Estimation and worldwide monitoring of the effective reproductive number of SARS-CoV-2.

The effective reproductive number Re is a key indicator of the growth of an epidemic. Since the start of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, many methods and online dashboards have sprung up to monitor this number through time. However, these methods are not always thoroughly tested, correctly placed in time, or are overly confident during high incidence periods. Here, we present a method for timely estimation of Re, applied to COVID-19 epidemic data from 170 countries. We thoroughly evaluate the method on simulated data, and present an intuitive web interface for interactive data exploration. We show that, in early 2020, in the majority of countries the estimated Re dropped below 1 only after the introduction of major non-pharmaceutical interventions. For Europe the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions was broadly associated with reductions in the estimated Re. Globally though, relaxing non-pharmaceutical interventions had more varied effects on subsequent Re estimates. Our framework is useful to inform governments and the general public on the status of epidemics in their country, and is used as the official source of Re estimates for SARS-CoV-2 in Switzerland. It further allows detailed comparison between countries and in relation to covariates such as implemented public health policies, mobility, behaviour, or weather data.

Over the past two and a half years, countries around the globe have struggled to control the transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus within their borders. To manage the situation, it is important to have an accurate picture of how fast the virus is spreading. This can be achieved by calculating the effective reproductive number (Re), which describes how many people, on average, someone with COVID-19 is likely to infect. If the Re is greater than one, the virus is infecting increasingly more people, but if it is smaller than one, the number of cases is declining. Scientists use various strategies to estimate the Re, which each have their own strengths and weaknesses. One of the main difficulties is that infections are typically recorded only when people test positive for COVID-19, are hospitalized with the virus, or die. This means that the data provides a delayed representation of when infections are happening. Furthermore, changes in these records occur later than measures that change the infection dynamics. As a result, researchers need to take these delays into account when estimating Re. Here, Huisman, Scire et al. have developed a new method for estimating the Re based on available data records, statistically taking into account the above-mentioned delays. An online dashboard with daily updates was then created so that policy makers and the population could monitor the values over time. For over two years, Huisman, Scire et al. have been applying their tool and dashboard to COVID-19 data from 170 countries. They found that public health interventions, such as mask requirements and lockdowns, did help reduce the Re in Europe. But the effects were not uniform across the globe, likely because of variations in how restrictions were implemented and followed during the pandemic. In early 2020, the Re only dropped below one after countries put lockdowns or other severe measures in place. The Re values added to the dashboard over the last two years have been used pro-actively to inform public health policies in Switzerland and to monitor the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in South Africa. The team has also recently released programming software based on this method that can be used to track future disease outbreaks, and extended the method to estimate the Re using SARS-CoV-2 levels in wastewater.

Test-trace-isolate-quarantine (TTIQ) intervention strategies after symptomatic COVID-19 case identification.

The test-trace-isolate-quarantine (TTIQ) strategy, where confirmed-positive pathogen carriers are isolated from the community and their recent close contacts are identified and pre-emptively quarantined, is used to break chains of transmission during a disease outbreak. The protocol is frequently followed after an individual presents with disease symptoms, at which point they will be tested for the pathogen. This TTIQ strategy, along with hygiene and social distancing measures, make up the non-pharmaceutical interventions that are utilised to suppress the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Here we develop a tractable mathematical model of disease transmission and the TTIQ intervention to quantify how the probability of detecting and isolating a case following symptom onset, the fraction of contacts that are identified and quarantined, and the delays inherent to these processes impact epidemic growth. In the model, the timing of disease transmission and symptom onset, as well as the frequency of asymptomatic cases, is based on empirical distributions of SARS-CoV-2 infection dynamics, while the isolation of confirmed cases and quarantine of their contacts is implemented by truncating their respective infectious periods. We find that a successful TTIQ strategy requires intensive testing: the majority of transmission is prevented by isolating symptomatic individuals and doing so in a short amount of time. Despite the lesser impact, additional contact tracing and quarantine increases the parameter space in which an epidemic is controllable and is necessary to control epidemics with a high reproductive number. TTIQ could remain an important intervention for the foreseeable future of the COVID-19 pandemic due to slow vaccine rollout and highly-transmissible variants with the potential for vaccine escape. Our results can be used to assess how TTIQ can be improved and optimised, and the methodology represents an improvement over previous quantification methods that is applicable to future epidemic scenarios.

