Estimating distribution of length of stay in a multi-state model conditional on the pathway, with an application to patients hospitalised with Covid-19.

Multi-state models are used to describe how individuals transition through different states over time. The distribution of the time spent in different states, referred to as 'length of stay', is often of interest. Methods for estimating expected length of stay in a given state are well established. The focus of this paper is on the distribution of the time spent in different states conditional on the complete pathway taken through the states, which we call 'conditional length of stay'. This work is motivated by questions about length of stay in hospital wards and intensive care units among patients hospitalised due to Covid-19. Conditional length of stay estimates are useful as a way of summarising individuals' transitions through the multi-state model, and also as inputs to mathematical models used in planning hospital capacity requirements. We describe non-parametric methods for estimating conditional length of stay distributions in a multi-state model in the presence of censoring, including conditional expected length of stay (CELOS). Methods are described for an illness-death model and then for the more complex motivating example. The methods are assessed using a simulation study and shown to give unbiased estimates of CELOS, whereas naive estimates of CELOS based on empirical averages are biased in the presence of censoring. The methods are applied to estimate conditional length of stay distributions for individuals hospitalised due to Covid-19 in the UK, using data on 42,980 individuals hospitalised from March to July 2020 from the COVID19 Clinical Information Network.

On the use of the reproduction number for SARS-CoV-2: Estimation, misinterpretations and relationships with other ecological measures.

The basic reproduction number, R 0, and its real-time analogue, Rt , are summary measures that reflect the ability of an infectious disease to spread through a population. Estimation methods for Rt  have a long history, have been widely developed and are now enhanced by application to the COVID-19 pandemic. While retrospective analyses of Rt have provided insight into epidemic dynamics and the effects of control strategies in prior outbreaks, misconceptions around the interpretation of Rt have arisen with broader recognition and near real-time monitoring of this parameter alongside reported case data during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we discuss some widespread misunderstandings regarding the use of Rt  as a barometer for population risk and its related use as an 'on/off' switch for policy decisions regarding relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions. Computation of Rt  from downstream data (e.g. hospitalizations) when infection counts are unreliable exacerbates lags between when transmission happens and when events are recorded. We also discuss analyses that have shown various relationships between Rt  and measures of mobility, vaccination coverage and a test-trace-isolation intervention in different settings.

Prevention of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) by mRNA-Based Vaccines Within the General Population of California.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness under real-world conditions, and understanding of barriers to uptake, are necessary to inform vaccine rollout. METHODS: We enrolled cases (testing positive) and controls (testing negative) from among the population whose SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostic test results from 24 February to 29 April 2021 were reported to the California Department of Public Health. Participants were matched on age, sex, and geographic region. We assessed participants' self-reported history of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine receipt (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273). Participants were considered fully vaccinated 2 weeks after second dose receipt. Among unvaccinated participants, we assessed willingness to receive vaccination. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) via the matched odds ratio of prior vaccination, comparing cases with controls. RESULTS: We enrolled 1023 eligible participants aged ≥18 years. Among 525 cases, 71 (13.5%) received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; 20 (3.8%) were fully vaccinated with either product. Among 498 controls, 185 (37.1%) received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273; 86 (16.3%) were fully vaccinated with either product. Two weeks after second dose receipt, VE was 87.0% (95% confidence interval: 68.6-94.6%) and 86.2% (68.4-93.9%) for BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, respectively. Fully vaccinated participants receiving either product experienced 91.3% (79.3-96.3%) and 68.3% (27.9-85.7%) VE against symptomatic and asymptomatic infection, respectively. Among unvaccinated participants, 42.4% (159/375) residing in rural regions and 23.8% (67/281) residing in urban regions reported hesitancy to receive COVID-19 vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Authorized mRNA-based vaccines are effective at reducing documented SARS-CoV-2 infections within the general population of California. Vaccine hesitancy presents a barrier to reaching coverage levels needed for herd immunity.

Risk Factors Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Farmworkers in Monterey County, California.

Importance: Essential workers in agriculture and food production have been severely affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To identify risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among farmworkers in California. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study invited farmworkers in California's Salinas Valley (Monterey County) receiving transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection at federally qualified community clinics and community sites to participate. Individuals were eligible if they were not pregnant, were 18 years or older, had conducted farmwork since the pandemic started, and were proficient in English or Spanish. Survey data were collected and SARS-CoV-2 tests were conducted among participants from July 16 to November 30, 2020. Exposures: Sociodemographic, household, community, and workplace characteristics. Main Outcomes and Measures: TMA- and immunoglobulin G (IgG)-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: A total of 1107 farmworkers (581 [52.5%] women; mean [SD] age, 39.7 [12.6] years) were included in these analyses. Most participants were born in Mexico (922 [83.3%]), were married or living with a partner (697 [63.0%]), and worked in the fields (825 [74.5%]). Overall, 118 of 911 (13.0%) had a positive result on their TMA test for SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas 201 of 1058 (19.0%) had antibody evidence of infection. In multivariable analyses accounting for recruitment venue and enrollment period, the incidence of TMA-positive SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher among those with lower than primary school-level education (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.32; 95% CI, 0.99-1.76; non-statistically significant finding), who spoke an Indigenous language at home (aRR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.97-1.73; non-statistically significant finding), who worked in the fields (aRR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.03-2.50), and who were exposed to a known or suspected COVID-19 case at home (aRR, 2.98; 95% CI, 2.06-4.32) or in the workplace (aRR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.18-2.14). Positive results on IgG tests for SARS-CoV-2 infection were more common among those who lived in crowded housing (aRR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.98-1.53; non-statistically significant finding), with children aged 5 years or younger (aRR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.11-1.76), with unrelated roommates (aRR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.19-1.64), and with an individual with known or suspected COVID-19 (aRR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.13-2.24). The risk of IgG positivity was also higher among those with body mass index of 30 or greater (aRR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.01-2.70) or diabetes (aRR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.98-1.75; non-statistically significant finding). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of farmworkers in California, both residential and workplace exposures were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Urgent distribution of COVID-19 vaccines and intervention on modifiable risk factors are warranted given this population's increased risk of infection and the essential nature of their work.

Efficacy of Wolbachia-Infected Mosquito Deployments for the Control of Dengue.

BACKGROUND: Aedes aegypti mosquitoes infected with the wMel strain of Wolbachia pipientis are less susceptible than wild-type A. aegypti to dengue virus infection. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial involving releases of wMel-infected A. aegypti mosquitoes for the control of dengue in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. We randomly assigned 12 geographic clusters to receive deployments of wMel-infected A. aegypti (intervention clusters) and 12 clusters to receive no deployments (control clusters). All clusters practiced local mosquito-control measures as usual. A test-negative design was used to assess the efficacy of the intervention. Patients with acute undifferentiated fever who presented to local primary care clinics and were 3 to 45 years of age were recruited. Laboratory testing was used to identify participants who had virologically confirmed dengue (VCD) and those who were test-negative controls. The primary end point was symptomatic VCD of any severity caused by any dengue virus serotype. RESULTS: After successful introgression of wMel into the intervention clusters, 8144 participants were enrolled; 3721 lived in intervention clusters, and 4423 lived in control clusters. In the intention-to-treat analysis, VCD occurred in 67 of 2905 participants (2.3%) in the intervention clusters and in 318 of 3401 (9.4%) in the control clusters (aggregate odds ratio for VCD, 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15 to 0.35; P = 0.004). The protective efficacy of the intervention was 77.1% (95% CI, 65.3 to 84.9) and was similar against the four dengue virus serotypes. The incidence of hospitalization for VCD was lower among participants who lived in intervention clusters (13 of 2905 participants [0.4%]) than among those who lived in control clusters (102 of 3401 [3.0%]) (protective efficacy, 86.2%; 95% CI, 66.2 to 94.3). CONCLUSIONS: Introgression of wMel into A. aegypti populations was effective in reducing the incidence of symptomatic dengue and resulted in fewer hospitalizations for dengue among the participants. (Funded by the Tahija Foundation and others; AWED ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03055585; Indonesia Registry number, INA-A7OB6TW.).

Theoretical Framework for Retrospective Studies of the Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines.

Observational studies of the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent COVID-19 are needed to inform real-world use. Such studies are now underway amid the ongoing rollout of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines globally. Although traditional case-control and test-negative design studies feature prominently among strategies used to assess vaccine effectiveness, such studies may encounter important threats to validity. Here, we review the theoretical basis for estimation of vaccine direct effects under traditional case-control and test-negative design frameworks, addressing specific natural history parameters of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 relevant to these designs. Bias may be introduced by misclassification of cases and controls, particularly when clinical case criteria include common, nonspecific indicators of COVID-19. When using diagnostic assays with high analytical sensitivity for SARS-CoV-2 detection, individuals testing positive may be counted as cases even if their symptoms are due to other causes. The traditional case-control design may be particularly prone to confounding due to associations of vaccination with healthcare-seeking behavior or risk of infection. The test-negative design reduces but may not eliminate this confounding, for instance, if individuals who receive vaccination seek care or testing for less-severe illness. These circumstances indicate the two study designs cannot be applied naively to datasets gathered through public health surveillance or administrative sources. We suggest practical strategies to reduce bias in vaccine effectiveness estimates at the study design and analysis stages.

Increased mortality in community-tested cases of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7.

SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, a variant that was first detected in the UK in September 20201, has spread to multiple countries worldwide. Several studies have established that B.1.1.7 is more transmissible than pre-existing variants, but have not identified whether it leads to any change in disease severity2. Here we analyse a dataset that links 2,245,263 positive SARS-CoV-2 community tests and 17,452 deaths associated with COVID-19 in England from 1 November 2020 to 14 February 2021. For 1,146,534 (51%) of these tests, the presence or absence of B.1.1.7 can be identified because mutations in this lineage prevent PCR amplification of the spike (S) gene target (known as S gene target failure (SGTF)1). On the basis of 4,945 deaths with known SGTF status, we estimate that the hazard of death associated with SGTF is 55% (95% confidence interval, 39-72%) higher than in cases without SGTF after adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, residence in a care home, the local authority of residence and test date. This corresponds to the absolute risk of death for a 55-69-year-old man increasing from 0.6% to 0.9% (95% confidence interval, 0.8-1.0%) within 28 days of a positive test in the community. Correcting for misclassification of SGTF and missingness in SGTF status, we estimate that the hazard of death associated with B.1.1.7 is 61% (42-82%) higher than with pre-existing variants. Our analysis suggests that B.1.1.7 is not only more transmissible than pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 variants, but may also cause more severe illness.

Prevalence and Clinical Profile of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection among Farmworkers, California, USA, June-November 2020.

During the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, farmworkers in the United States are considered essential personnel and continue in-person work. We conducted prospective surveillance for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and antibody prevalence among farmworkers in Salinas Valley, California, during June 15-November 30, 2020. We observed 22.1% (1,514/6,864) positivity for SARS-CoV-2 infection among farmworkers compared with 17.2% (1,255/7,305) among other adults from the same communities (risk ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.20-1.37). In a nested study enrolling 1,115 farmworkers, prevalence of current infection was 27.7% among farmworkers reporting >1 COVID-19 symptom and 7.2% among farmworkers without symptoms (adjusted odds ratio 4.16, 95% CI 2.85-6.06). Prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies increased from 10.5% (95% CI 6.0%-18.4%) during July 16-August 31 to 21.2% (95% CI 16.6%-27.4%) during November 1-30. High SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence among farmworkers underscores the need for vaccination and other preventive interventions.

Broad cross-national public support for accelerated COVID-19 vaccine trial designs.

A vaccine for COVID-19 is urgently needed. Several vaccine trial designs may significantly accelerate vaccine testing and approval, but also increase risks to human subjects. Concerns about whether the public would see such designs as ethical represent an important roadblock to their implementation; accordingly, both the World Health Organization and numerous scholars have called for consulting the public regarding them. We answered these calls by conducting a cross-national survey (n = 5920) in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The survey explained key differences between traditional vaccine trials and two accelerated designs: a challenge trial or a trial integrating a Phase II safety and immunogenicity trial into a larger Phase III efficacy trial. Respondents' answers to comprehension questions indicate that they largely understood the key differences and ethical trade-offs between the designs from our descriptions. We asked respondents whether they would prefer scientists to conduct traditional trials or one of these two accelerated designs. We found broad majorities prefer for scientists to conduct challenge trials (75%) and integrated trials (63%) over standard trials. Even as respondents acknowledged the risks, they perceived both accelerated trials as similarly ethical to standard trial designs. This high support is consistent across every geography and demographic subgroup we examined, including vulnerable populations. These findings may help assuage some of the concerns surrounding accelerated designs.

Incidence, clinical outcomes, and transmission dynamics of severe coronavirus disease 2019 in California and Washington: prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the epidemiology and burden of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) during the first epidemic wave on the west coast of the United States. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente integrated healthcare delivery systems serving populations in northern California, southern California, and Washington state. PARTICIPANTS: 1840 people with a first acute hospital admission for confirmed covid-19 by 22 April 2020, among 9 596 321 healthcare plan enrollees. Analyses of hospital length of stay and clinical outcomes included 1328 people admitted by 9 April 2020 (534 in northern California, 711 in southern California, and 83 in Washington). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cumulative incidence of first acute hospital admission for confirmed covid-19, and subsequent probabilities of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) and mortality, as well as duration of hospital stay and ICU stay. The effective reproduction number (RE ) describing transmission dynamics was estimated for each region. RESULTS: As of 22 April 2020, cumulative incidences of a first acute hospital admission for covid-19 were 15.6 per 100 000 cohort members in northern California, 23.3 per 100 000 in southern California, and 14.7 per 100 000 in Washington. Accounting for censoring of incomplete hospital stays among those admitted by 9 April 2020, the estimated median duration of stay among survivors was 9.3 days (with 95% staying 0.8 to 32.9 days) and among non-survivors was 12.7 days (1.6 to 37.7 days). The censoring adjusted probability of ICU admission for male patients was 48.5% (95% confidence interval 41.8% to 56.3%) and for female patients was 32.0% (26.6% to 38.4%). For patients requiring critical care, the median duration of ICU stay was 10.6 days (with 95% staying 1.3 to 30.8 days). The censoring adjusted case fatality ratio was 23.5% (95% confidence interval 19.6% to 28.2%) among male inpatients and 14.9% (11.8% to 18.6%) among female inpatients; mortality risk increased with age for both male and female patients. Reductions in RE were identified over the study period within each region. CONCLUSIONS: Among residents of California and Washington state enrolled in Kaiser Permanente healthcare plans who were admitted to hospital with covid-19, the probabilities of ICU admission, of long hospital stay, and of mortality were identified to be high. Incidence rates of new hospital admissions have stabilized or declined in conjunction with implementation of social distancing interventions.