Estimated US Pediatric Hospitalizations and School Absenteeism Associated With Accelerated COVID-19 Bivalent Booster Vaccination.

Importance: Adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in the pediatric population include disease and hospitalization, leading to school absenteeism. Booster vaccination for eligible individuals across all ages may promote health and school attendance. Objective: To assess whether accelerating COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccination uptake across the general population would be associated with reduced pediatric hospitalizations and school absenteeism. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this decision analytical model, a simulation model of COVID-19 transmission was fitted to reported incidence data from October 1, 2020, to September 30, 2022, with outcomes simulated from October 1, 2022, to March 31, 2023. The transmission model included the entire age-stratified US population, and the outcome model included children younger than 18 years. Interventions: Simulated scenarios of accelerated bivalent COVID-19 booster campaigns to achieve uptake that was either one-half of or similar to the age-specific uptake observed for 2020 to 2021 seasonal influenza vaccination in the eligible population across all age groups. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were estimated hospitalizations, intensive care unit admissions, and isolation days of symptomatic infection averted among children aged 0 to 17 years and estimated days of school absenteeism averted among children aged 5 to 17 years under the accelerated bivalent booster campaign simulated scenarios. Results: Among children aged 5 to 17 years, a COVID-19 bivalent booster campaign achieving age-specific coverage similar to influenza vaccination could have averted an estimated 5 448 694 (95% credible interval [CrI], 4 936 933-5 957 507) days of school absenteeism due to COVID-19 illness. In addition, the booster campaign could have prevented an estimated 10 019 (95% CrI, 8756-11 278) hospitalizations among the pediatric population aged 0 to 17 years, of which 2645 (95% CrI, 2152-3147) were estimated to require intensive care. A less ambitious booster campaign with only 50% of the age-specific uptake of influenza vaccination among eligible individuals could have averted an estimated 2 875 926 (95% CrI, 2 524 351-3 332 783) days of school absenteeism among children aged 5 to 17 years and an estimated 5791 (95% CrI, 4391-6932) hospitalizations among children aged 0 to 17 years, of which 1397 (95% CrI, 846-1948) were estimated to require intensive care. Conclusions and Relevance: In this decision analytical model, increased uptake of bivalent booster vaccination among eligible age groups was associated with decreased hospitalizations and school absenteeism in the pediatric population. These findings suggest that although COVID-19 prevention strategies often focus on older populations, the benefits of booster campaigns for children may be substantial.

Return on Investment of the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign in New York City.

Importance: New York City, an early epicenter of the pandemic, invested heavily in its COVID-19 vaccination campaign to mitigate the burden of disease outbreaks. Understanding the return on investment (ROI) of this campaign would provide insights into vaccination programs to curb future COVID-19 outbreaks. Objective: To estimate the ROI of the New York City COVID-19 vaccination campaign by estimating the tangible direct and indirect costs from a societal perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytical model of disease transmission was calibrated to confirmed and probable cases of COVID-19 in New York City between December 14, 2020, and January 31, 2022. This simulation model was validated with observed patterns of reported hospitalizations and deaths during the same period. Exposures: An agent-based counterfactual scenario without vaccination was simulated using the calibrated model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs of health care and deaths were estimated in the actual pandemic trajectory with vaccination and in the counterfactual scenario without vaccination. The savings achieved by vaccination, which were associated with fewer outpatient visits, emergency department visits, emergency medical services, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions, were also estimated. The value of a statistical life (VSL) lost due to COVID-19 death and the productivity loss from illness were accounted for in calculating the ROI. Results: During the study period, the vaccination campaign averted an estimated $27.96 (95% credible interval [CrI], $26.19-$29.84) billion in health care expenditures and 315 724 (95% CrI, 292 143-340 420) potential years of life lost, averting VSL loss of $26.27 (95% CrI, $24.39-$28.21) billion. The estimated net savings attributable to vaccination were $51.77 (95% CrI, $48.50-$55.85) billion. Every $1 invested in vaccination yielded estimated savings of $10.19 (95% CrI, $9.39-$10.87) in direct and indirect costs of health outcomes that would have been incurred without vaccination. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this modeling study showed an association of the New York City COVID-19 vaccination campaign with reduction in severe outcomes and avoidance of substantial economic losses. This significant ROI supports continued investment in improving vaccine uptake during the ongoing pandemic.

