Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 26
Filter
1.
Infection ; 2023 Jun 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20235264

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The study evaluates the effects on sero-immunity, health status and quality of life of children and adolescents after the upsurge of the Omicron variant in Germany. METHODS: This multicenter cross-sectional study (IMMUNEBRIDGE Kids) was conducted within the German Network University Medicine (NUM) from July to October 2022. SARS-CoV-2- antibodies were measured and data on SARS-CoV-2 infections, vaccinations, health and socioeconomic factors as well as caregiver-reported evaluation on their children's health and psychological status were assessed. RESULTS: 497 children aged 2-17 years were included. Three groups were analyzed: 183 pre-schoolchildren aged 2-4 years, 176 schoolchildren aged 5-11 years and 138 adolescents aged 12-18 years. Positive antibodies against the S- or N-antigen of SARS-CoV-2 were detected in 86.5% of all participants (70.0% [128/183] of pre-schoolchildren, 94.3% of schoolchildren [166/176] and 98.6% of adolescents [136/138]). Among all children, 40.4% (201/497) were vaccinated against COVID-19 (pre-schoolchildren 4.4% [8/183], schoolchildren 44.3% [78/176] and adolescents 83.3% [115/138]). SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was lowest in pre-school. Health status and quality of life reported by the parents were very positive at the time of the survey (Summer 2022). CONCLUSION: Age-related differences on SARS-CoV-2 sero-immunity could mainly be explained by differences in vaccination rates based on the official German vaccination recommendations as well as differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in the different age groups. Health status and quality of life of almost all children were very good independent of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or vaccination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Registry for Clinical Trials Identifier Würzburg: DRKS00025546 (registration: 11.09.2021), Bochum: DRKS00022434 (registration:07.08.2020), Dresden: DRKS 00022455 (registration: 23.07.2020).

2.
Dtsch Arztebl Int ; (Forthcoming)2023 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319055

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Early during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, national population-based seroprevalence surveys were conducted in some countries; however, this was not done in Germany. In particular, no seroprevalence surveys were planned for the summer of 2022. In the context of the IMMUNEBRIDGE project, the GUIDE study was carried out to estimate seroprevalence on the national and regional levels. METHODS: To obtain an overview of the population-wide immunity against SARS-CoV-2 among adults in Germany that would be as statistically robust as possible, serological tests were carried out using self-sampling dried blood spot cards in conjunction with surveys, one by telephone and one online. Blood samples were analyzed for the presence of antibodies to the S and N antigens of SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Among the 15 932 participants, antibodies to the S antigen were detected in 95.7%, and to the N antigen in 44.4%. In the higher-risk age groups of persons aged 65 and above and persons aged 80 and above, anti-S antibodies were found in 97,4% and 98.8%, respectively. Distinct regional differences in the distribution of anti-S and anti-N antibodies emerged. Immunity gaps were found both regionally and in particular subgroups of the population. High anti-N antibody levels were especially common in eastern German states, and high anti-S antibody levels in western German states. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that a large percentage of the adult German population has formed antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This will markedly lower the probability of an overburdening of the health care system by hospitalization and high occupancy of intensive care units due to future SARS-CoV-2 waves, depending on the viral characteristics of then prevailing variants.

3.
Infection ; 2023 May 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2318877

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has highlighted the importance of viable infection surveillance and the relevant infrastructure. From a German perspective, an integral part of this infrastructure, genomic pathogen sequencing, was at best fragmentary and stretched to its limits due to the lack or inefficient use of equipment, human resources, data management and coordination. The experience in other countries has shown that the rate of sequenced positive samples and linkage of genomic and epidemiological data (person, place, time) represent important factors for a successful application of genomic pathogen surveillance. Planning, establishing and consistently supporting adequate structures for genomic pathogen surveillance will be crucial to identify and combat future pandemics as well as other challenges in infectious diseases such as multi-drug resistant bacteria and healthcare-associated infections. Therefore, the authors propose a multifaceted and coordinated process for the definition of procedural, legal and technical standards for comprehensive genomic pathogen surveillance in Germany, covering the areas of genomic sequencing, data collection and data linkage, as well as target pathogens. A comparative analysis of the structures established in Germany and in other countries is applied. This proposal aims to better tackle epi- and pandemics to come and take action from the "lessons learned" from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

