Outbreak of acute respiratory disease caused by human adenovirus type 7 and human coronavirus-229E in Zhejiang Province, China.

In 2019, an outbreak of pharyngoconjunctival fever (PCF) occurred at a swimming center in Zhejiang Province, China. A total of 97 (13.55%) of the 716 amateur swimmers had illnesses, with 24 patients (24.74%) hospitalized in the pediatric ward. Human adenovirus serotype 7 (HAdV-7) was isolated from one concentrated water from the swimming pool, and 20 of 97 positive cases without liver damage. This outbreak led to a nosocomial outbreak in the pediatric ward, in which 1 nurse had a fever and was confirmed to be adenovirus positive. The hexon, fiber, and penton genes from 20 outbreak cases, 1 water sample, and 1 nurse had 100% homology. Furthermore, 2 cases admitted to the pediatric ward, 2 parents, and 1 doctor were confirmed to be human coronaviruses (HCoV-229E) positive. Finally, all outbreak cases had fully recovered, regardless of a single infection (adenovirus or HCoV-229E) or coinfection of these two viruses simultaneously. Thus, PCF and acute respiratory disease outbreaks in Zhejiang were caused by the completely homologous type 7 adenovirus and HCoV-229E, respectively. The swimming pool water contaminated with HAdV-7 was most likely the source of the PCF outbreak, whereas nosocomial transmission might be the source of HCoV-229E outbreak.

The clinical and virological features of two children's coinfections with human adenovirus type 7 and human coronavirus-229E virus.

Objective: Human adenovirus (HAdV) coinfection with other respiratory viruses is common, but adenovirus infection combined with human coronavirus-229E (HCoV-229E) is very rare. Study design and setting: Clinical manifestations, laboratory examinations, and disease severity were compared between three groups: one coinfected with HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E, one infected only with adenovirus (mono-adenovirus), and one infected only with HCoV-229E (mono-HCoV-229E). Results: From July to August 2019, there were 24 hospitalized children: two were coinfected with HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E, and 21 were infected with a single adenovirus infection. Finally, one 14-year-old boy presented with a high fever, but tested negative for HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E. Additionally, three adult asymptotic cases with HCoV-229E were screened. No significant difference in age was found in the coinfection and mono-adenovirus groups (11 vs. 8 years, p = 0.332). Both groups had the same incubation period (2.5 vs. 3 days, p = 0.8302), fever duration (2.5 vs. 2.9 days, p = 0.5062), and length of hospital stay (7 vs. 6.76 days, p = 0.640). No obvious differences were found in viral loads between the coinfection and mono-adenovirus groups (25.4 vs. 23.7, p = 0.570), or in the coinfection and mono-HCoV-229E groups (32.9 vs. 30.06, p = 0.067). All cases recovered and were discharged from the hospital. Conclusion: HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E coinfection in healthy children may not increase the clinical severity or prolong the clinical course. The specific interaction mechanism between the viruses requires further study.

The clinical and virological features of two children's coinfections with human adenovirus type 7 and human coronavirus-229E virus

Objective Human adenovirus (HAdV) coinfection with other respiratory viruses is common, but adenovirus infection combined with human coronavirus-229E (HCoV-229E) is very rare. Study design and setting Clinical manifestations, laboratory examinations, and disease severity were compared between three groups: one coinfected with HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E, one infected only with adenovirus (mono-adenovirus), and one infected only with HCoV-229E (mono-HCoV-229E). Results From July to August 2019, there were 24 hospitalized children: two were coinfected with HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E, and 21 were infected with a single adenovirus infection. Finally, one 14-year-old boy presented with a high fever, but tested negative for HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E. Additionally, three adult asymptotic cases with HCoV-229E were screened. No significant difference in age was found in the coinfection and mono-adenovirus groups (11 vs. 8 years, p = 0.332). Both groups had the same incubation period (2.5 vs. 3 days, p = 0.8302), fever duration (2.5 vs. 2.9 days, p = 0.5062), and length of hospital stay (7 vs. 6.76 days, p = 0.640). No obvious differences were found in viral loads between the coinfection and mono-adenovirus groups (25.4 vs. 23.7, p = 0.570), or in the coinfection and mono-HCoV-229E groups (32.9 vs. 30.06, p = 0.067). All cases recovered and were discharged from the hospital. Conclusion HAdV-Ad7 and HCoV-229E coinfection in healthy children may not increase the clinical severity or prolong the clinical course. The specific interaction mechanism between the viruses requires further study.

Transmission roles of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases: a modelling study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) asymptomatic cases are hard to identify, impeding transmissibility estimation. The value of COVID-19 transmissibility is worth further elucidation for key assumptions in further modelling studies. Through a population-based surveillance network, we collected data on 1342 confirmed cases with a 90-days follow-up for all asymptomatic cases. An age-stratified compartmental model containing contact information was built to estimate the transmissibility of symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases. The difference in transmissibility of a symptomatic and asymptomatic case depended on age and was most distinct for the middle-age groups. The asymptomatic cases had a 66.7% lower transmissibility rate than symptomatic cases, and 74.1% (95% CI 65.9-80.7) of all asymptomatic cases were missed in detection. The average proportion of asymptomatic cases was 28.2% (95% CI 23.0-34.6). Simulation demonstrated that the burden of asymptomatic transmission increased as the epidemic continued and could potentially dominate total transmission. The transmissibility of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases is high and asymptomatic COVID-19 cases play a significant role in outbreaks.

Collateral Impact of COVID-19 Prevention Measures on Re-Emergence of Scarlet Fever and Pertussis in Mainland China and Hong Kong China.

The incidence of scarlet fever and pertussis has increased significantly in China in recent years. During the COVID-19 pandemic, stringent non-pharmaceutical intervention measures were widely adopted to contain the spread of the virus, which may also have essential collateral impacts on other infectious diseases, such as scarlet fever and pertussis. We compared the incidence data of scarlet fever and pertussis in Mainland China and Hong Kong from 2004 to 2021 before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The results show that the incidence of both diseases decreased significantly in 2020-2021 compared to the after-re-emergence stage in these two locations. Specifically, in 2020, scarlet fever decreased by 73.13% and pertussis by 76.63% in Mainland China, and 83.70% and 76.10%, respectively, in Hong Kong. In the absence of COVID-19, the predicted incidence of both diseases was much higher than the actual incidence in Mainland China and Hong Kong in 2020-2021. This study demonstrates that non-pharmaceutical measures implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic can partially reduce scarlet fever and pertussis re-emergence in Mainland China and Hong Kong.

COVID-19 Transmission Dynamics Among Close Contacts of Index Patients With COVID-19: A Population-Based Cohort Study in Zhejiang Province, China.

Importance: Much remains unknown about the transmission dynamics of COVID-19. How the severity of the index case and timing of exposure is associated with disease in close contacts of index patients with COVID-19 and clinical presentation in those developing disease is not well elucidated. Objectives: To investigate the association between the timing of exposure and development of disease among close contacts of index patients with COVID-19 and to evaluate whether the severity of the index case is associated with clinical presentation in close contacts who develop COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used a large, population-based cohort of 730 individuals (index patients) who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 in Zhejiang Province, China, from January 8 to July 30, 2020, along with a contact tracing surveillance program. Field workers visited 8852 close contacts of the index patients and evaluated them for COVID-19 through August 2020. A timeline was constructed to characterize different exposure periods between index patients and their contacts. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the attack rate of COVID-19, defined as the total number of new COVID-19 cases diagnosed among contacts of index patients divided by the total number of exposed contacts. A secondary outcome was asymptomatic clinical presentation among infected contacts. Relative risks were calculated to investigate risk factors for COVID-19 among contacts and asymptomatic clinical presentation among infected contacts. Results: Among 8852 close contacts (4679 male contacts [52.9%]; median age, 41 years [interquartile range, 28-54 years]) of 730 index patients (374 male patients [51.2%]; median age, 46 years [interquartile range, 36-56 years]), contacts were at highest risk of COVID-19 if they were exposed between 2 days before and 3 days after the index patient's symptom onset, peaking at day 0 (adjusted relative risk [ARR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.5). Compared with being exposed to an asymptomatic index patient, the risk of COVID-19 among contacts was higher when they were exposed to index patients with mild (ARR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.8-9.1) and moderate (ARR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.9-9.7) cases of COVID-19. As index case severity increased, infected contacts were less likely to be asymptomatic (exposed to patient with mild COVID-19: ARR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.9; exposed to patient with moderate COVID-19: ARR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.8). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that individuals with COVID-19 were most infectious a few days before and after symptom onset. Infected contacts of asymptomatic index patients were less likely to present with COVID-19 symptoms, suggesting that quantity of exposure may be associated with clinical presentation in close contacts.

The impact of social distancing, contact tracing, and case isolation interventions to suppress the COVID-19 epidemic: A modeling study.

INTRODUCTION: Most countries are dependent on nonpharmaceutical public health interventions such as social distancing, contact tracing, and case isolation to mitigate COVID-19 spread until medicines or vaccines widely available. Minimal research has been performed on the independent and combined impact of each of these interventions based on empirical case data. METHODS: We obtained data from all confirmed COVID-19 cases from January 7th to February 22nd 2020 in Zhejiang Province, China, to fit an age-stratified compartmental model using human contact information before and during the outbreak. The effectiveness of social distancing, contact tracing, and case isolation was studied and compared in simulation. We also simulated a two-phase reopening scenario to assess whether various strategies combining nonpharmaceutical interventions are likely to achieve population-level control of a second-wave epidemic. RESULTS: Our study sample included 1,218 symptomatic cases with COVID-19, of which 664 had no inter-province travel history. Results suggest that 36.5 % (95 % CI, 12.8-57.1) of contacts were quarantined, and approximately five days (95 % CI, 2.2-11.0) were needed to detect and isolate a case. As contact networks would increase after societal and economic reopening, avoiding a second wave without strengthening nonpharmaceutical interventions compared to the first wave it would be exceedingly difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous attention and further improvement of nonpharmaceutical interventions are needed in second-wave prevention. Specifically, contact tracing merits further attention.

A Cluster of Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infections Indicating Person-to-Person Transmission Among Casual Contacts From Social Gatherings: An Outbreak Case-Contact Investigation.

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the pathogen causing novel coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19), efficiently spreads from person to person in close contact settings. Transmission among casual contacts in settings such as during social gatherings is not well understood. METHODS: We report several transmission events to both close and casual contacts from a cluster of 7 COVID-19 cases occurring from mid-January to early February 2020. A total of 539 social and family contacts of the index patient's, including members of a 2-day wedding and a family party, were contacted and screened through epidemiologic surveys. The clinical progression of all cases is described. RESULTS: We estimate the secondary attack rate among close contacts to be 29% (2 of 7) and for the casual contacts to be 0.6% (3 of 473). The incubation period of our case cluster was 4-12 days (median, 7 days). CONCLUSIONS: Transmission efficiency among close contacts was higher than among casual contacts; however, transmission from second-generation cases may help spread the virus during the incubation period.