Testing for COVID-19 is Much More Effective When Performed Immediately Prior to Social Mixing

Objective: To quantify the utility of RT-PCR and rapid antigen tests in preventing post-arrival transmission based on timing of the pre-departure test. Methods: We derived analytical expressions to compute post-arrival transmission when no test is performed, and when either an RT-PCR or any of 18 rapid antigen tests is performed at specified times before arrival. We determined the diagnostic sensitivity of the rapid antigen tests by propagating their RT-PCR percent positive agreement onto known RT-PCR diagnostic sensitivity. Results: Depending on the rapid antigen test used, conducting a rapid antigen test immediately before departure reduces post-arrival transmission between 37.4% (95% CrI: 28.2%–40.7%) and 46.7% (95% CrI:40.0%–49.3%), compared to a 31.1% (95% CrI: 26.3%–33.5%) reduction using an RT-PCR 12 h before arrival. Performance of each rapid antigen test differed by diagnostic sensitivity over the course of disease. However, these differences were smaller than those engendered by testing too early. Conclusion: Testing closer to arrival—ideally on the day of arrival—is more effective at reducing post-arrival transmission than testing earlier. Rapid antigen tests perform the best in this application due to their short turnaround time.

Quarantine and serial testing for variants of SARS-CoV-2 with benefits of vaccination and boosting on consequent control of COVID-19.

Quarantine and serial testing strategies for a disease depend principally on its incubation period and infectiousness profile. In the context of COVID-19, these primary public health tools must be modulated with successive SARS CoV-2 variants of concern that dominate transmission. Our analysis shows that (1) vaccination status of an individual makes little difference to the determination of the appropriate quarantine duration of an infected case, whereas vaccination coverage of the population can have a substantial effect on this duration, (2) successive variants can challenge disease control efforts by their earlier and increased transmission in the disease time course relative to prior variants, and (3) sufficient vaccine boosting of a population substantially aids the suppression of local transmission through frequent serial testing. For instance, with Omicron, increasing immunity through vaccination and boosters-for instance with 100% of the population is fully immunized and at least 24% having received a third dose-can reduce quarantine durations by up to 2 d, as well as substantially aid in the repression of outbreaks through serial testing. Our analysis highlights the paramount importance of maintaining high population immunity, preferably by booster uptake, and the role of quarantine and testing to control the spread of SARS CoV-2.

Comparative analyses of eighteen rapid antigen tests and RT-PCR for COVID-19 quarantine and surveillance-based isolation.

Background: Rapid antigen (RA) tests are being increasingly employed to detect SARS-CoV-2 infections in quarantine and surveillance. Prior research has focused on RT-PCR testing, a single RA test, or generic diagnostic characteristics of RA tests in assessing testing strategies. Methods: We have conducted a comparative analysis of the post-quarantine transmission, the effective reproduction number during serial testing, and the false-positive rates for 18 RA tests with emergency use authorization from The United States Food and Drug Administration and an RT-PCR test. To quantify the extent of transmission, we developed an analytical mathematical framework informed by COVID-19 infectiousness, test specificity, and temporal diagnostic sensitivity data. Results: We demonstrate that the relative effectiveness of RA tests and RT-PCR testing in reducing post-quarantine transmission depends on the quarantine duration and the turnaround time of testing results. For quarantines of two days or shorter, conducting a RA test on exit from quarantine reduces onward transmission more than a single RT-PCR test (with a 24-h delay) conducted upon exit. Applied to a complementary approach of performing serial testing at a specified frequency paired with isolation of positives, we have shown that RA tests outperform RT-PCR with a 24-h delay. The results from our modeling framework are consistent with quarantine and serial testing data collected from a remote industry setting. Conclusions: These RA test-specific results are an important component of the tool set for policy decision-making, and demonstrate that judicious selection of an appropriate RA test can supply a viable alternative to RT-PCR in efforts to control the spread of disease.