4.
PLOS Glob Public Health ; 3(5): e0001018, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2316007

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 pandemic puts an enormous strain on health care systems worldwide and may have a detrimental effect on prevention, treatment and outcomes of tuberculosis (TB), viral hepatitis, HIV/AIDS and malaria, whose ending is part of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We conducted a systematic review of scientific and grey literature in order to collect wide-ranging evidence with emphasis on quantification of the projected and actual indirect impacts of COVID-19 on the four infectious diseases with a global focus. We followed PRISMA guidelines and the protocol registered for malaria (CRD42021234974). We searched PubMed, Scopus, preView (last search: January 13, 2021) and websites of main (medical) societies and leading NGOs related to each of the four considered infectious diseases. From modelling studies, we identified the most impactful disruptions; from surveys and other quantitative studies (based e.g. on surveillance or program data), we assessed the actual size of the disruptions. The identified modelling studies warned about under-diagnosis (TB), anti-retroviral therapy interruption/decrease in viral load suppression (HIV), disruptions of insecticide-treated nets (ITN) distribution and access to effective treatment (malaria), and treatment delays and vaccination interruptions (viral hepatitis). The reported disruptions were very heterogeneous both between and within countries. If observed at several points in time, the initial drops (partly dramatic, e.g. TB notifications/cases, or HIV testing volumes decreased up to -80%) were followed by a gradual recovery. However, the often-missing assessment of the changes against the usual pre-pandemic fluctuations hampered the interpretation of less severe ones. Given the recurring waves of the pandemic and the unknown mid- to long-term effects of adaptation and normalisation, the real consequences for the fight against leading infectious diseases will only manifest over the coming years.

5.
Elife ; 122023 04 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2303644

ABSTRACT

Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease burden can contribute to situational awareness and aid capacity planning. Based on best practice in other fields and recent insights in infectious disease epidemiology, one can maximise the predictive performance of such forecasts if multiple models are combined into an ensemble. Here, we report on the performance of ensembles in predicting COVID-19 cases and deaths across Europe between 08 March 2021 and 07 March 2022. Methods: We used open-source tools to develop a public European COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We invited groups globally to contribute weekly forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths reported by a standardised source for 32 countries over the next 1-4 weeks. Teams submitted forecasts from March 2021 using standardised quantiles of the predictive distribution. Each week we created an ensemble forecast, where each predictive quantile was calculated as the equally-weighted average (initially the mean and then from 26th July the median) of all individual models' predictive quantiles. We measured the performance of each model using the relative Weighted Interval Score (WIS), comparing models' forecast accuracy relative to all other models. We retrospectively explored alternative methods for ensemble forecasts, including weighted averages based on models' past predictive performance. Results: Over 52 weeks, we collected forecasts from 48 unique models. We evaluated 29 models' forecast scores in comparison to the ensemble model. We found a weekly ensemble had a consistently strong performance across countries over time. Across all horizons and locations, the ensemble performed better on relative WIS than 83% of participating models' forecasts of incident cases (with a total N=886 predictions from 23 unique models), and 91% of participating models' forecasts of deaths (N=763 predictions from 20 models). Across a 1-4 week time horizon, ensemble performance declined with longer forecast periods when forecasting cases, but remained stable over 4 weeks for incident death forecasts. In every forecast across 32 countries, the ensemble outperformed most contributing models when forecasting either cases or deaths, frequently outperforming all of its individual component models. Among several choices of ensemble methods we found that the most influential and best choice was to use a median average of models instead of using the mean, regardless of methods of weighting component forecast models. Conclusions: Our results support the use of combining forecasts from individual models into an ensemble in order to improve predictive performance across epidemiological targets and populations during infectious disease epidemics. Our findings further suggest that median ensemble methods yield better predictive performance more than ones based on means. Our findings also highlight that forecast consumers should place more weight on incident death forecasts than incident case forecasts at forecast horizons greater than 2 weeks. Funding: AA, BH, BL, LWa, MMa, PP, SV funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant 1R01GM109718, NSF BIG DATA Grant IIS-1633028, NSF Grant No.: OAC-1916805, NSF Expeditions in Computing Grant CCF-1918656, CCF-1917819, NSF RAPID CNS-2028004, NSF RAPID OAC-2027541, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 75D30119C05935, a grant from Google, University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund award number SIF160, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under Contract No. HDTRA1-19-D-0007, and respectively Virginia Dept of Health Grant VDH-21-501-0141, VDH-21-501-0143, VDH-21-501-0147, VDH-21-501-0145, VDH-21-501-0146, VDH-21-501-0142, VDH-21-501-0148. AF, AMa, GL funded by SMIGE - Modelli statistici inferenziali per governare l'epidemia, FISR 2020-Covid-19 I Fase, FISR2020IP-00156, Codice Progetto: PRJ-0695. AM, BK, FD, FR, JK, JN, JZ, KN, MG, MR, MS, RB funded by Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland with grant 28/WFSN/2021 to the University of Warsaw. BRe, CPe, JLAz funded by Ministerio de Sanidad/ISCIII. BT, PG funded by PERISCOPE European H2020 project, contract number 101016233. CP, DL, EA, MC, SA funded by European Commission - Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology through the contract LC-01485746, and Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades and FEDER, with the project PGC2018-095456-B-I00. DE., MGu funded by Spanish Ministry of Health / REACT-UE (FEDER). DO, GF, IMi, LC funded by Laboratory Directed Research and Development program of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) under project number 20200700ER. DS, ELR, GG, NGR, NW, YW funded by National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health). FB, FP funded by InPresa, Lombardy Region, Italy. HG, KS funded by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. IV funded by Agencia de Qualitat i Avaluacio Sanitaries de Catalunya (AQuAS) through contract 2021-021OE. JDe, SMo, VP funded by Netzwerk Universitatsmedizin (NUM) project egePan (01KX2021). JPB, SH, TH funded by Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; grant 05M18SIA). KH, MSc, YKh funded by Project SaxoCOV, funded by the German Free State of Saxony. Presentation of data, model results and simulations also funded by the NFDI4Health Task Force COVID-19 (https://www.nfdi4health.de/task-force-covid-19-2) within the framework of a DFG-project (LO-342/17-1). LP, VE funded by Mathematical and Statistical modelling project (MUNI/A/1615/2020), Online platform for real-time monitoring, analysis and management of epidemic situations (MUNI/11/02202001/2020); VE also supported by RECETOX research infrastructure (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic: LM2018121), the CETOCOEN EXCELLENCE (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17-043/0009632), RECETOX RI project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16-013/0001761). NIB funded by Health Protection Research Unit (grant code NIHR200908). SAb, SF funded by Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , Epidemics , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Forecasting , Models, Statistical , Retrospective Studies
6.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz ; 66(4): 443-449, 2023 Apr.
Article in German | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2280092