Applying mixture model methods to SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey data from Geneva.

Serosurveys are an important tool to estimate the true extent of the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. So far, most serosurvey data have been analyzed with cutoff-based methods, which dichotomize individual measurements into sero-positives or negatives based on a predefined cutoff. However, mixture model methods can gain additional information from the same serosurvey data. Such methods refrain from dichotomizing individual values and instead use the full distribution of the serological measurements from pre-pandemic and COVID-19 controls to estimate the cumulative incidence. This study presents an application of mixture model methods to SARS-CoV-2 serosurvey data from the SEROCoV-POP study from April and May 2020 in Geneva (2766 individuals). Besides estimating the total cumulative incidence in these data (8.1% (95% CI: 6.8%-9.9%)), we applied extended mixture model methods to estimate an indirect indicator of disease severity, which is the fraction of cases with a distribution of antibody levels similar to hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This fraction is 51.2% (95% CI: 15.2%-79.5%) across the full serosurvey, but differs between three age classes: 21.4% (95% CI: 0%-59.6%) for individuals between 5 and 40 years old, 60.2% (95% CI: 21.5%-100%) for individuals between 41 and 65 years old and 100% (95% CI: 20.1%-100%) for individuals between 66 and 90 years old. Additionally, we find a mismatch between the inferred negative distribution of the serosurvey and the validation data of pre-pandemic controls. Overall, this study illustrates that mixture model methods can provide additional insights from serosurvey data.

On the relationship between serial interval, infectiousness profile and generation time.

The timing of transmission plays a key role in the dynamics and controllability of an epidemic. However, observing generation times-the time interval between the infection of an infector and an infectee in a transmission pair-requires data on infection times, which are generally unknown. The timing of symptom onset is more easily observed; generation times are therefore often estimated based on serial intervals-the time interval between symptom onset of an infector and an infectee. This estimation follows one of two approaches: (i) approximating the generation time distribution by the serial interval distribution or (ii) deriving the generation time distribution from the serial interval and incubation period-the time interval between infection and symptom onset in a single individual-distributions. These two approaches make different-and not always explicitly stated-assumptions about the relationship between infectiousness and symptoms, resulting in different generation time distributions with the same mean but unequal variances. Here, we clarify the assumptions that each approach makes and show that neither set of assumptions is plausible for most pathogens. However, the variances of the generation time distribution derived under each assumption can reasonably be considered as upper (approximation with serial interval) and lower (derivation from serial interval) bounds. Thus, we suggest a pragmatic solution is to use both approaches and treat these as edge cases in downstream analysis. We discuss the impact of the variance of the generation time distribution on the controllability of an epidemic through strategies based on contact tracing, and we show that underestimating this variance is likely to overestimate controllability.

Estimating the cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 with imperfect serological tests: Exploiting cutoff-free approaches.

Large-scale serological testing in the population is essential to determine the true extent of the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Serological tests measure antibody responses against pathogens and use predefined cutoff levels that dichotomize the quantitative test measures into sero-positives and negatives and use this as a proxy for past infection. With the imperfect assays that are currently available to test for past SARS-CoV-2 infection, the fraction of seropositive individuals in serosurveys is a biased estimator of the cumulative incidence and is usually corrected to account for the sensitivity and specificity. Here we use an inference method-referred to as mixture-model approach-for the estimation of the cumulative incidence that does not require to define cutoffs by integrating the quantitative test measures directly into the statistical inference procedure. We confirm that the mixture model outperforms the methods based on cutoffs, leading to less bias and error in estimates of the cumulative incidence. We illustrate how the mixture model can be used to optimize the design of serosurveys with imperfect serological tests. We also provide guidance on the number of control and case sera that are required to quantify the test's ambiguity sufficiently to enable the reliable estimation of the cumulative incidence. Lastly, we show how this approach can be used to estimate the cumulative incidence of classes of infections with an unknown distribution of quantitative test measures. This is a very promising application of the mixture-model approach that could identify the elusive fraction of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. An R-package implementing the inference methods used in this paper is provided. Our study advocates using serological tests without cutoffs, especially if they are used to determine parameters characterizing populations rather than individuals. This approach circumvents some of the shortcomings of cutoff-based methods at exactly the low cumulative incidence levels and test accuracies that we are currently facing in SARS-CoV-2 serosurveys.

ARC: An Open Web-Platform for Request/Supply Matching for a Prioritized and Controlled COVID-19 Response.

In 2020 the world was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic putting entire governments and civil societies in crisis mode. Around the globe unprecedented shortages of equipment and qualified personnel were reported in hospitals and diagnostic laboratories. When a crisis is global, supply chains are strained worldwide and external help may not be readily available. In Switzerland, as part of the efforts of the Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force, we developed a tailor-made web-based tool where needs and offers for critical laboratory equipment and expertise can be brought together, coordinated, prioritized, and validated. This Academic Resources for COVID-19 (ARC) Platform presents the specialized needs of diagnostic laboratories to academic research groups at universities, allowing the sourcing of said needs from unconventional supply channels, while keeping the entities tasked with coordination of the crisis response in control of each part of the process. An instance of the ARC Platform is operated in Switzerland (arc.epfl.ch) catering to the diagnostic efforts in Switzerland and sourcing from the Swiss academic sector. The underlying technology has been released as open source so that others can adopt the customizable web-platform for need/supply match-making in their own relief efforts, during the COVID-19 pandemic or any future disaster.

Quantifying the impact of quarantine duration on COVID-19 transmission.

The large number of individuals placed into quarantine because of possible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) exposure has high societal and economic costs. There is ongoing debate about the appropriate duration of quarantine, particularly since the fraction of individuals who eventually test positive is perceived as being low. We use empirically determined distributions of incubation period, infectivity, and generation time to quantify how the duration of quarantine affects onward transmission from traced contacts of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases and from returning travellers. We also consider the roles of testing followed by release if negative (test-and-release), reinforced hygiene, adherence, and symptoms in calculating quarantine efficacy. We show that there are quarantine strategies based on a test-and-release protocol that, from an epidemiological viewpoint, perform almost as well as a 10-day quarantine, but with fewer person-days spent in quarantine. The findings apply to both travellers and contacts, but the specifics depend on the context.

The COVID-19 pandemic has led many countries to impose quarantines, ensuring that people who may have been exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus or who return from abroad are isolated for a specific period to prevent the spread of the disease. These measures have crippled travel, taken a large economic toll, and affected the wellbeing of those needing to self-isolate. However, there is no consensus on how long COVID-19 quarantines should be. Reducing the duration of quarantines could significantly decrease the costs of COVID-19 to the overall economy and to individuals, so Ashcroft et al. decided to examine how shorter isolation periods and test-and-release schemes affected transmission. Existing data on how SARS-CoV-2 behaves in a population were used to generate a model that would predict how changing quarantine length impacts transmission for both travellers and people who may have been exposed to the virus. The analysis predicted that shortening quarantines from ten to seven days would result in almost no increased risk of transmission, if paired with PCR testing on day five of isolation (with people testing positive being confined for longer). The quarantine could be cut further to six days if rapid antigen tests were used. Ashcroft et al.'s findings suggest that it may be possible to shorten COVID-19 quarantines if good testing approaches are implemented, leading to better economic, social and individual outcomes.

Practical considerations for measuring the effective reproductive number, Rt.

Estimation of the effective reproductive number Rt is important for detecting changes in disease transmission over time. During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, policy makers and public health officials are using Rt to assess the effectiveness of interventions and to inform policy. However, estimation of Rt from available data presents several challenges, with critical implications for the interpretation of the course of the pandemic. The purpose of this document is to summarize these challenges, illustrate them with examples from synthetic data, and, where possible, make recommendations. For near real-time estimation of Rt, we recommend the approach of Cori and colleagues, which uses data from before time t and empirical estimates of the distribution of time between infections. Methods that require data from after time t, such as Wallinga and Teunis, are conceptually and methodologically less suited for near real-time estimation, but may be appropriate for retrospective analyses of how individuals infected at different time points contributed to the spread. We advise caution when using methods derived from the approach of Bettencourt and Ribeiro, as the resulting Rt estimates may be biased if the underlying structural assumptions are not met. Two key challenges common to all approaches are accurate specification of the generation interval and reconstruction of the time series of new infections from observations occurring long after the moment of transmission. Naive approaches for dealing with observation delays, such as subtracting delays sampled from a distribution, can introduce bias. We provide suggestions for how to mitigate this and other technical challenges and highlight open problems in Rt estimation.