SARS-CoV-2 cross-sectional seroprevalence study among public school staff in Metro Vancouver after the first Omicron wave in British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school workers within the Greater Vancouver area, British Columbia, Canada, after the first Omicron wave. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study by online questionnaire, with blood serology testing. SETTING: Three main school districts (Vancouver, Richmond and Delta) in the Vancouver metropolitan area. PARTICIPANTS: Active school staff enrolled from January to April 2022, with serology testing between 27 January and 8 April 2022. Seroprevalence estimates were compared with data obtained from Canadian blood donors weighted over the same sampling period, age, sex and postal code distribution. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody testing results adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity, and regional variation across school districts using Bayesian models. RESULTS: Of 1850 school staff enrolled, 65.8% (1214/1845) reported close contact with a COVID-19 case outside the household. Of those close contacts, 51.5% (625/1214) were a student and 54.9% (666/1214) were a coworker. Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 positive testing by self-reported nucleic acid or rapid antigen testing since the beginning of the pandemic was 15.8% (291/1845). In a representative sample of 1620 school staff who completed serology testing (87.6%), the adjusted seroprevalence was 26.5% (95% CrI 23.9% to 29.3%), compared with 32.4% (95% CrI 30.6% to 34.5%) among 7164 blood donors. CONCLUSION: Despite frequent COVID-19 exposures reported, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among school staff in this setting remained no greater than the community reference group. Results are consistent with the premise that many infections were acquired outside the school setting, even with Omicron.

Association between close interpersonal contact and vaccine hesitancy: Findings from a population-based survey in Canada

Background Vaccine hesitancy threatens efforts to bring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to an end. Given that social or interpersonal contact is an important driver for COVID-19 transmission, understanding the relationship between contact rates and vaccine hesitancy may help identify appropriate targets for strategic intervention. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between interpersonal contact and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among a sample of unvaccinated adults in the Canadian province of British Columbia (BC). Methods Unvaccinated individuals participating in the BC COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns Survey (BC-Mix) were asked to indicate their level of agreement to the statement, “I plan to get the COVID-19 vaccine.” Multivariable multinomial logistic regression was used to assess the association between self-reported interpersonal contact and vaccine hesitancy, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, educational attainment, occupation, household size and region of residence. All analyses incorporated survey sampling weights based on age, sex, geography, and ethnicity. Results Results were based on survey responses collected between March 8, 2021 and December 6, 2021, by a total of 4,515 adults aged 18 years and older. Overall, 56.7% of respondents reported that they were willing to get the COVID-19 vaccine, 27.0% were unwilling and 16.3% were undecided. We found a dose-response association between interpersonal contact and vaccine hesitancy. Compared to individuals in the lowest quartile (least contact), those in the fourth quartile (highest contact), third quartile and second quartile groups were more likely to be vaccine hesitant, with adjusted odd ratios (aORs) of 2.85 (95% CI: 2.02, 4.00), 1.91(95% CI: 1.38, 2.64), 1.78 (95% CI: 1.13, 2.82), respectively. Conclusion Study findings show that among unvaccinated people in BC, vaccine hesitancy is greater among those who have high contact rates, and hence potentially at higher risk of acquiring and transmitting infection. This may also impact future uptake of booster doses.

Cohort profile: the British Columbia COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns Survey (BC-Mix).