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV­2 pandemic has shown a deficit of essential epidemiological infrastructure, especially with regard to genomic pathogen surveillance in Germany. In order to prepare for future pandemics, the authors consider it urgently necessary to remedy this existing deficit by establishing an efficient infrastructure for genomic pathogen surveillance. Such a network can build on structures, processes, and interactions that have already been initiated regionally and further optimize them. It will be able to respond to current and future challenges with a high degree of adaptability.The aim of this paper is to address the urgency and to outline proposed measures for establishing an efficient, adaptable, and responsive genomic pathogen surveillance network, taking into account external framework conditions and internal standards. The proposed measures are based on global and country-specific best practices and strategy papers. Specific next steps to achieve an integrated genomic pathogen surveillance include linking epidemiological data with pathogen genomic data; sharing and coordinating existing resources; making surveillance data available to relevant decision-makers, the public health service, and the scientific community; and engaging all stakeholders. The establishment of a genomic pathogen surveillance network is essential for the continuous, stable, active surveillance of the infection situation in Germany, both during pandemic phases and beyond.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics/prevention & control , Germany/epidemiology , Genomics
7.
Infection ; 2022 Jun 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2267233

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: School closures have been used as part of lockdown strategies to contain the spread of SARS-CoV-2, adversely affecting children's health and education. To ensure the accessibility of educational institutions without exposing society to the risk of increased transmissions, it is essential to establish SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies that are child-friendly, scalable and implementable in a daily school routine. Self-sampling using non-invasive saliva swabs combined with pooled RT-qPCR testing (Lolli-Method) has been proven to be a sensitive method for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: We conducted a pilot project in Cologne, Germany, designed to determine the feasibility of a large-scale rollout of the Lolli-Method for testing without any additional on-site medical staff in schools. Over a period of three weeks, students from 22 schools were sampled using the Lolli-Method. At the end of the project, teachers were asked to evaluate the overall acceptance of the project. RESULTS: We analyzed a total of 757 pooled RT-qPCRs obtained from 8,287 individual swabs and detected 7 SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. The Lolli-Method was shown to be a feasible and accepted testing strategy whose application is only slightly disruptive to the daily school routine. CONCLUSION: Our observations suggest that the Lolli-Method in combination with pooled RT-qPCR can be implemented for SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in daily school routine, applicable on a large scale.

