Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 23
Filter
1.
Nat Commun ; 14(1): 3272, 2023 06 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20236207

ABSTRACT

Access to COVID-19 vaccines on the global scale has been drastically hindered by structural socio-economic disparities. Here, we develop a data-driven, age-stratified epidemic model to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 vaccine inequities in twenty lower middle and low income countries (LMIC) selected from all WHO regions. We investigate and quantify the potential effects of higher or earlier doses availability. In doing so, we focus on the crucial initial months of vaccine distribution and administration, exploring counterfactual scenarios where we assume the same per capita daily vaccination rate reported in selected high income countries. We estimate that more than 50% of deaths (min-max range: [54-94%]) that occurred in the analyzed countries could have been averted. We further consider scenarios where LMIC had similarly early access to vaccine doses as high income countries. Even without increasing the number of doses, we estimate an important fraction of deaths (min-max range: [6-50%]) could have been averted. In the absence of the availability of high-income countries, the model suggests that additional non-pharmaceutical interventions inducing a considerable relative decrease of transmissibility (min-max range: [15-70%]) would have been required to offset the lack of vaccines. Overall, our results quantify the negative impacts of vaccine inequities and underscore the need for intensified global efforts devoted to provide faster access to vaccine programs in low and lower-middle-income countries.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Income
3.
Clin Trials ; 19(6): 647-654, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1957005

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The threat of a possible Marburg virus disease outbreak in Central and Western Africa is growing. While no Marburg virus vaccines are currently available for use, several candidates are in the pipeline. Building on knowledge and experiences in the designs of vaccine efficacy trials against other pathogens, including SARS-CoV-2, we develop designs of randomized Phase 3 vaccine efficacy trials for Marburg virus vaccines. METHODS: A core protocol approach will be used, allowing multiple vaccine candidates to be tested against controls. The primary objective of the trial will be to evaluate the effect of each vaccine on the rate of virologically confirmed Marburg virus disease, although Marburg infection assessed via seroconversion could be the primary objective in some cases. The overall trial design will be a mixture of individually and cluster-randomized designs, with individual randomization done whenever possible. Clusters will consist of either contacts and contacts of contacts of index cases, that is, ring vaccination, or other transmission units. RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint will be analysed as a time-to-event outcome. A vaccine will be considered successful if its estimated efficacy is greater than 50% and has sufficient precision to rule out that true efficacy is less than 30%. This will require approximately 150 total endpoints, that is, cases of confirmed Marburg virus disease, per vaccine/comparator combination. Interim analyses will be conducted after 50 and after 100 events. Statistical analysis of the trial will be blended across the different types of designs. Under the assumption of a 6-month attack rate of 1% of the participants in the placebo arm for both the individually and cluster-randomized populations, the most likely sample size is about 20,000 participants per arm. CONCLUSION: This event-driven design takes into the account the potentially sporadic spread of Marburg virus. The proposed trial design may be applicable for other pathogens against which effective vaccines are not yet available.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases, Emerging , Marburg Virus Disease , Marburgvirus , Vaccines , Animals , Humans , Communicable Diseases, Emerging/epidemiology , Communicable Diseases, Emerging/prevention & control , Marburg Virus Disease/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 119(26): e2112182119, 2022 06 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1890404

ABSTRACT

Detailed characterization of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission across different settings can help design less disruptive interventions. We used real-time, privacy-enhanced mobility data in the New York City, NY and Seattle, WA metropolitan areas to build a detailed agent-based model of SARS-CoV-2 infection to estimate the where, when, and magnitude of transmission events during the pandemic's first wave. We estimate that only 18% of individuals produce most infections (80%), with about 10% of events that can be considered superspreading events (SSEs). Although mass gatherings present an important risk for SSEs, we estimate that the bulk of transmission occurred in smaller events in settings like workplaces, grocery stores, or food venues. The places most important for transmission change during the pandemic and are different across cities, signaling the large underlying behavioral component underneath them. Our modeling complements case studies and epidemiological data and indicates that real-time tracking of transmission events could help evaluate and define targeted mitigation policies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/transmission , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , Pandemics , Population Dynamics , Time Factors , Washington/epidemiology
5.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(4): e229317, 2022 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1813429