PURPOSE: Several non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as physical distancing, handwashing, self-isolation, and school and business closures, were implemented in British Columbia (BC) following the first laboratory-confirmed case of COVID-19 on 26 January 2020, to minimise in-person contacts that could spread infections. The BC COVID-19 Population Mixing Patterns Survey (BC-Mix) was established as a surveillance system to measure behaviour and contact patterns in BC over time to inform the timing of the easing/re-imposition of control measures. In this paper, we describe the BC-Mix survey design and the demographic characteristics of respondents. PARTICIPANTS: The ongoing repeated online survey was launched in September 2020. Participants are mainly recruited through social media platforms (including Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp). A follow-up survey is sent to participants 2-4 weeks after completing the baseline survey. Survey responses are weighted to BC's population by age, sex, geography and ethnicity to obtain generalisable estimates. Additional indices such as the Material and Social Deprivation Index, residential instability, economic dependency, and others are generated using census and location data. FINDINGS TO DATE: As of 26 July 2021, over 61 000 baseline survey responses were received of which 41 375 were eligible for analysis. Of the eligible participants, about 60% consented to follow-up and about 27% provided their personal health numbers for linkage with healthcare databases. Approximately 83.5% of respondents were female, 58.7% were 55 years or older, 87.5% identified as white and 45.9% had at least a university degree. After weighting, approximately 50% were female, 39% were 55 years or older, 65% identified as white and 50% had at least a university degree. FUTURE PLANS: Multiple papers describing contact patterns, physical distancing measures, regular handwashing and facemask wearing, modelling looking at impact of physical distancing measures and vaccine acceptance, hesitancy and uptake are either in progress or have been published.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy: a Canadian National Vaccine Safety (CANVAS) network cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pregnant individuals have been receiving COVID-19 vaccines following pre-authorisation clinical trials in non-pregnant people. This study aimed to determine the frequency and nature of significant health events among pregnant females after COVID-19 vaccination, compared with unvaccinated pregnant controls and vaccinated non-pregnant individuals. METHODS: We did an observational cohort study, set in seven Canadian provinces and territories including Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Yukon, and Prince Edward Island. Eligibility criteria for vaccinated individuals were a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine within the previous 7 days; an active email address and telephone number; ability to communicate in English or French; and residence in the aforementioned provinces or territories. Study participants were pregnant and non-pregnant females aged 15-49 years. Individuals were able to participate as controls if they were unvaccinated and fulfilled the other criteria. Data were collected primarily by self-reported survey after both vaccine doses, with telephone follow-up for those reporting any medically attended event. Participants reported significant health events (new or worsening of a health event sufficient to cause work or school absenteeism, medical consultation, or prevent daily activities) occurring within 7 days of vaccination or within the past 7 days for unvaccinated individuals. We employed multivariable logistic regression to examine significant health events associated with mRNA vaccines, adjusting for age group, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, and trimester, as appropriate. FINDINGS: As of Nov 4, 2021, 191 360 women aged 15-49 years with known pregnancy status had completed the first vaccine dose survey and 94 937 had completed the second dose survey. 180 388 received one dose and 94 262 received a second dose of an mRNA vaccine, with 5597 pregnant participants receiving dose one and 3108 receiving dose two, and 174 765 non-pregnant participants receiving dose one and 91 131 receiving dose two. Of 6179 included unvaccinated control participants, 339 were pregnant and 5840 were not pregnant. Overall, 226 (4·0%) of 5597 vaccinated pregnant females reported a significant health event after dose one of an mRNA vaccine, and 227 (7·3%) of 3108 after dose two, compared with 11 (3·2%) of 339 pregnant unvaccinated females. Pregnant vaccinated females had an increased odds of a significant health event within 7 days of the vaccine after dose two of mRNA-1273 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4·4 [95% CI 2·4-8·3]) compared with pregnant unvaccinated controls within the past 7 days, but not after dose one of mRNA-1273 or any dose of BNT162b2. Pregnant vaccinated females had decreased odds of a significant health event compared with non-pregnant vaccinated females after both dose one (aOR 0·63 [95% CI 0·55-0·72]) and dose two (aOR 0·62 [0·54-0·71]) of any mRNA vaccination. There were no significant differences in any analyses when restricted to events which led to medical attention. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have a good safety profile in pregnancy. These data can be used to appropriately inform pregnant people regarding reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy, and should be considered alongside effectiveness and immunogenicity data to make appropriate recommendations about best use of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Public Health Agency of Canada.

Social Contacts and Transmission of COVID-19 in British Columbia, Canada.