8.
BMC Infect Dis ; 23(1): 205, 2023 Apr 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2285850

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: One of the primary aims of contact restriction measures during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has been to protect people at increased risk of severe disease from the virus. Knowledge about the uptake of contact restriction measures in this group is critical for public health decision-making. We analysed data from the German contact survey COVIMOD to assess differences in contact patterns based on risk status, and compared this to pre-pandemic data to establish whether there was a differential response to contact reduction measures. METHODS: We quantified differences in contact patterns according to risk status by fitting a generalised linear model accounting for within-participant clustering to contact data from 31 COVIMOD survey waves (April 2020-December 2021), and estimated the population-averaged ratio of mean contacts of persons with high risk for a severe COVID-19 outcome due to age or underlying health conditions, to those without. We then compared the results to pre-pandemic data from the contact surveys HaBIDS and POLYMOD. RESULTS: Averaged across all analysed waves, COVIMOD participants reported a mean of 3.21 (95% confidence interval (95%CI) 3.14,3.28) daily contacts (truncated at 100), compared to 18.10 (95%CI 17.12,19.06) in POLYMOD and 28.27 (95%CI 26.49,30.15) in HaBIDS. After adjusting for confounders, COVIMOD participants aged 65 or above had 0.83 times (95%CI 0.79,0.87) the number of contacts as younger age groups. In POLYMOD, this ratio was 0.36 (95%CI 0.30,0.43). There was no clear difference in contact patterns due to increased risk from underlying health conditions in either HaBIDS or COVIMOD. We also found that persons in COVIMOD at high risk due to old age increased their non-household contacts less than those not at such risk after strict restriction measures were lifted. CONCLUSIONS: Over the course of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there was a general reduction in contact numbers in the German population and also a differential response to contact restriction measures based on risk status for severe COVID-19. This differential response needs to be taken into account for parametrisations of mathematical models in a pandemic setting.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Surveys and Questionnaires , Public Health
9.
Econ Hum Biol ; 49: 101198, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2240357

ABSTRACT

Decisions on public health measures to contain a pandemic are often based on parameters such as expected disease burden and additional mortality due to the pandemic. Both pandemics and non-pharmaceutical interventions to fight pandemics, however, produce economic, social, and medical costs. The costs are, for example, caused by changes in access to healthcare, social distancing, and restrictions on economic activity. These factors indirectly influence health outcomes in the short- and long-term perspective. In a narrative review based on targeted literature searches, we develop a comprehensive perspective on the concepts available as well as the challenges of estimating the overall disease burden and the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 interventions from both epidemiological and economic perspectives, particularly during the early part of a pandemic. We review the literature and discuss relevant components that need to be included when estimating the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. The review presents data sources and different forms of death counts, and discusses empirical findings on direct and indirect effects of the pandemic and interventions on disease burden as well as the distribution of health risks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Public Health , Cost of Illness
10.
Eur J Epidemiol ; 38(1): 39-58, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2234929

ABSTRACT

Current estimates of pandemic SARS-CoV-2 spread in Germany using infectious disease models often do not use age-specific infection parameters and are not always based on age-specific contact matrices of the population. They also do usually not include setting- or pandemic phase-based information from epidemiological studies of reported cases and do not account for age-specific underdetection of reported cases. Here, we report likely pandemic spread using an age-structured model to understand the age- and setting-specific contribution of contacts to transmission during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. We developed a deterministic SEIRS model using a pre-pandemic contact matrix. The model was optimized to fit age-specific SARS-CoV-2 incidences reported by the German National Public Health Institute (Robert Koch Institute), includes information on setting-specific reported cases in schools and integrates age- and pandemic period-specific parameters for underdetection of reported cases deduced from a large population-based seroprevalence studies. Taking age-specific underreporting into account, younger adults and teenagers were identified in the modeling study as relevant contributors to infections during the first three pandemic waves in Germany. For the fifth wave, the Delta to Omicron transition, only age-specific parametrization reproduces the observed relative and absolute increase in pediatric hospitalizations in Germany. Taking into account age-specific underdetection did not change considerably how much contacts in schools contributed to the total burden of infection in the population (up to 12% with open schools under hygiene measures in the third wave). Accounting for the pandemic phase and age-specific underreporting is important to correctly identify those groups of the population in which quarantine, testing, vaccination, and contact-reduction measures are likely to be most effective and efficient. Age-specific parametrization is also highly relevant to generate informative age-specific output for decision makers and resource planers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Adolescent , Humans , Child , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Age Factors , Germany/epidemiology
11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Jun 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2237813

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The rapid emergence of the omicron variant and its large number of mutations led to its classification as a variant of concern (VOC) by the WHO. Subsequently, omicron evolved into distinct sublineages (e.g. BA1 and BA2), which currently represent the majority of global infections. Initial studies of the neutralizing response towards BA1 in convalescent and vaccinated individuals showed a substantial reduction. METHODS: We assessed antibody (IgG) binding, ACE2 (Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme 2) binding inhibition, and IgG binding dynamics for the omicron BA1 and BA2 variants compared to a panel of VOC/VOIs, in a large cohort (n = 352) of convalescent, vaccinated, and infected and subsequently vaccinated individuals. RESULTS: While omicron was capable efficiently binding to ACE2, antibodies elicited by infection or immunization showed reduced binding capacities and ACE2 binding inhibition compared to WT. Whereas BA1 exhibited less IgG binding compared to BA2, BA2 showed reduced inhibition of ACE2 binding. Among vaccinated samples, antibody binding to omicron only improved after administration of a third dose. CONCLUSION: omicron BA1 and BA2 can still efficiently bind to ACE2, while vaccine/infection-derived antibodies can bind omicron. The extent of the mutations within both variants prevent a strong inhibitory binding response. As a result, both omicron variants are able to evade control by pre-existing antibodies.