Universal healthcare as pandemic preparedness: The lives and costs that could have been saved during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The fragmented and inefficient healthcare system in the United States leads to many preventable deaths and unnecessary costs every year. During a pandemic, the lives saved and economic benefits of a single-payer universal healthcare system relative to the status quo would be even greater. For Americans who are uninsured and underinsured, financial barriers to COVID-19 care delayed diagnosis and exacerbated transmission. Concurrently, deaths beyond COVID-19 accrued from the background rate of uninsurance. Universal healthcare would alleviate the mortality caused by the confluence of these factors. To evaluate the repercussions of incomplete insurance coverage in 2020, we calculated the elevated mortality attributable to the loss of employer-sponsored insurance and to background rates of uninsurance, summing with the increased COVID-19 mortality due to low insurance coverage. Incorporating the demography of the uninsured with age-specific COVID-19 and nonpandemic mortality, we estimated that a single-payer universal healthcare system would have saved about 212,000 lives in 2020 alone. We also calculated that US$105.6 billion of medical expenses associated with COVID-19 hospitalization could have been averted by a single-payer universal healthcare system over the course of the pandemic. These economic benefits are in addition to US$438 billion expected to be saved by single-payer universal healthcare during a nonpandemic year.

Quarantine and testing strategies to ameliorate transmission due to travel during the COVID-19 pandemic: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Numerous countries have imposed strict travel restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, contributing to a large socioeconomic burden. The long quarantines that have been applied to contacts of cases may be excessive for travel policy. METHODS: We developed an approach to evaluate imminent countrywide COVID-19 infections after 0-14-day quarantine and testing. We identified the minimum travel quarantine duration such that the infection rate within the destination country did not increase compared to a travel ban, defining this minimum quarantine as "sufficient." FINDINGS: We present a generalised analytical framework and a specific case study of the epidemic situation on November 21, 2021, for application to 26 European countries. For most origin-destination country pairs, a three-day or shorter quarantine with RT-PCR or antigen testing on exit suffices. Adaptation to the European Union traffic-light risk stratification provided a simplified policy tool. Our analytical approach provides guidance for travel policy during all phases of pandemic diseases. INTERPRETATION: For nearly half of origin-destination country pairs analysed, travel can be permitted in the absence of quarantine and testing. For the majority of pairs requiring controls, a short quarantine with testing could be as effective as a complete travel ban. The estimated travel quarantine durations are substantially shorter than those specified for traced contacts. FUNDING: EasyJet (JPT and APG), the Elihu endowment (JPT), the Burnett and Stender families' endowment (APG), the Notsew Orm Sands Foundation (JPT and APG), the National Institutes of Health (MCF), Canadian Institutes of Health Research (SMM) and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada EIDM-MfPH (SMM).

Modeling comparative cost-effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose fractionation in India.

Given global Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine shortages and inequity of vaccine distributions, fractionation of vaccine doses might be an effective strategy for reducing public health and economic burden, notwithstanding the emergence of new variants of concern. In this study, we developed a multi-scale model incorporating population-level transmission and individual-level vaccination to estimate the costs of hospitalization and vaccination and the economic benefits of reducing COVID-19 deaths due to dose-fractionation strategies in India. We used large-scale survey data of the willingness to pay together with data of vaccine and hospital admission costs to build the model. We found that fractional doses of vaccines could be an economically viable vaccination strategy compared to alternatives of either full-dose vaccination or no vaccination. Dose-sparing strategies could save a large number of lives, even with the emergence of new variants with higher transmissibility.

Cost-effective proactive testing strategies during COVID-19 mass vaccination: A modelling study.

BACKGROUND: As SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are administered worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic continues to exact significant human and economic costs. Mass testing of unvaccinated individuals followed by isolation of positive cases can substantially mitigate risks and be tailored to local epidemiological conditions to ensure cost effectiveness. METHODS: Using a multi-scale model that incorporates population-level SARS-CoV-2 transmission and individual-level viral load kinetics, we identify the optimal frequency of proactive SARS-CoV-2 testing, depending on the local transmission rate and proportion immunized. FINDINGS: Assuming a willingness-to-pay of US$100,000 per averted year of life lost (YLL) and a price of $10 per test, the optimal strategy under a rapid transmission scenario (Re ∼ 2.5) is daily testing until one third of the population is immunized and then weekly testing until half the population is immunized, combined with a 10-day isolation period of positive cases and their households. Under a low transmission scenario (Re ∼ 1.2), the optimal sequence is weekly testing until the population reaches 10% partial immunity, followed by monthly testing until 20% partial immunity, and no testing thereafter. INTERPRETATION: Mass proactive testing and case isolation is a cost effective strategy for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in the initial stages of the global SARS-CoV-2 vaccination campaign and in response to resurgences of vaccine-evasive variants. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, HK Innovation and Technology Commission, China National Natural Science Foundation, European Research Council, and EPSRC Impact Acceleration Grant.