ABSTRACT

Importance: An overall household secondary attack rate (SAR) of 18.9% (95% CI, 16.2%-22.0%) through June 17, 2021 was previously reported for SARS-CoV-2. Emerging variants of concern and increased vaccination have affected transmission rates. Objective: To evaluate how reported household SARs changed over time and whether SARs varied by viral variant and index case and contact vaccination status. Data Sources: PubMed and medRxiv from June 18, 2021, through March 8, 2022, and reference lists of eligible articles. Preprints were included. Study Selection: Articles with original data reporting the number of infected and total number of household contacts. Search terms included SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, variant, vaccination, secondary attack rate, secondary infection rate, household, index case, family contacts, close contacts, and family transmission. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guideline was followed. Meta-analyses used generalized linear mixed models to obtain SAR estimates and 95% CIs. Main Outcomes and Measures: SAR stratified by covariates according to variant, index case and contact vaccination status, and index case identification period. SARs were used to estimate vaccine effectiveness on the basis of the transmission probability for susceptibility to infection (VES,p), infectiousness given infection (VEI,p), and total vaccine effectiveness (VET,p). Results: Household SARs were higher for 33 studies with midpoints in 2021 to 2022 (37.3%; 95% CI, 32.7% to 42.1%) compared with 63 studies with midpoints through April 2020 (15.5%; 95% CI, 13.2% to 18.2%). Household SARs were 42.7% (95% CI, 35.4% to 50.4%) for Omicron (7 studies), 36.4% (95% CI, 33.4% to 39.5%) for Alpha (11 studies), 29.7% (95% CI, 23.0% to 37.3%) for Delta (16 studies), and 22.5% (95% CI, 18.6% to 26.8%) for Beta (3 studies). For full vaccination, VES,p was 78.6% (95% CI, 76.0% to 80.9%) for Alpha, 56.4% (95% CI, 54.6% to 58.1%) for Delta, and 18.1% (95% CI, -18.3% to 43.3%) for Omicron; VEI,p was 75.3% (95% CI, 69.9% to 79.8%) for Alpha, 21.9% (95% CI, 11.0% to 31.5%) for Delta, and 18.2% (95% CI, 0.6% to 32.6%) for Omicron; and VET,p was 94.7% (95% CI, 93.3% to 95.8%) for Alpha, 64.4% (95% CI, 58.0% to 69.8%) for Delta, and 35.8% (95% CI, 13.0% to 52.6%) for Omicron. Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern have increased transmissibility. Full vaccination was associated with reductions in susceptibility and infectiousness, but more so for Alpha than Delta and Omicron. The changes in estimated vaccine effectiveness underscore the challenges of developing effective vaccines concomitant with viral evolution.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Incidence , Vaccination
6.
Science ; 375(6585): 1088-1089, 2022 03 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736007

ABSTRACT

How much do COVID-19 vaccines reduce transmission? The answer is a moving target.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Immunity, Herd , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Immunity, Herd/immunology , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination/veterinary
7.
Epidemics ; 37: 100506, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1514167

ABSTRACT

Outbreaks of emerging pathogens pose unique methodological and practical challenges for the design, implementation, and evaluation of vaccine efficacy trials. Lessons learned from COVID-19 highlight the need for innovative and flexible study design and application to quickly identify promising candidate vaccines. Trial design strategies should be tailored to the dynamics of the specific pathogen, location of the outbreak, and vaccine prototypes, within the regional socioeconomic constraints. Mathematical and statistical models can assist investigators in designing infectious disease clinical trials. We introduce key challenges for planning, evaluating, and modelling vaccine efficacy trials for emerging pathogens.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases, Emerging , Communicable Diseases, Emerging/epidemiology , Communicable Diseases, Emerging/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Vaccine Efficacy
8.
[Unspecified Source]; 2020.
Non-conventional in English | [Unspecified Source] | ID: grc-750498

ABSTRACT

We use a global metapopulation transmission model to study the establishment of sustained and undetected community transmission of the COVID-19 epidemic in the United States. The model is calibrated on international case importations from mainland China and takes into account travel restrictions to and from international destinations. We estimate widespread community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in February, 2020. Modeling results indicate international travel as the key driver of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 in the West and East Coast metropolitan areas that could have been seeded as early as late-December, 2019. For most of the continental states the largest contribution of imported infections arrived through domestic travel flows.

9.
Nature ; 600(7887): 127-132, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483136

ABSTRACT

Considerable uncertainty surrounds the timeline of introductions and onsets of local transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) globally1-7. Although a limited number of SARS-CoV-2 introductions were reported in January and February 2020 (refs.8,9), the narrowness of the initial testing criteria, combined with a slow growth in testing capacity and porous travel screening10, left many countries vulnerable to unmitigated, cryptic transmission. Here we use a global metapopulation epidemic model to provide a mechanistic understanding of the early dispersal of infections and the temporal windows of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 and onset of local transmission in Europe and the USA. We find that community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was likely to have been present in several areas of Europe and the USA by January 2020, and estimate that by early March, only 1 to 4 in 100 SARS-CoV-2 infections were detected by surveillance systems. The modelling results highlight international travel as the key driver of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2, with possible introductions and transmission events as early as December 2019 to January 2020. We find a heterogeneous geographic distribution of cumulative infection attack rates by 4 July 2020, ranging from 0.78% to 15.2% across US states and 0.19% to 13.2% in European countries. Our approach complements phylogenetic analyses and other surveillance approaches and provides insights that can be used to design innovative, model-driven surveillance systems that guide enhanced testing and response strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Epidemiological Models , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Air Travel/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , China/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Population Density , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
10.
Immunity ; 54(10): 2172-2176, 2021 Oct 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1433404

ABSTRACT

The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its associated disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has caused a devastating pandemic worldwide. Here, we explain basic concepts underlying the transition from an epidemic to an endemic state, where a pathogen is stably maintained in a population. We discuss how the number of infections and the severity of disease change in the transition from the epidemic to the endemic phase and consider the implications of this transition in the context of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , Endemic Diseases , COVID-19/prevention & control , Disease Susceptibility/epidemiology , Disease Susceptibility/immunology , Epidemics , Humans , Immunity , Prevalence , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Severity of Illness Index , Vaccination
11.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(8): e2122240, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1375584

ABSTRACT

Importance: A previous systematic review and meta-analysis of household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 that summarized 54 published studies through October 19, 2020, found an overall secondary attack rate (SAR) of 16.6% (95% CI, 14.0%-19.3%). However, the understanding of household secondary attack rates for SARS-CoV-2 is still evolving, and updated analysis is needed. Objective: To use newly published data to further the understanding of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the household. Data Sources: PubMed and reference lists of eligible articles were used to search for records published between October 20, 2020, and June 17, 2021. No restrictions on language, study design, time, or place of publication were applied. Studies published as preprints were included. Study Selection: Articles with original data that reported at least 2 of the following factors were included: number of household contacts with infection, total number of household contacts, and secondary attack rates among household contacts. Studies that reported household infection prevalence (which includes index cases), that tested contacts using antibody tests only, and that included populations overlapping with another included study were excluded. Search terms were SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 with secondary attack rate, household, close contacts, contact transmission, contact attack rate, or family transmission. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses were performed using generalized linear mixed models to obtain SAR estimates and 95% CIs. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall household SAR for SARS-CoV-2, SAR by covariates (contact age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, and relationship; index case age, sex, symptom status, presence of fever, and presence of cough; number of contacts; study location; and variant), and SAR by index case identification period. Results: A total of 2722 records (2710 records from database searches and 12 records from the reference lists of eligible articles) published between October 20, 2020, and June 17, 2021, were identified. Of those, 93 full-text articles reporting household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 were assessed for eligibility, and 37 studies were included. These 37 new studies were combined with 50 of the 54 studies (published through October 19, 2020) from our previous review (4 studies from Wuhan, China, were excluded because their study populations overlapped with another recent study), resulting in a total of 87 studies representing 1 249 163 household contacts from 30 countries. The estimated household SAR for all 87 studies was 18.9% (95% CI, 16.2%-22.0%). Compared with studies from January to February 2020, the SAR for studies from July 2020 to March 2021 was higher (13.4% [95% CI, 10.7%-16.7%] vs 31.1% [95% CI, 22.6%-41.1%], respectively). Results from subgroup analyses were similar to those reported in a previous systematic review and meta-analysis; however, the SAR was higher to contacts with comorbidities (3 studies; 50.0% [95% CI, 41.4%-58.6%]) compared with previous findings, and the estimated household SAR for the B.1.1.7 (α) variant was 24.5% (3 studies; 95% CI, 10.9%-46.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that the household remains an important site of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and recent studies have higher household SAR estimates compared with the earliest reports. More transmissible variants and vaccines may be associated with further changes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , Family Characteristics , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/etiology , Child , Child, Preschool , China/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Incidence , Infant , Male , Risk Factors , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
13.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 21(5): 617-628, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1033382

