Evaluation of the Australian first few X household transmission project for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The Australian First Few X (FFX) Household Transmission Project for COVID-19 was the first prospective, multi-jurisdictional study of its kind in Australia. The project was undertaken as a partnership between federal and state health departments and the Australian Partnership for Preparedness Research on Infectious Disease Emergencies (APPRISE) and was active from April to October 2020. METHODS: We aimed to identify and explore the challenges and strengths of the Australian FFX Project to inform future FFX study development and integration into pandemic preparedness plans. We asked key stakeholders and partners involved with implementation to identify and rank factors relating to the strengths and challenges of project implementation in two rounds of modified Delphi surveys. Key representatives from jurisdictional health departments were then interviewed to contextualise findings within public health processes and information needs to develop a final set of recommendations for FFX study development in Australia. RESULTS: Four clear recommendations emerged from the evaluation. Future preparedness planning should aim to formalise and embed partnerships between health departments and researchers to help better integrate project data collection into core public health surveillance activities. The development of functional, adaptable protocols with pre-established ethics and governance approvals and investment in national data infrastructure were additional priority areas noted by evaluation participants. CONCLUSION: The evaluation provided a great opportunity to consolidate lessons learnt from the Australian FFX Household Transmission Project. The developed recommendations should be incorporated into future pandemic preparedness plans in Australia to enable effective implementation and increase local utility and value of the FFX platform within emergency public health response.

Learnings from the Australian first few X household transmission project for COVID-19.

Background: First Few "X" (FFX) studies provide a platform to collect the required epidemiological, clinical and virological data to help address emerging information needs about the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We adapted the WHO FFX protocol for COVID-19 to understand severity and household transmission dynamics in the early stages of the pandemic in Australia. Implementation strategies were developed for participating sites; all household members were followed for 14 days from case identification. Household contacts completed symptom diaries and had multiple respiratory swabs taken irrespective of symptoms. We modelled the spread of COVID-19 within households using a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered-type model, and calculated the household secondary attack rate and key epidemiological parameters. Findings: 96 households with 101 cases and 286 household contacts were recruited into the study between April-October 2020. Forty household contacts tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in the study follow-up period. Our model estimated the household secondary attack rate to be 15% (95% CI 8-25%), which scaled up with increasing household size. Our findings suggest children were less infectious than their adult counterparts but were also more susceptible to infection. Interpretation: Our study provides important baseline data characterising the transmission of early SARS-CoV-2 strains from children and adults in Australia, against which properties of variants of concern can be benchmarked. We encountered many challenges with respect to logistics, ethics, governance and data management. Continued efforts to invest in preparedness research will help to test, refine and further develop Australian FFX study protocols in advance of future outbreaks. Funding: Australian Government Department of Health.

Virology and immune dynamics reveal high household transmission of ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain.

BACKGROUND: Household studies are crucial for understanding the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection, which may be underestimated from PCR testing of respiratory samples alone. We aim to combine the assessment of household mitigation measures; nasopharyngeal, saliva, and stool PCR testing; along with mucosal and systemic SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies, to comprehensively characterize SARS-CoV-2 infection and transmission in households. METHODS: Between March and September 2020, we obtained samples from 92 participants in 26 households in Melbourne, Australia, in a 4-week period following the onset of infection with ancestral SARS-CoV-2 variants. RESULTS: The secondary attack rate was 36% (24/66) when using nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) PCR positivity alone. However, when respiratory and nonrespiratory samples were combined with antibody responses in blood and saliva, the secondary attack rate was 76% (50/66). SARS-CoV-2 viral load of the index case and household isolation measures were key factors that determine secondary transmission. In 27% (7/26) of households, all family members tested positive by NPS for SARS-CoV-2 and were characterized by lower respiratory Ct values than low transmission families (Median 22.62 vs. 32.91; IQR 17.06-28.67 vs. 30.37-34.24). High transmission families were associated with enhanced plasma antibody responses to multiple SARS-CoV-2 antigens and the presence of neutralizing antibodies. Three distinguishing saliva SARS-CoV-2 antibody features were identified according to age (IgA1 to Spike 1, IgA1 to nucleocapsid protein (NP)), suggesting that adults and children generate distinct mucosal antibody responses during the acute phase of infection. CONCLUSION: Utilizing respiratory and nonrespiratory PCR testing, along with the measurement of SARS-CoV-2-specific local and systemic antibodies, provides a more accurate assessment of infection within households and highlights some of the immunological differences in response between children and adults.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in standardised first few X cases and household transmission investigations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to estimate the household secondary infection attack rate (hSAR) of SARS-CoV-2 in investigations aligned with the WHO Unity Studies Household Transmission Investigations (HHTI) protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and medRxiv/bioRxiv for "Unity-aligned" First Few X cases (FFX) and HHTIs published 1 December 2019 to 26 July 2021. Standardised early results were shared by WHO Unity Studies collaborators (to 1 October 2021). We used a bespoke tool to assess investigation methodological quality. Values for hSAR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted or calculated from crude data. Heterogeneity was assessed by visually inspecting overlap of CIs on forest plots and quantified in meta-analyses. Of 9988 records retrieved, 80 articles (64 from databases; 16 provided by Unity Studies collaborators) were retained in the systematic review; 62 were included in the primary meta-analysis. hSAR point estimates ranged from 2% to 90% (95% prediction interval: 3%-71%; I 2 = 99.7%); I 2 values remained >99% in subgroup analyses, indicating high, unexplained heterogeneity and leading to a decision not to report pooled hSAR estimates. FFX and HHTI remain critical epidemiological tools for early and ongoing characterisation of novel infectious pathogens. The large, unexplained variance in hSAR estimates emphasises the need to further support standardisation in planning, conduct and analysis, and for clear and comprehensive reporting of FFX and HHTIs in time and place, to guide evidence-based pandemic preparedness and response efforts for SARS-CoV-2, influenza and future novel respiratory viruses.