Background: Close-contact rates are thought to be a driving force behind the transmission of many infectious respiratory diseases. Yet, contact rates and their relation to transmission and the impact of control measures, are seldom quantified. We quantify the response of contact rates, reported cases and transmission of COVID-19, to public health contact-restriction orders, and examine the associations among these three variables in the province of British Columbia, Canada. Methods: We derived time series data for contact rates, daily cases and transmission of COVID-19 from a social contacts survey, reported case counts and by fitting a transmission model to reported cases, respectively. We used segmented regression to investigate impacts of public health orders; Pearson correlation to determine associations between contact rates and transmission; and vector autoregressive modeling to quantify lagged associations between contacts rates, daily cases, and transmission. Results: Declines in contact rates and transmission occurred concurrently with the announcement of public health orders, whereas declines in cases showed a reporting delay of about 2 weeks. Contact rates were a significant driver of COVID-19 and explained roughly 19 and 20% of the variation in new cases and transmission, respectively. Interestingly, increases in COVID-19 transmission and cases were followed by reduced contact rates: overall, daily cases explained about 10% of the variation in subsequent contact rates. Conclusion: We showed that close-contact rates were a significant time-series driver of transmission and ultimately of reported cases of COVID-19 in British Columbia, Canada and that they varied in response to public health orders. Our results also suggest possible behavioral feedback, by which increased reported cases lead to reduced subsequent contact rates. Our findings help to explain and validate the commonly assumed, but rarely measured, response of close contact rates to public health guidelines and their impact on the dynamics of infectious diseases.

Age-Associated Seroprevalence of Coronavirus Antibodies: Population-Based Serosurveys in 2013 and 2020, British Columbia, Canada.

Background: Older adults have been disproportionately affected during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, including higher risk of severe disease and long-COVID. Prior exposure to endemic human coronaviruses (HCoV) may modulate the response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and contribute to age-related observations. We hypothesized that cross-reactive antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are associated with antibodies to HCoV and that both increase with age. Methods: To assess SARS-CoV-2 unexposed individuals, we drew upon archived anonymized residual sero-surveys conducted in British Columbia (BC), Canada, including before SARS-CoV-2 emergence (May, 2013) and before widespread community circulation in BC (May, 2020). Fifty sera, sex-balanced per ten-year age band, were sought among individuals ≤10 to ≥80 years old, supplemented as indicated by sera from March and September 2020. Sera were tested on the Meso Scale Diagnostics (MSD) electrochemiluminescent multiplex immunoassay to quantify IgG antibody against the Spike proteins of HCoV, including alpha (HCoV-229E, HCoV-NL63) and beta (HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-OC43) viruses, and the 2003 epidemic beta coronavirus, SARS-CoV-1. Cross-reactive antibodies to Spike, Nucleocapsid, and the Receptor Binding Domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 were similarly measured, with SARS-CoV-2 sero-positivity overall defined by positivity on ≥2 targets. Results: Samples included 407 sera from 2013, of which 17 were children ≤10 years. The 2020 samples included 488 sera, of which 88 were children ≤10 years. Anti-Spike antibodies to all four endemic HCoV were acquired by 10 years of age. There were 20/407 (5%) sera in 2013 and 8/488 (2%) in 2020 that were considered sero-positive for SARS-CoV-2 based on MSD testing. Of note, antibody to the single SARS-CoV-2 RBD target was detected in 329/407 (81%) of 2013 sera and 91/488 (19%) of 2020 sera. Among the SARS-CoV-2 overall sero-negative population, age was correlated with anti-HCoV antibody levels and these, notably 229E and HKU1, were correlated with cross-reactive anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD titres. SARS-CoV-2 overall sero-positive individuals showed higher titres to HCoV more generally. Conclusion: Most people have an HCoV priming exposure by 10 years of age and IgG levels are stable thereafter. Anti-HCoV antibodies can cross-react with SARS-CoV-2 epitopes. These immunological interactions warrant further investigation with respect to their implications for COVID-19 clinical outcomes.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study.

Due to the large number of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many were treated outside the traditional walls of the intensive care unit (ICU), and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium World Health Organization COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes or vasopressors. A logistic generalised additive model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted or not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median (interquartile range (IQR), 67 (55-78) years), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 (5-19) days and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those who were cared for outside the ICU (12 (6-23) days versus 8 (4-15) days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% (5797 out of 18 831) versus 39.0% (7532 out of 19 295), p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.65-0.75; p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside an ICU.