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Wuhan was the first epicentre of COVID-19 in the world, accounting for 80% of cases in China during the first wave. We aimed to assess household transmissibility of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and risk factors associated with infectivity and susceptibility to infection in Wuhan. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included the households of all laboratory-confirmed or clinically confirmed COVID-19 cases and laboratory-confirmed asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections identified by the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention between Dec 2, 2019, and April 18, 2020. We defined households as groups of family members and close relatives who did not necessarily live at the same address and considered households that shared common contacts as epidemiologically linked. We used a statistical transmission model to estimate household secondary attack rates and to quantify risk factors associated with infectivity and susceptibility to infection, accounting for individual-level exposure history. We assessed how intervention policies affected the household reproductive number, defined as the mean number of household contacts a case can infect. FINDINGS: 27 101 households with 29 578 primary cases and 57 581 household contacts were identified. The secondary attack rate estimated with the transmission model was 15·6% (95% CI 15·2-16·0), assuming a mean incubation period of 5 days and a maximum infectious period of 22 days. Individuals aged 60 years or older were at a higher risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 than all other age groups. Infants aged 0-1 years were significantly more likely to be infected than children aged 2-5 years (odds ratio [OR] 2·20, 95% CI 1·40-3·44) and children aged 6-12 years (1·53, 1·01-2·34). Given the same exposure time, children and adolescents younger than 20 years of age were more likely to infect others than were adults aged 60 years or older (1·58, 1·28-1·95). Asymptomatic individuals were much less likely to infect others than were symptomatic cases (0·21, 0·14-0·31). Symptomatic cases were more likely to infect others before symptom onset than after (1·42, 1·30-1·55). After mass isolation of cases, quarantine of household contacts, and restriction of movement policies were implemented, household reproductive numbers declined by 52% among primary cases (from 0·25 [95% CI 0·24-0·26] to 0·12 [0·10-0·13]) and by 63% among secondary cases (from 0·17 [0·16-0·18] to 0·063 [0·057-0·070]). INTERPRETATION: Within households, children and adolescents were less susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection but were more infectious than older individuals. Presymptomatic cases were more infectious and individuals with asymptomatic infection less infectious than symptomatic cases. These findings have implications for devising interventions for blocking household transmission of SARS-CoV-2, such as timely vaccination of eligible children once resources become available. FUNDING: National Natural Science Foundation of China, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, US National Institutes of Health, and US National Science Foundation.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19/etiology , Child , Child, Preschool , China/epidemiology , Disease Susceptibility , Family Characteristics , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Young Adult
14.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(12): e2031756, 2020 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-973285

ABSTRACT

Importance: Crowded indoor environments, such as households, are high-risk settings for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Objectives: To examine evidence for household transmission of SARS-CoV-2, disaggregated by several covariates, and to compare it with other coronaviruses. Data Source: PubMed, searched through October 19, 2020. Search terms included SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 with secondary attack rate, household, close contacts, contact transmission, contact attack rate, or family transmission. Study Selection: All articles with original data for estimating household secondary attack rate were included. Case reports focusing on individual households and studies of close contacts that did not report secondary attack rates for household members were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-analyses were done using a restricted maximum-likelihood estimator model to yield a point estimate and 95% CI for secondary attack rate for each subgroup analyzed, with a random effect for each study. To make comparisons across exposure types, study was treated as a random effect, and exposure type was a fixed moderator. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. Main Outcomes and Measures: Secondary attack rate for SARS-CoV-2, disaggregated by covariates (ie, household or family contact, index case symptom status, adult or child contacts, contact sex, relationship to index case, adult or child index cases, index case sex, number of contacts in household) and for other coronaviruses. Results: A total of 54 relevant studies with 77 758 participants reporting household secondary transmission were identified. Estimated household secondary attack rate was 16.6% (95% CI, 14.0%-19.3%), higher than secondary attack rates for SARS-CoV (7.5%; 95% CI, 4.8%-10.7%) and MERS-CoV (4.7%; 95% CI, 0.9%-10.7%). Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%), to adult contacts (28.3%; 95% CI, 20.2%-37.1%) than to child contacts (16.8%; 95% CI, 12.3%-21.7%), to spouses (37.8%; 95% CI, 25.8%-50.5%) than to other family contacts (17.8%; 95% CI, 11.7%-24.8%), and in households with 1 contact (41.5%; 95% CI, 31.7%-51.7%) than in households with 3 or more contacts (22.8%; 95% CI, 13.6%-33.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that given that individuals with suspected or confirmed infections are being referred to isolate at home, households will continue to be a significant venue for transmission of SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Family , Family Characteristics , Female , Humans , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
15.
Vaccine ; 39(2): 447-456, 2021 01 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-956592