12.
Eur J Health Econ ; 2022 Mar 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2229572

ABSTRACT

We develop a novel approach integrating epidemiological and economic models that allows data-based simulations during a pandemic. We examine the economically optimal opening strategy that can be reconciled with the containment of a pandemic. The empirical evidence is based on data from Germany during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our empirical findings reject the view that there is necessarily a conflict between health protection and economic interests and suggest a non-linear U-shape relationship: it is in the interest of public health and the economy to balance non-pharmaceutical interventions in a manner that further reduces the incidence of infections. Our simulations suggest that a prudent strategy that leads to a reproduction number of around 0.75 is economically optimal. Too restrictive policies cause massive economic costs. Conversely, policies that are too loose lead to higher death tolls and higher economic costs in the long run. We suggest this finding as a guide for policy-makers in balancing interests of public health and the economy during a pandemic.

13.
PLoS Med ; 19(12): e1003913, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2196852

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: School-level infection control measures in Germany during the early Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic differed across the 16 federal states and lacked a dependable evidence base, with available evidence limited to regional data restricted to short phases of the pandemic. This study aimed to assess the (a) infection risks in students and staff; (b) transmission risks and routes in schools; (c) effects of school-level infection control measures on school and population infection dynamics; and (d) contribution of contacts in schools to population cases. METHODS AND FINDINGS: For this retrospective observational study, we used German federal state (NUTS-2) and county (NUTS-3) data from public health and education agencies from March 2020 to April 2022. We assessed (a) infection risk as cumulative risk and crude risk ratios and (b) secondary attack rates (SARs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). We used (c) multiple regression analysis for the effects of infection control measures such as reduced attendance, mask mandates, and vaccination coverage as absolute reduction in case incidence per 100,000 inhabitants per 14 days and in percentage relative to the population, and (d) infection dynamic modelling to determine the percentage contribution of school contacts to population cases. We included (a) nationwide NUTS-2 data from calendar weeks (W) 46-50/2020 and W08/2021-W15/2022 with 3,521,964 cases in students and 329,283 in teachers; (b) NUTS-3 data from W09-25/2021 with 85,788 student and 9,427 teacher cases; and (c) detailed data from 5 NUTS-3 regions from W09/2020 to W27/2021 with 12,814 cases (39% male, 37% female; median age 14, range 5 to 63), 43,238 contacts and 4,165 secondary cases for students (for teachers, 14,801 [22% male, 50% female; median age 39, range 16 to 75], 5,893 and 472). Infection risk (a) for students and teachers was higher than the population risk in all phases of normal presence class and highest in the early 2022 omicron wave with 30.6% (95% CI 30.5% to 32.6%) of students and 32.7% (95% CI 32.6% to 32.8%) of teachers infected in Germany. SARs (b) for students and staff were below 5% in schools throughout the study period, while SARs in households more than doubled from 13.8% (95% CI 10.6% to 17.6%) W21-39/2020 to 28.7% (95% CI 27% to 30.4%) in W08-23/2021 for students and 10.9% (95% CI 7% to 16.5%) to 32.7% (95% CI 28.2% to 37.6%) for staff. Most contacts were reported for schools, yet most secondary cases originated in households. In schools, staff predominantly infected staff. Mandatory surgical mask wearing during class in all schools was associated with a reduction in the case incidence of students and teachers (c), by 56/100,000 persons per 14 days (students: 95% CI 47.7 to 63.4; teachers: 95% CI 39.6 to 71.6; p < 0.001) and by 29.8% (95% CI 25% to 35%, p < 0.001) and 24.3% (95% CI 13% to 36%, p < 0.001) relative to the population, respectively, as were reduced attendance and higher vaccination coverage. The contribution of contacts in schools to population cases (d) was 2% to 20%, lowest during school closures/vacation and peaked during normal presence class intervals, with the overall peak early during the omicron wave. Limitations include underdetection, misclassification of contacts, interviewer/interviewee dependence of contact-tracing, and lack of individual-level confounding factors in aggregate data regression analysis. CONCLUSION: In this study, we observed that open schools under hygiene measures and testing strategies contributed up to 20% of population infections during the omicron wave early 2022, and as little as 2% during vacations/school closures; about a third of students and teachers were infected during the omicron wave in early 2022 in Germany. Mandatory mask wearing during class in all school types and reduced attendance models were associated with a reduced infection risk in schools.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Female , Male , Humans , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Educational Status , Schools , Students , Germany/epidemiology
14.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 19858, 2022 Nov 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2133587

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2 variants accumulating immune escape mutations provide a significant risk to vaccine-induced protection against infection. The novel variant of concern (VoC) Omicron BA.1 and its sub-lineages have the largest number of amino acid alterations in its Spike protein to date. Thus, they may efficiently escape recognition by neutralizing antibodies, allowing breakthrough infections in convalescent and vaccinated individuals in particular in those who have only received a primary immunization scheme. We analyzed neutralization activity of sera from individuals after vaccination with all mRNA-, vector- or heterologous immunization schemes currently available in Europe by in vitro neutralization assay at peak response towards SARS-CoV-2 B.1, Omicron sub-lineages BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.3, BA.4/5, Beta and Delta pseudotypes and also provide longitudinal follow-up data from BNT162b2 vaccinees. All vaccines apart from Ad26.CoV2.S showed high levels of responder rates (96-100%) towards the SARS-CoV-2 B.1 isolate, and minor to moderate reductions in neutralizing Beta and Delta VoC pseudotypes. The novel Omicron variant and its sub-lineages had the biggest impact, both in terms of response rates and neutralization titers. Only mRNA-1273 showed a 100% response rate to Omicron BA.1 and induced the highest level of neutralizing antibody titers, followed by heterologous prime-boost approaches. Homologous BNT162b2 vaccination, vector-based AZD1222 and Ad26.CoV2.S performed less well with peak responder rates of 48%, 56% and 9%, respectively. However, Omicron responder rates in BNT162b2 recipients were maintained in our six month longitudinal follow-up indicating that individuals with cross-protection against Omicron maintain it over time. Overall, our data strongly argue for booster doses in individuals who were previously vaccinated with BNT162b2, or a vector-based primary immunization scheme.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Neutralization Tests , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19 Vaccines , RNA, Messenger , Ad26COVS1 , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Vaccination
15.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 859, 2022 Nov 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2139175

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lyme borreliosis (LB) is the most common tick-borne infectious disease in the northern hemisphere. The diagnosis of LB is usually made by clinical symptoms and subsequently supported by serology. In Europe, a two-step testing consisting of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and an immunoblot is recommended. However, due to the low sensitivity of the currently available tests, antibody detection is sometimes inaccurate, especially in the early phase of infection, leading to underdiagnoses. METHODS: To improve upon Borrelia diagnostics, we developed a multiplex Borrelia immunoassay (Borrelia multiplex), which utilizes the new INTELLIFLEX platform, enabling the simultaneous dual detection of IgG and IgM antibodies, saving further time and reducing the biosample material requirement. In order to enable correct classification, the Borrelia multiplex contains eight antigens from the five human pathogenic Borrelia species known in Europe. Six antigens are known to mainly induce an IgG response and two antigens are predominant for an IgM response. RESULTS: To validate the assay, we compared the Borrelia multiplex to a commercial bead-based immunoassay resulting in an overall assay sensitivity of 93.7% (95% CI 84.8-97.5%) and a specificity of 96.5% (95%CI 93.5-98.1%). To confirm the calculated sensitivity and specificity, a comparison with a conventional 2-step diagnostics was performed. With this comparison, we obtained a sensitivity of 95.2% (95% CI 84.2-99.2%) and a specificity of 93.0% (95% CI 90.6-94.7%). CONCLUSION: Borrelia multiplex is a highly reproducible cost- and time-effective assay that enables the profiling of antibodies against several individual antigens simultaneously.


Subject(s)
Borrelia , Lyme Disease , Humans , Antibodies, Bacterial , Serologic Tests/methods , Immunoglobulin G , Lyme Disease/diagnosis , Immunoglobulin M
16.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD015021, 2022 08 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1981526