Clinical characteristics, risk factors and outcomes in patients with severe COVID-19 registered in the ISARIC WHO clinical characterisation protocol: a prospective, multinational, multicentre, observational study

Due to the large number of patients with severe COVID-19, many were treated outside of the traditional walls of the ICU, and in many cases, by personnel who were not trained in critical care. The clinical characteristics and the relative impact of caring for severe COVID-19 patients outside of the ICU is unknown. This was a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC WHO COVID-19 platform. Severe COVID-19 patients were identified as those admitted to an ICU and/or those treated with one of the following treatments: invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation, high-flow nasal cannula, inotropes, and vasopressors. A logistic Generalised Additive Model was used to compare clinical outcomes among patients admitted and not to the ICU. A total of 40 440 patients from 43 countries and six continents were included in this analysis. Severe COVID-19 patients were frequently male (62.9%), older adults (median [IQR], 67 years [55, 78]), and with at least one comorbidity (63.2%). The overall median (IQR) length of hospital stay was 10 days (5–19) and was longer in patients admitted to an ICU than in those that were cared for outside of ICU (12 [6–23] versus 8 [4–15] days, p<0.0001). The 28-day fatality ratio was lower in ICU-admitted patients (30.7% [5797/18831] versus 39.0% [7532/19295], p<0.0001). Patients admitted to an ICU had a significantly lower probability of death than those who were not (adjusted OR:0.70, 95%CI: 0.65-0.75, p<0.0001). Patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an ICU had significantly lower 28-day fatality ratio than those cared for outside of an ICU.

A majority of uninfected adults show preexisting antibody reactivity against SARS-CoV-2.

Preexisting cross-reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 occurs in the absence of prior viral exposure. However, this has been difficult to quantify at the population level due to a lack of reliably defined seroreactivity thresholds. Using an orthogonal antibody testing approach, we estimated that about 0.6% of nontriaged adults from the greater Vancouver, Canada, area between May 17 and June 19, 2020, showed clear evidence of a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, after adjusting for false-positive and false-negative test results. Using a highly sensitive multiplex assay and positive/negative thresholds established in infants in whom maternal antibodies have waned, we determined that more than 90% of uninfected adults showed antibody reactivity against the spike protein, receptor-binding domain (RBD), N-terminal domain (NTD), or the nucleocapsid (N) protein from SARS-CoV-2. This seroreactivity was evenly distributed across age and sex, correlated with circulating coronaviruses' reactivity, and was partially outcompeted by soluble circulating coronaviruses' spike. Using a custom SARS-CoV-2 peptide mapping array, we found that this antibody reactivity broadly mapped to spike and to conserved nonstructural viral proteins. We conclude that most adults display preexisting antibody cross-reactivity against SARS-CoV-2, which further supports investigation of how this may impact the clinical severity of COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 vaccine responses.

Evaluation of telephone and virtual visits for routine pediatric diabetes care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIMS: To evaluate pediatric type 1 diabetes telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a focus on assessing the usability of these visits and gathering patient perspectives. METHODS: An online survey, which included a validated telehealth usability questionnaire, was offered via email to families with a telephone or virtual visit since the COVID-19-related cancellation of routine in-person care. Survey data was linked with the British Columbia (BC) Clinical Diabetes Registry. Outcomes between groups were assessed using Welch's t-test. Associations with type of visit as well as with desire to return to in-person care were assessed with logistic regression models. RESULTS: The response rate was 47%. Of 141 survey respondents, 87 had clinical data available in the BC Clinical Diabetes Registry, and thus were included in our analysis. Overall, telephone and virtual visits were rated highly for usability. Telephone visits were easier to learn to use, and simpler to understand; however, telephone and virtual visits were similar across multiple areas. No factors associated with choosing one type of visit over the other, or with desire to return to in-person care, could be identified. 72% of participants want future telehealth care; however, some would like all future care to be in-person. CONCLUSIONS: Telephone and virtual visits had impressive usability. Many families want telehealth to play a significant part in their future care.