ABSTRACT

The current pediatric vaccination program in England and Wales administers Live-Attenuated Influenza Vaccine (LAIV) to children ages 2-16 years old. Annual administration of LAIV to this age group is costly and poses substantial logistical issues. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of prioritizing vaccination to age groups within the 2-16 year old age range to mitigate the operational and resource challenges of the current strategy. We performed economic evaluations comparing the influenza vaccination program from 1995-2013 to seven alternative strategies targeted at low risk individuals along the school age divisions Preschool (2-4 years old), Primary school (5-11 years old), and Secondary school (12-16 years old). These extensions are evaluated incrementally on the status quo scenario (vaccinating subgroups at high risk of influenza-related complications and individuals 65+ years old). Impact of vaccination was assessed using a transmission model from a previously published study and updated with new data. At all levels of coverage, all strategies had a 100% probability of being cost-effective at the current National Health Service threshold, £20,000/QALY gained. The incremental analysis demonstrated vaccinating Primary School children was the most cost-efficient strategy compared incrementally against others with an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio of £639 spent per QALY gained (Net Benefit: 404 M£ [155, 795]). When coverage was varied between 30%, 55%, and 70% strategies which included Primary school children had a higher probability of being cost-effective at lower willingness-to-pay levels. Although children were the vaccine target the majority of QALY gains occurred in the 25-44 years old and 65+ age groups. Influenza strain A/H3N2 incurred the greatest costs and QALYs lost regardless of which strategy was used. Improvement could be made to the current LAIV pediatric vaccination strategy by eliminating vaccination of 2-4 year olds and focusing on school-based delivery to Primary and Secondary school children in tandem.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , Cost-Benefit Analysis , England , Humans , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Schools , State Medicine , Vaccination , Wales
16.
Vaccine ; 38(46): 7213-7216, 2020 10 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-759423

ABSTRACT

To rapidly evaluate the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccine candidates, prioritizing vaccine trial sites in areas with high expected disease incidence can speed endpoint accrual and shorten trial duration. Mathematical and statistical forecast models can inform the process of site selection, integrating available data sources and facilitating comparisons across locations. We recommend the use of ensemble forecast modeling - combining projections from independent modeling groups - to guide investigators identifying suitable sites for COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials. We describe an appropriate structure for this process, including minimum requirements, suggested output, and a user-friendly tool for displaying results. Importantly, we advise that this process be repeated regularly throughout the trial, to inform decisions about enrolling new participants at existing sites with waning incidence versus adding entirely new sites. These types of data-driven models can support the implementation of flexible efficacy trials tailored to the outbreak setting.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/immunology , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Viral Vaccines/adverse effects , Viral Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Coronavirus Infections/immunology , Forecasting/methods , Humans , Models, Theoretical , SARS-CoV-2
17.
Nat Hum Behav ; 4(9): 964-971, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-695170

ABSTRACT

While severe social-distancing measures have proven effective in slowing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, second-wave scenarios are likely to emerge as restrictions are lifted. Here we integrate anonymized, geolocalized mobility data with census and demographic data to build a detailed agent-based model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in the Boston metropolitan area. We find that a period of strict social distancing followed by a robust level of testing, contact-tracing and household quarantine could keep the disease within the capacity of the healthcare system while enabling the reopening of economic activities. Our results show that a response system based on enhanced testing and contact tracing can have a major role in relaxing social-distancing interventions in the absence of herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Contact Tracing/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Infection Control/statistics & numerical data , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Boston/epidemiology , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Family Characteristics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Models, Statistical , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
18.
medRxiv ; 2020 Aug 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-663330

ABSTRACT

We use a global metapopulation transmission model to study the establishment of sustained and undetected community transmission of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. The model is calibrated on international case importations from mainland China and takes into account travel restrictions to and from international destinations. We estimate widespread community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in February, 2020. Modeling results indicate international travel as the key driver of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 in the West and East Coast metropolitan areas that could have been seeded as early as late-December, 2019. For most of the continental states the largest contribution of imported infections arrived through domestic travel flows.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL