Vaccine Effectiveness against COVID-19 among Symptomatic Persons Aged >=12 Years with Reported Contact with COVID-19 Cases, February - September 2021 (preprint)

Individuals in contact with persons with COVID-19 are at high risk of developing COVID-19, but protection offered by COVID-19 vaccines in the context of known exposure is unknown. Symptomatic outpatients reporting acute onset of COVID-19-like illness and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection were enrolled. Among 2,229 participants, 283/451 (63%) of those reporting contact and 331/1778 (19%) without known contact tested SARS-CoV-2 positive. Using the test-negative design, adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 71% (95% confidence interval, 49%-83%) among fully vaccinated participants reporting contact versus 80% (95% CI, 72%-86%) among those without. This study supports COVID-19 vaccination and highlights the importance of efforts to increase vaccination coverage.

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness against COVID-19 among Symptomatic Outpatients Aged >=16 Years in the United States, February to May 2021 (preprint)

Evaluations of vaccine effectiveness (VE) are important to monitor as COVID-19 vaccines are introduced in the general population. Research staff enrolled symptomatic participants seeking outpatient medical care for COVID-19-like illness or SARS-CoV-2 testing from a multisite network. VE was evaluated using the test-negative design. Among 236 SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test-positive and 576 test-negative participants aged [≥]16 years, VE of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 was 91% (95% CI: 83-95) for full vaccination and 75% (95% CI: 55-87) for partial vaccination. Vaccination was associated with prevention of most COVID-19 cases among people seeking outpatient medical care.

Health impact of routine immunisation service disruptions and mass vaccination campaign suspensions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic: Multimodel comparative analysis of disruption scenarios for measles, meningococcal A, and yellow fever vaccination in 10 low- and lower middle-income countries (preprint)

Background: Childhood immunisation services have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. WHO recommends considering outbreak risk using epidemiological criteria when deciding whether to conduct preventive vaccination campaigns during the pandemic. Methods: We used 2-3 models per infection to estimate the health impact of 50% reduced routine vaccination coverage in 2020 and delay of campaign vaccination from 2020 to 2021 for measles vaccination in Bangladesh, Chad, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, and South Sudan, for meningococcal A vaccination in Burkina Faso, Chad, Niger, and Nigeria, and for yellow fever vaccination in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, and Nigeria. Our counterfactual comparative scenario was sustaining immunisation services at coverage projections made prior to COVID-19 (i.e. without any disruption). Findings: Reduced routine vaccination coverage in 2020 without catch-up vaccination may lead to an increase in measles and yellow fever disease burden in the modelled countries. Delaying planned campaigns in Ethiopia and Nigeria by a year may significantly increased the risk of measles outbreaks (both countries did complete their SIAS planned for 2020). For yellow fever vaccination, delay in campaigns leads to a potential disease burden rise of >1 death per 100,000 people until the campaigns are implemented. For meningococcal A vaccination, short term disruptions in 2020 are unlikely to have a significant impact due to the persistence of direct and indirect benefits from past introductory campaigns of the 1 to 29-year-old population, bolstered by inclusion of the vaccine into the routine immunisation schedule accompanied by further catch-up campaigns. Interpretation: The impact of COVID-19-related disruption to vaccination programs varies between infections and countries. Planning and implementation of campaigns should consider country and infection-specific epidemiological factors and local immunity gaps worsened by the COVID-19 pandemic when prioritising vaccines and strategies for catch-up vaccination.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Seattle, Washington: October 2019-April 2020 (preprint)

Estimating prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is important to determine disease burden. We tested residual samples from 763 Seattle-area adults for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Prevalence rose from 0% to 1.2% between October 2019-April 2020, suggesting a small percentage of this metropolitan-area cohort had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 at that time.

Clinical symptoms among ambulatory patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

We compared symptoms and characteristics of 4961 ambulatory patients with and without laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Findings indicate that clinical symptoms alone would be insufficient to distinguish between COVID-19 and other respiratory infections (e.g., influenza) and/or to evaluate the effects of preventive interventions (e.g., vaccinations).

Decreasing median age of COVID-19 cases in the United States: changing epidemiology or changing surveillance? (preprint)

BackgroundUnderstanding and monitoring the demographics of SARS-CoV-2 infection can inform strategies for prevention. Surveillance monitoring has suggested that the age distribution of people infected with SARS-CoV-2 has changed since the pandemic began, but no formal analysis has been performed. MethodsRetrospective review of SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing results from a national reference laboratory was performed. Result distributions by age and positivity were compared between early period (March-April 2020) and late periods (June-July 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, a sub-analysis compared changing age distributions between inpatients and outpatients. ResultsThere were 277,601 test results of which 19320 (7.0%) were positive. The median age of infected people declined over time (p < 0.0005). In March-April, the median age of positive people was 40.8 years (Interquartile range (IQR): 29.0 - 54.1). In June-July, the median age of positive people was 35.8 years (IQR: 24.0 - 50.2). The positivity rate of patients under 50 increased from 6.0 to 10.6 percent and the positivity rate for those over 50 decreased from 6.3 to 5.0 percent between the early and late periods. The trend was only observed for outpatient populations. ConclusionsWe confirm that there is a trend toward decreasing age among persons with laboratory- confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, but that these trends seem to be specific to the outpatient population. Overall, this suggests that observed age-related trends are driven by changes in testing patterns rather than true changes in the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This calls for caution in interpretation of routine surveillance data until testing patterns stabilize. SummaryWe used national reference laboratory data to compare ages of patients tested for SARS-CoV-2 in March/April 2020 vs. June/July. Median age declined overall, but increased for inpatients, suggesting that declining age is due to changes in surveillance, not COVID-19 epidemiology.

Low-Impact Social Distancing Interventions to Mitigate Local Epidemics of SARS-CoV-2 (preprint)

BackgroundAfter many jurisdictions have implemented intensive social distancing to suppress SARS-CoV-2 transmission, the challenge now is to mitigate the ongoing COVID-19 epidemic without overburdening economic and social activities. This report explores "low-impact" interventions to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 with a minimum of social and economic disruption. MethodsAn agent-based model simulated the population of King County, Washington, with agents that interact in homes, schools, workplaces, and other community sites. SARS-CoV-2 transmission probabilities were estimated by fitting simulated to observed hospital admissions from February - May 2020. Interventions considered were (a) encouraging telecommuting; (b) reducing contacts to seniors and nursing home residents; (c) modest reductions to contacts outside of the home; (d) encouraging self-isolation of persons with COVID-19 symptoms; (e) rapid testing and household quarantining. ResultsIndividual interventions are not expected to have a large impact on COVID-19 hospitalizations. No intervention reduced COVID-19 hospitalizations by more than 12.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.0% to 13.3%). Removing all interventions would result in nearly 42,000 COVID- 19 hospitalizations between June 2020 and January 2021, with peak hospital occupancy exceeding available beds 6-fold. Combining the interventions is predicted to reduce total hospitalizations by 48% (95% CI, 47-49%), with peak COVID-19 hospital occupancy of 70% of total beds. Targeted school closures can further reduce the peak occupancy. ConclusionsCombining low-impact interventions may mitigate the course of the COVID-19 epidemic, keeping hospital burden within the capacity of the healthcare system. Under this approach SARS-CoV-2 can spread through the community, moving toward herd immunity, while minimizing social and economic disruption.

Incidence, clinical outcomes, and transmission dynamics of hospitalized 2019 coronavirus disease among 9,596,321 individuals residing in California and Washington, United States: a prospective cohort study (preprint)

Background: The United States is now the country reporting the highest number of 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases and deaths. However, little is known about the epidemiology and burden of severe COVID-19 to inform planning within healthcare systems and modeling of intervention impact. Methods: We assessed incidence, duration of hospitalization, and clinical outcomes of acute COVID-19 inpatient admissions in a prospectively-followed cohort of 9,596,321 individuals enrolled in comprehensive, integrated healthcare delivery plans from Kaiser Permanente in California and Washington state. We also estimated the effective reproductive number (RE) describing transmission in the study populations. Results: Data covered 1277 hospitalized patients with laboratory- or clinically-confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis by April 9, 2020. Cumulative incidence of first COVID-19 acute inpatient admission was 10.6-12.4 per 100,000 cohort members across the study regions. Mean censoring-adjusted duration of hospitalization was 10.7 days (2.5-97.5%iles: 0.8-30.1) among survivors and 13.7 days (2.5-97.5%iles: 1.7-34.6) among non-survivors. Among all hospitalized confirmed cases, censoring-adjusted probabilities of ICU admission and mortality were 41.9% (95% confidence interval: 34.1-51.4%) and 17.8% (14.3-22.2%), respectively, and higher among men than women. We estimated RE was 1.43 (1.17-1.73), 2.09 (1.63-2.69), and 1.47 (0.07-2.59) in Northern California, Southern California, and Washington, respectively, for infections acquired March 1, 2020. RE declined to 0.98 (0.76-1.27), 0.89 (0.74-1.06), and 0.92 (0.05-1.55) respectively, for infections acquired March 20, 2020. Conclusions: We identify high probability of ICU admission, long durations of stay, and considerable mortality risk among hospitalized COVID-19 cases in the western United States. Reductions in RE have occurred in conjunction with implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Effects of weather-related social distancing on city-scale transmission of respiratory viruses (preprint)

BACKGROUND: Unusually high snowfall in western Washington State in February 2019 led to widespread school and workplace closures. We assessed the impact of social distancing caused by this extreme weather event on the transmission of respiratory viruses. METHODS: Residual specimens from patients evaluated for acute respiratory illness at hospitals in the Seattle metropolitan area were screened for a panel of respiratory viruses. Transmission models were fit to each virus, with disruption of contact rates and care-seeking informed by data on local traffic volumes and hospital admissions. RESULTS: Disruption in contact patterns reduced effective contact rates during the intervention period by 16% to 95%, and cumulative disease incidence through the remainder of the season by 3% to 9%. Incidence reductions were greatest for viruses that were peaking when the disruption occurred and least for viruses in early epidemic phase. CONCLUSION: High-intensity, short-duration social distancing measures may substantially reduce total incidence in a respiratory virus epidemic if implemented near the epidemic peak.