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: High efficacy in terms of protection from severe COVID-19 has been demonstrated for several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. However, patients with compromised immune status develop a weaker and less stable immune response to vaccination. Strong immune response may not always translate into clinical benefit, therefore it is important to synthesise evidence on modified schemes and types of vaccination in these population subgroups for guiding health decisions. As the literature on COVID-19 vaccines continues to expand, we aimed to scope the literature on multiple subgroups to subsequently decide on the most relevant research questions to be answered by systematic reviews. OBJECTIVES: To provide an overview of the availability of existing literature on immune response and long-term clinical outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination, and to map this evidence according to the examined populations, specific vaccines, immunity parameters, and their way of determining relevant long-term outcomes and the availability of mapping between immune reactivity and relevant outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, the Web of Science Core Collection, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease on 6 December 2021.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that published results on immunity outcomes after vaccination with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, AZD1222, Ad26.COV2.S, Sputnik V or Sputnik Light, BBIBP-CorV, or CoronaVac on predefined vulnerable subgroups such as people with malignancies, transplant recipients, people undergoing renal replacement therapy, and people with immune disorders, as well as pregnant and breastfeeding women, and children. We included studies if they had at least 100 participants (not considering healthy control groups); we excluded case studies and case series. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently and in duplicate onto an online data extraction form. Data were represented as tables and as online maps to show the frequency of studies for each item. We mapped the data according to study design, country of participant origin, patient comorbidity subgroup, intervention, outcome domains (clinical, safety, immunogenicity), and outcomes.  MAIN RESULTS: Out of 25,452 identified records, 318 studies with a total of more than 5 million participants met our eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Participants were recruited mainly from high-income countries between January 2020 and 31 October 2021 (282/318); the majority of studies included adult participants (297/318).  Haematological malignancies were the most commonly examined comorbidity group (N = 54), followed by solid tumours (N = 47), dialysis (N = 48), kidney transplant (N = 43), and rheumatic diseases (N = 28, 17, and 15 for mixed diseases, multiple sclerosis, and inflammatory bowel disease, respectively). Thirty-one studies included pregnant or breastfeeding women. The most commonly administered vaccine was BNT162b2 (N = 283), followed by mRNA-1273 (N = 153), AZD1222 (N = 66), Ad26.COV2.S (N = 42), BBIBP-CorV (N = 15), CoronaVac (N = 14), and Sputnik V (N = 5; no studies were identified for Sputnik Light). Most studies reported outcomes after regular vaccination scheme.  The majority of studies focused on immunogenicity outcomes, especially seroconversion based on binding antibody measurements and immunoglobulin G (IgG) titres (N = 179 and 175, respectively). Adverse events and serious adverse events were reported in 126 and 54 studies, whilst SARS-CoV-2 infection irrespective of severity was reported in 80 studies. Mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 infection was reported in 36 studies. Please refer to our evidence gap maps for more detailed information. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Up to 6 December 2021, the majority of studies examined data on mRNA vaccines administered as standard vaccination schemes (two doses approximately four to eight weeks apart) that report on immunogenicity parameters or adverse events. Clinical outcomes were less commonly reported, and if so, were often reported as a secondary outcome observed in seroconversion or immunoglobulin titre studies. As informed by this scoping review, two effectiveness reviews (on haematological malignancies and kidney transplant recipients) are currently being conducted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hematologic Neoplasms , Vaccines , Ad26COVS1 , Adult , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Child , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
17.
Front Immunol ; 13: 828053, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1731780

ABSTRACT

Recent increases in SARS-CoV-2 infections have led to questions about duration and quality of vaccine-induced immune protection. While numerous studies have been published on immune responses triggered by vaccination, these often focus on studying the impact of one or two immunisation schemes within subpopulations such as immunocompromised individuals or healthcare workers. To provide information on the duration and quality of vaccine-induced immune responses against SARS-CoV-2, we analyzed antibody titres against various SARS-CoV-2 antigens and ACE2 binding inhibition against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and variants of concern in samples from a large German population-based seroprevalence study (MuSPAD) who had received all currently available immunisation schemes. We found that homologous mRNA-based or heterologous prime-boost vaccination produced significantly higher antibody responses than vector-based homologous vaccination. Ad26.CoV2S.2 performance was particularly concerning with reduced titres and 91.7% of samples classified as non-responsive for ACE2 binding inhibition, suggesting that recipients require a booster mRNA vaccination. While mRNA vaccination induced a higher ratio of RBD- and S1-targeting antibodies, vector-based vaccines resulted in an increased proportion of S2-targeting antibodies. Given the role of RBD- and S1-specific antibodies in neutralizing SARS-CoV-2, their relative over-representation after mRNA vaccination may explain why these vaccines have increased efficacy compared to vector-based formulations. Previously infected individuals had a robust immune response once vaccinated, regardless of which vaccine they received, which could aid future dose allocation should shortages arise for certain manufacturers. Overall, both titres and ACE2 binding inhibition peaked approximately 28 days post-second vaccination and then decreased.