COVID-19 outcomes in hospitalized patients with active cancer: Experiences from a major New York City health care system.

BACKGROUND: The authors sought to study the risk factors associated with severe outcomes in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with cancer. METHODS: The authors queried the New York University Langone Medical Center's records for hospitalized patients who were polymerase chain reaction-positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) and performed chart reviews on patients with cancer diagnoses to identify patients with active cancer and patients with a history of cancer. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine associations between clinical, demographic, and laboratory characteristics with outcomes, including death and admission to the intensive care unit. RESULTS: A total of 4184 hospitalized SARS CoV-2+ patients, including 233 with active cancer, were identified. Patients with active cancer were more likely to die than those with a history of cancer and those without any cancer history (34.3% vs 27.6% vs 20%, respectively; P < .01). In multivariable regression among all patients, active cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.89; CI, 1.34-2.67; P < .01), older age (OR, 1.06; CI, 1.05-1.06; P < .01), male sex (OR for female vs male, 0.70; CI, 0.58-0.84; P < .01), diabetes (OR, 1.26; CI, 1.04-1.53; P = .02), morbidly obese body mass index (OR, 1.87; CI, 1.24-2.81; P < .01), and elevated D-dimer (OR, 6.41 for value >2300; CI, 4.75-8.66; P < .01) were associated with increased mortality. Recent cancer-directed medical therapy was not associated with death in multivariable analysis. Among patients with active cancer, those with a hematologic malignancy had the highest mortality rate in comparison with other cancer types (47.83% vs 28.66%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The authors found that patients with an active cancer diagnosis were more likely to die from COVID-19. Those with hematologic malignancies were at the highest risk of death. Patients receiving cancer-directed therapy within 3 months before hospitalization had no overall increased risk of death. LAY SUMMARY: Our investigators found that hospitalized patients with active cancer were more likely to die from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than those with a history of cancer and those without any cancer history. Patients with hematologic cancers were the most likely among patients with cancer to die from COVID-19. Patients who received cancer therapy within 3 months before hospitalization did not have an increased risk of death.

Racial disparities in COVID-19 mortality across Michigan, United States.

BACKGROUND: Black populations in the United States are being disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, but the increased mortality burden after accounting for health and other demographic characteristics is not well understood. We examined characteristics of individuals who died from COVID-19 in Michigan by race stratified by their age, sex and comorbidity prevalence to illustrate and understand this disparity in mortality risk. METHODS: We evaluate COVID-19 mortality in Michigan by demographic and health characteristics, using individual-level linked death certificate and surveillance data collected by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services from March 16 to October 26, 2020. We identified differences in demographics and comorbidity prevalence across race among individuals who died from COVID-19 and calculated mortality rates by age, sex, race, and number of comorbidities. FINDINGS: Among the 6,065 COVID-19 related deaths in Michigan, Black individuals are experiencing 3·6 times the mortality rate of White individuals (p<0.001), with a mortality rate for Black individuals under 65 years without comorbidities that is 12·6 times that of their White counterparts (p<0.001). After accounting for age, race, sex, and number of comorbidities, we find that Black individuals in all strata are at higher risk of COVID-19 mortality than their White counterparts. INTERPRETATION: Our findings demonstrate that Black populations are disproportionately burdened by COVID-19 mortality, even after accounting for demographic and underlying health characteristics. We highlight how disparities across race, which result from systemic racism, are compounded in crises. FUNDING: ASP, AP and APG were funded by NSF Expeditions grant 1918784, NIH grant 1R01AI151176-01, NSF Rapid Response Research for COVID-19 grant RAPID-2027755, and the Notsew Orm Sands Foundation. MCF was supported by NIH grant K01AI141576.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 testing strategies in the USA: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: To mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic, countries worldwide have enacted unprecedented movement restrictions, physical distancing measures, and face mask requirements. Until safe and efficacious vaccines or antiviral drugs become widely available, viral testing remains the primary mitigation measure for rapid identification and isolation of infected individuals. We aimed to assess the economic trade-offs of expanding and accelerating testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) across the USA in different transmission scenarios. METHODS: We used a multiscale model that incorporates SARS-CoV-2 transmission at the population level and daily viral load dynamics at the individual level to assess eight surveillance testing strategies that varied by testing frequency (from daily to monthly testing) and isolation period (1 or 2 weeks), compared with the status-quo strategy of symptom-based testing and isolation. For each testing strategy, we first estimated the costs (incorporating costs of diagnostic testing and admissions to hospital, and salary lost while in isolation) and years of life lost (YLLs) prevented under rapid and low transmission scenarios. We then assessed the testing strategies across a range of scenarios, each defined by effective reproduction number (Re), willingness to pay per YLL averted, and cost of a test, to estimate the probability that a particular strategy had the greatest net benefit. Additionally, for a range of transmission scenarios (Re from 1·1 to 3), we estimated a threshold test price at which the status-quo strategy outperforms all testing strategies considered. FINDINGS: Our modelling showed that daily testing combined with a 2-week isolation period was the most costly strategy considered, reflecting increased costs with greater test frequency and length of isolation period. Assuming a societal willingness to pay of US$100 000 per YLL averted and a price of $5 per test, the strategy most likely to be cost-effective under a rapid transmission scenario (Re of 2·2) is weekly testing followed by a 2-week isolation period subsequent to a positive test result. Under low transmission scenarios (Re of 1·2), monthly testing of the population followed by 1-week isolation rather than 2-week isolation is likely to be most cost-effective. Expanded surveillance testing is more likely to be cost-effective than the status-quo testing strategy if the price per test is less than $75 across all transmission rates considered. INTERPRETATION: Extensive expansion of SARS-CoV-2 testing programmes with more frequent and rapid tests across communities coupled with isolation of individuals with confirmed infection is essential for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, resources recouped from shortened isolation duration could be cost-effectively allocated to more frequent testing. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Love, Tito's.

Optimal COVID-19 quarantine and testing strategies.

For COVID-19, it is vital to understand if quarantines shorter than 14 days can be equally effective with judiciously deployed testing. Here, we develop a mathematical model that quantifies the probability of post-quarantine transmission incorporating testing into travel quarantine, quarantine of traced contacts with an unknown time of infection, and quarantine of cases with a known time of exposure. We find that testing on exit (or entry and exit) can reduce the duration of a 14-day quarantine by 50%, while testing on entry shortens quarantine by at most one day. In a real-world test of our theory applied to offshore oil rig employees, 47 positives were obtained with testing on entry and exit to quarantine, of which 16 had tested negative at entry; preventing an expected nine offshore transmission events that each could have led to outbreaks. We show that appropriately timed testing can make shorter quarantines effective.

The implications of silent transmission for the control of COVID-19 outbreaks.

Since the emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), unprecedented movement restrictions and social distancing measures have been implemented worldwide. The socioeconomic repercussions have fueled calls to lift these measures. In the absence of population-wide restrictions, isolation of infected individuals is key to curtailing transmission. However, the effectiveness of symptom-based isolation in preventing a resurgence depends on the extent of presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission. We evaluate the contribution of presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission based on recent individual-level data regarding infectiousness prior to symptom onset and the asymptomatic proportion among all infections. We found that the majority of incidences may be attributable to silent transmission from a combination of the presymptomatic stage and asymptomatic infections. Consequently, even if all symptomatic cases are isolated, a vast outbreak may nonetheless unfold. We further quantified the effect of isolating silent infections in addition to symptomatic cases, finding that over one-third of silent infections must be isolated to suppress a future outbreak below 1% of the population. Our results indicate that symptom-based isolation must be supplemented by rapid contact tracing and testing that identifies asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases, in order to safely lift current restrictions and minimize the risk of resurgence.