , VacinaçãoRESUMO
SARS-CoV-2 is notable both for its rapid spread, and for the heterogeneity of its patterns of transmission, with multiple published incidences of superspreading behaviour. Here, we applied a novel network reconstruction algorithm to infer patterns of viral transmission occurring between patients and health care workers (HCWs) in the largest clusters of COVID-19 infection identified during the first wave of the epidemic at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK. Based upon dates of individuals reporting symptoms, recorded individual locations, and viral genome sequence data, we show an uneven pattern of transmission between individuals, with patients being much more likely to be infected by other patients than by HCWs. Further, the data were consistent with a pattern of superspreading, whereby 21% of individuals caused 80% of transmission events. Our study provides a detailed retrospective analysis of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and sheds light on the need for intensive and pervasive infection control procedures.
The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, presents a global public health challenge. Hospitals have been at the forefront of this battle, treating large numbers of sick patients over several waves of infection. Finding ways to manage the spread of the virus in hospitals is key to protecting vulnerable patients and workers, while keeping hospitals running, but to generate effective infection control, researchers must understand how SARS-CoV-2 spreads. A range of factors make studying the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitals tricky. For instance, some people do not present any symptoms, and, amongst those who do, it can be difficult to determine whether they caught the virus in the hospital or somewhere else. However, comparing the genetic information of the SARS-CoV-2 virus from different people in a hospital could allow scientists to understand how it spreads. Samples of the genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 can be obtained by swabbing infected individuals. If the genetic sequences of two samples are very different, it is unlikely that the individuals who provided the samples transmitted the virus to one another. Illingworth, Hamilton et al. used this information, along with other data about how SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted, to develop an algorithm that can determine how the virus spreads from person to person in different hospital wards. To build their algorithm, Illingworth, Hamilton et al. collected SARS-CoV-2 genetic data from patients and staff in a hospital, and combined it with information about how SARS-CoV-2 spreads and how these people moved in the hospital . The algorithm showed that, for the most part, patients were infected by other patients (20 out of 22 cases), while staff were infected equally by patients and staff. By further probing these data, Illingworth, Hamilton et al. revealed that 80% of hospital-acquired infections were caused by a group of just 21% of individuals in the study, identifying a 'superspreader' pattern. These findings may help to inform SARS-CoV-2 infection control measures to reduce spread within hospitals, and could potentially be used to improve infection control in other contexts.
Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/transmissão , Surtos de Doenças/estatística & dados numéricos , Hospitais/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic is expanding at an unprecedented rate. As a result, diagnostic services are stretched to their limit, and there is a clear need for the provision of additional diagnostic capacity. Academic laboratories, many of which are closed due to governmental lockdowns, may be in a position to support local screening capacity by adapting their current laboratory practices. Here, we describe the process of developing a SARS-Cov2 diagnostic workflow in a conventional academic Containment Level 2 laboratory. Our outline includes simple SARS-Cov2 deactivation upon contact, the method for a quantitative real-time reverse transcriptase PCR detecting SARS-Cov2, a description of process establishment and validation, and some considerations for establishing a similar workflow elsewhere. This was achieved under challenging circumstances through the collaborative efforts of scientists, clinical staff, and diagnostic staff to mitigate to the ongoing crisis. Within 14 days, we created a validated COVID-19 diagnostics service for healthcare workers in our local hospital. The described methods are not exhaustive, but we hope may offer support to other academic groups aiming to set up something comparable in a short time frame.
RESUMO
Previously, we showed that 3% (31/1032)of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) from a large teaching hospital in Cambridge, UK, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in April 2020. About 15% (26/169) HCWs with symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Rivett et al., 2020). Here, we show that the proportion of both asymptomatic and symptomatic HCWs testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 rapidly declined to near-zero between 25th April and 24th May 2020, corresponding to a decline in patient admissions with COVID-19 during the ongoing UK 'lockdown'. These data demonstrate how infection prevention and control measures including staff testing may help prevent hospitals from becoming independent 'hubs' of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and illustrate how, with appropriate precautions, organizations in other sectors may be able to resume on-site work safely.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Pessoal de Saúde , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Adulto , Doenças Assintomáticas , Betacoronavirus/genética , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19 , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/transmissão , Busca de Comunicante , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Características da Família , Feminino , Unidades Hospitalares , Hospitais de Ensino/organização & administração , Hospitais de Ensino/estatística & dados numéricos , Hospitais Universitários/organização & administração , Hospitais Universitários/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Controle de Infecções , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/organização & administração , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nasofaringe/virologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Admissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Prevalência , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , SARS-CoV-2 , Avaliação de SintomasRESUMO
Significant differences exist in the availability of healthcare worker (HCW) SARS-CoV-2 testing between countries, and existing programmes focus on screening symptomatic rather than asymptomatic staff. Over a 3 week period (April 2020), 1032 asymptomatic HCWs were screened for SARS-CoV-2 in a large UK teaching hospital. Symptomatic staff and symptomatic household contacts were additionally tested. Real-time RT-PCR was used to detect viral RNA from a throat+nose self-swab. 3% of HCWs in the asymptomatic screening group tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. 17/30 (57%) were truly asymptomatic/pauci-symptomatic. 12/30 (40%) had experienced symptoms compatible with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)>7 days prior to testing, most self-isolating, returning well. Clusters of HCW infection were discovered on two independent wards. Viral genome sequencing showed that the majority of HCWs had the dominant lineage Bâ1. Our data demonstrates the utility of comprehensive screening of HCWs with minimal or no symptoms. This approach will be critical for protecting patients and hospital staff.
Patients admitted to NHS hospitals are now routinely screened for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), and isolated from other patients if necessary. Yet healthcare workers, including frontline patient-facing staff such as doctors, nurses and physiotherapists, are only tested and excluded from work if they develop symptoms of the illness. However, there is emerging evidence that many people infected with SARS-CoV-2 never develop significant symptoms: these people will therefore be missed by 'symptomatic-only' testing. There is also important data showing that around half of all transmissions of SARS-CoV-2 happen before the infected individual even develops symptoms. This means that much broader testing programs are required to spot people when they are most infectious. Rivett, Sridhar, Sparkes, Routledge et al. set out to determine what proportion of healthcare workers was infected with SARS-CoV-2 while also feeling generally healthy at the time of testing. Over 1,000 staff members at a large UK hospital who felt they were well enough to work, and did not fit the government criteria for COVID-19 infection, were tested. Amongst these, 3% were positive for SARS-CoV-2. On closer questioning, around one in five reported no symptoms, two in five very mild symptoms that they had dismissed as inconsequential, and a further two in five reported COVID-19 symptoms that had stopped more than a week previously. In parallel, healthcare workers with symptoms of COVID-19 (and their household contacts) who were self-isolating were also tested, in order to allow those without the virus to quickly return to work and bolster a stretched workforce. Finally, the rates of infection were examined to probe how the virus could have spread through the hospital and among staff and in particular, to understand whether rates of infection were greater among staff working in areas devoted to COVID-19 patients. Despite wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, healthcare workers in these areas were almost three times more likely to test positive than those working in areas without COVID-19 patients. However, it is not clear whether this genuinely reflects greater rates of patients passing the infection to staff. Staff may give the virus to each other, or even acquire it at home. Overall, this work implies that hospitals need to be vigilant and introduce broad screening programmes across their workforces. It will be vital to establish such approaches before 'lockdown' is fully lifted, so healthcare institutions are prepared for any second peak of infections.