Changes in population immunity against infection and severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants in the United States between December 2021 and November 2022.

BACKGROUND: While a substantial fraction of the US population was infected with SARS-CoV-2 during December 2021 - February 2022, the subsequent evolution of population immunity reflects the competing influences of waning protection over time and acquisition or restoration of immunity through additional infections and vaccinations. METHODS: Using a Bayesian evidence synthesis model of reported COVID-19 data (diagnoses, hospitalizations), vaccinations, and waning patterns for vaccine- and infection-acquired immunity, we estimate population immunity against infection and severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants in the United States, by location (national, state, county) and week. RESULTS: By November 9, 2022, 97% (95%-99%) of the US population were estimated to have prior immunological exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Between December 1, 2021 and November 9, 2022, protection against a new Omicron infection rose from 22% (21%-23%) to 63% (51%-75%) nationally, and protection against an Omicron infection leading to severe disease increased from 61% (59%-64%) to 89% (83%-92%). Increasing first booster uptake to 55% in all states (current US coverage: 34%) and second booster uptake to 22% (current US coverage: 11%) would increase protection against infection by 4.5 percentage points (2.4-7.2) and protection against severe disease by 1.1 percentage points (1.0-1.5). CONCLUSIONS: Effective protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease in November 2022 was substantially higher than in December 2021. Despite this high level of protection, a more transmissible or immune evading (sub)variant, changes in behavior, or ongoing waning of immunity could lead to a new SARS-CoV-2 wave.

Planning for Mpox on a College Campus: A Model-Based Decision-Support Tool.

BACKGROUND: In spring and summer 2022, an outbreak of mpox occurred worldwide, largely confined to men who have sex with men (MSM). There was concern that mpox could break swiftly into congregate settings and populations with high levels of regular frequent physical contact, like university campus communities. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the likelihood of an mpox outbreak and the potential effect of mitigation measures in a residential college setting. DESIGN: A stochastic dynamic SEIR (susceptible, exposed but not infectious, infectious, or recovered) model of mpox transmission in a study population was developed, composed of: a high-risk group representative of the population of MSM with a basic reproductive number (R 0) of 2.4 and a low-risk group with an R 0 of 0.8. Base input assumptions included an incubation time of 7.6 days and time to recovery of 21 days. SETTING: U.S. residential college campus. PARTICIPANTS: Hypothetical cohort of 6500 students. INTERVENTION: Isolation, quarantine, and vaccination of close contacts. MEASUREMENTS: Proportion of 1000 simulations producing sustained transmission; mean cases given sustained transmission; maximum students isolated, quarantined, and vaccinated. All projections are estimated over a planning horizon of 100 days. RESULTS: Without mitigation measures, the model estimated an 83% likelihood of sustained transmission, leading to an average of 183 cases. With detection and isolation of 20%, 50%, and 80% of cases, the average infections would fall to 117, 37, and 8, respectively. Reactive vaccination of contacts of detected cases (assuming 50% detection and isolation) reduced mean cases from 37 to 17, assuming 20 vaccinated contacts per detected case. Preemptive vaccination of 50% of the high-risk population before outbreak reduced cases from 37 to 14, assuming 50% detection and isolation. LIMITATION: A model is a stylized portrayal of behavior and transmission on a university campus. CONCLUSION: Based on our current understanding of mpox epidemiology among MSM in the United States, this model-based analysis suggests that future outbreaks of mpox on college campuses may be controlled with timely detection and isolation of symptomatic cases. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Population immunity to pre-Omicron and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants in US states and counties through December 1, 2021.

BACKGROUND: Both SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination contribute to population-level immunity against SARS-CoV-2. This study estimates the immunological exposure and effective protection against future SARS-CoV-2 infection in each US state and county over 2020-2021, and how this changed with the introduction of the Omicron variant. METHODS: We used a Bayesian model to synthesize estimates of daily SARS-CoV-2 infections, vaccination data and estimates of the relative rates of vaccination conditional on infection status to estimate the fraction of the population with (i) immunological exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (ever infected with SARS-CoV-2 and/or received one or more doses of a COVID-19 vaccine), (ii) effective protection against infection, and (iii) effective protection against severe disease, for each US state and county from January 1, 2020, to December 1, 2021. RESULTS: The estimated percentage of the US population with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination as of December 1, 2021, was 88.2% (95% Credible Interval (CrI): 83.6%-93.5%). Accounting for waning and immune escape, effective protection against the Omicron variant on December 1, 2021, was 21.8% (95%CrI: 20.7%-23.4%) nationally and ranged between 14.4% (95%CrI: 13.2%-15.8%, West Virginia) to 26.4% (95%CrI: 25.3%-27.8%, Colorado). Effective protection against severe disease from Omicron was 61.2% (95%CrI: 59.1%-64.0%) nationally and ranged between 53.0% (95%CrI: 47.3%-60.0%, Vermont) and 65.8% (95%CrI: 64.9%-66.7%, Colorado). CONCLUSIONS: While over four-fifths of the US population had prior immunological exposure to SARS-CoV-2 via vaccination or infection on December 1, 2021, only a fifth of the population was estimated to have effective protection against infection with the immune-evading Omicron variant.

Reconstructing the course of the COVID-19 epidemic over 2020 for US states and counties: Results of a Bayesian evidence synthesis model.

Reported COVID-19 cases and deaths provide a delayed and incomplete picture of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the United States (US). Accurate estimates of both the timing and magnitude of infections are needed to characterize viral transmission dynamics and better understand COVID-19 disease burden. We estimated time trends in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and other COVID-19 outcomes for every county in the US, from the first reported COVID-19 case in January 13, 2020 through January 1, 2021. To do so we employed a Bayesian modeling approach that explicitly accounts for reporting delays and variation in case ascertainment, and generates daily estimates of incident SARS-CoV-2 infections on the basis of reported COVID-19 cases and deaths. The model is freely available as the covidestim R package. Nationally, we estimated there had been 49 million symptomatic COVID-19 cases and 404,214 COVID-19 deaths by the end of 2020, and that 28% of the US population had been infected. There was county-level variability in the timing and magnitude of incidence, with local epidemiological trends differing substantially from state or regional averages, leading to large differences in the estimated proportion of the population infected by the end of 2020. Our estimates of true COVID-19 related deaths are consistent with independent estimates of excess mortality, and our estimated trends in cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection are consistent with trends in seroprevalence estimates from available antibody testing studies. Reconstructing the underlying incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections across US counties allows for a more granular understanding of disease trends and the potential impact of epidemiological drivers.

The Impact of Changes in Diagnostic Testing Practices on Estimates of COVID-19 Transmission in the United States.

Estimates of the reproductive number for novel pathogens, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, are essential for understanding the potential trajectory of epidemics and the levels of intervention that are needed to bring the epidemics under control. However, most methods for estimating the basic reproductive number (R0) and time-varying effective reproductive number (Rt) assume that the fraction of cases detected and reported is constant through time. We explored the impact of secular changes in diagnostic testing and reporting on estimates of R0 and Rt using simulated data. We then compared these patterns to data on reported cases of coronavirus disease 2019 and testing practices from different states in the United States from March 4, 2020, to August 30, 2020. We found that changes in testing practices and delays in reporting can result in biased estimates of R0 and Rt. Examination of changes in the daily numbers of tests conducted and the percentages of patients who tested positive might be helpful for identifying the potential direction of bias. Changes in diagnostic testing and reporting processes should be monitored and taken into consideration when interpreting estimates of the reproductive number of coronavirus disease.

Adaptive Policies to Balance Health Benefits and Economic Costs of Physical Distancing Interventions during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Policy makers need decision tools to determine when to use physical distancing interventions to maximize the control of COVID-19 while minimizing the economic and social costs of these interventions. We describe a pragmatic decision tool to characterize adaptive policies that combine real-time surveillance data with clear decision rules to guide when to trigger, continue, or stop physical distancing interventions during the current pandemic. In model-based experiments, we find that adaptive policies characterized by our proposed approach prevent more deaths and require a shorter overall duration of physical distancing than alternative physical distancing policies. Our proposed approach can readily be extended to more complex models and interventions.