Subject(s)
Ad26COVS1/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Immunity, Humoral/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/growth & development , Antibodies, Neutralizing/immunology , Antibodies, Viral/immunology , Antibody Formation/immunology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Germany , Humans , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus/immunology , Vaccination/methods
18.
Dtsch Arztebl Int ; 118(48): 824-831, 2021 12 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1706269

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Until now, information on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Germany has been based mainly on data from the public health offices. It may be assumed that these data do not include many cases of asymptomatic and mild infection. METHODS: We determined seroprevalence over the course of the pandemic in a sequential, multilocal seroprevalence study (MuSPAD). Study participants were recruited at random in seven administrative districts (Kreise) in Germany from July 2020 onward; each participant was tested at two different times 3-5 months apart. Test findings on blood samples were used to determine the missed-case rate of reported infections, the infection fatality rate (IFR), and the association between seropositivity and demographic, socio-economic, and health-related factors, as well as to evaluate the self-reported results of PCR and antigenic tests. The registration number of this study is DRKS00022335. RESULTS: Among non-vaccinated persons, the seroprevalence from July to December 2020 was 1.3-2.8% and rose between February and May 2021 to 4.1-13.1%. In July 2021, 35% of tested persons in Chemnitz were not vaccinated, and the seroprevalence among these persons was 32.4% (07/2021). The surveillance detection ratio (SDR), i.e., the ratio between the true number of infections estimated from seroprevalence and the actual number or reported infections, varied among the districts included in the study from 2.2 to 5.1 up to December 2020 and from 1.3 to 2.9 up to June 2021, and subsequently declined. The IFR was in the range of 0.8% to 2.4% in all regions except Magdeburg, where a value of 0.3% was calculated for November 2020. A lower educational level was associated with a higher seropositivity rate, smoking with a lower seropositivity rate. On average, 1 person was infected for every 8.5 persons in quarantine. CONCLUSION: Seroprevalence was low after the first wave of the pandemic but rose markedly during the second and third waves. The missed-case rate trended downward over the course of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Seroepidemiologic Studies
19.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(12): e30106, 2021 12 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598120

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Gaining oversight into the rapidly growing number of mobile health tools for surveillance or outbreak management in Africa has become a challenge. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to map the functional portfolio of mobile health tools used for surveillance or outbreak management of communicable diseases in Africa. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review by combining data from a systematic review of the literature and a telephone survey of experts. We applied the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching for articles published between January 2010 and December 2020. In addition, we used the respondent-driven sampling method and conducted a telephone survey from October 2019 to February 2020 among representatives from national public health institutes from all African countries. We combined the findings and used a hierarchical clustering method to group the tools based on their functionalities (attributes). RESULTS: We identified 30 tools from 1914 publications and 45 responses from 52% (28/54) of African countries. Approximately 13% of the tools (4/30; Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System, Go.Data, CommCare, and District Health Information Software 2) covered 93% (14/15) of the identified attributes. Of the 30 tools, 17 (59%) tools managed health event data, 20 (67%) managed case-based data, and 28 (97%) offered a dashboard. Clustering identified 2 exceptional attributes for outbreak management, namely contact follow-up (offered by 8/30, 27%, of the tools) and transmission network visualization (offered by Surveillance Outbreak Response Management and Analysis System and Go.Data). CONCLUSIONS: There is a large range of tools in use; however, most of them do not offer a comprehensive set of attributes, resulting in the need for public health workers having to use multiple tools in parallel. Only 13% (4/30) of the tools cover most of the attributes, including those most relevant for response to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as laboratory interface, contact follow-up, and transmission network visualization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Africa/epidemiology , Cluster Analysis , Humans , SARS-CoV-2
20.
BMJ Open ; 11(11): e052690, 2021 11 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501719

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the comparative risk of infection in school staff and their contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission. DESIGN: Systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, WHO COVID-19 database and preView were searched on 29 January 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included studies that reported risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in school staff or transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in school settings. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction was done in duplicates. Data synthesis was qualitative. We report attack rates and infection risk in school settings for staff and students stratified by control measures taken and infection dynamics at the point of data collection. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included. Three studies in low incidence settings showed low attack rates similar for teachers and students. Five studies in medium incidence settings and two studies in high incidence settings showed secondary attack rates up to 16% in school staff.Seroprevalence studies, two in each low and high incidence settings showed an infection risk of 0%-0.2% and 1.7%-28% for teachers.The risk of infection for teachers compared with students were similar in one study in low incidence setting, higher in three studies (RR 1.2-4.4) and lower in three studies in medium to high incidence settings. The risk of infection for teachers in a high infection environment is higher in face-to-face than in distance classes when compared with general population groups. The risk of infections as well as risk of hospitalisation both increased for teachers during school openings compared with school closure. CONCLUSION: While in low incidence settings there is little evidence for school staff to be at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, in high incidence settings there is an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in school staff teaching face-to-face compared to staff teaching digitally and general population. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021239225.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Schools , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Students
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL