Different forms of superspreading lead to different outcomes: Heterogeneity in infectiousness and contact behavior relevant for the case of SARS-CoV-2.

Superspreading events play an important role in the spread of several pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2. While the basic reproduction number of the original Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 is estimated to be about 3 for Belgium, there is substantial inter-individual variation in the number of secondary cases each infected individual causes-with most infectious individuals generating no or only a few secondary cases, while about 20% of infectious individuals is responsible for 80% of new infections. Multiple factors contribute to the occurrence of superspreading events: heterogeneity in infectiousness, individual variations in susceptibility, differences in contact behavior, and the environment in which transmission takes place. While superspreading has been included in several infectious disease transmission models, research into the effects of different forms of superspreading on the spread of pathogens remains limited. To disentangle the effects of infectiousness-related heterogeneity on the one hand and contact-related heterogeneity on the other, we implemented both forms of superspreading in an individual-based model describing the transmission and spread of SARS-CoV-2 in a synthetic Belgian population. We considered its impact on viral spread as well as on epidemic resurgence after a period of social distancing. We found that the effects of superspreading driven by heterogeneity in infectiousness are different from the effects of superspreading driven by heterogeneity in contact behavior. On the one hand, a higher level of infectiousness-related heterogeneity results in a lower risk of an outbreak persisting following the introduction of one infected individual into the population. Outbreaks that did persist led to fewer total cases and were slower, with a lower peak which occurred at a later point in time, and a lower herd immunity threshold. Finally, the risk of resurgence of an outbreak following a period of lockdown decreased. On the other hand, when contact-related heterogeneity was high, this also led to fewer cases in total during persistent outbreaks, but caused outbreaks to be more explosive in regard to other aspects (such as higher peaks which occurred earlier, and a higher herd immunity threshold). Finally, the risk of resurgence of an outbreak following a period of lockdown increased. We found that these effects were conserved when testing combinations of infectiousness-related and contact-related heterogeneity.

Controlling SARS-CoV-2 in schools using repetitive testing strategies.

SARS-CoV-2 remains a worldwide emergency. While vaccines have been approved and are widely administered, there is an ongoing debate whether children should be vaccinated or prioritized for vaccination. Therefore, in order to mitigate the spread of more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants among children, the use of non-pharmaceutical interventions is still warranted. We investigate the impact of different testing strategies on the SARS-CoV-2 infection dynamics in a primary school environment, using an individual-based modelling approach. Specifically, we consider three testing strategies: (1) symptomatic isolation, where we test symptomatic individuals and isolate them when they test positive, (2) reactive screening, where a class is screened once one symptomatic individual was identified, and (3) repetitive screening, where the school in its entirety is screened on regular time intervals. Through this analysis, we demonstrate that repetitive testing strategies can significantly reduce the attack rate in schools, contrary to a reactive screening or a symptomatic isolation approach. However, when a repetitive testing strategy is in place, more cases will be detected and class and school closures are more easily triggered, leading to a higher number of school days lost per child. While maintaining the epidemic under control with a repetitive testing strategy, we show that absenteeism can be reduced by relaxing class and school closure thresholds.

A Tale of Three Recent Pandemics: Influenza, HIV and SARS-CoV-2.

Emerging infectious diseases are one of the main threats to public health, with the potential to cause a pandemic when the infectious agent manages to spread globally. The first major pandemic to appear in the 20th century was the influenza pandemic of 1918, caused by the influenza A H1N1 strain that is characterized by a high fatality rate. Another major pandemic was caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), that started early in the 20th century and remained undetected until 1981. The ongoing HIV pandemic demonstrated a high mortality and morbidity rate, with discrepant impacts in different regions around the globe. The most recent major pandemic event, is the ongoing pandemic of COVID-19, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which has caused over 5.7 million deaths since its emergence, 2 years ago. The aim of this work is to highlight the main determinants of the emergence, epidemic response and available countermeasures of these three pandemics, as we argue that such knowledge is paramount to prepare for the next pandemic. We analyse these pandemics' historical and epidemiological contexts and the determinants of their emergence. Furthermore, we compare pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions that have been used to slow down these three pandemics and zoom in on the technological advances that were made in the progress. Finally, we discuss the evolution of epidemiological modelling, that has become an essential tool to support public health policy making and discuss it in the context of these three pandemics. While these pandemics are caused by distinct viruses, that ignited in different time periods and in different regions of the globe, our work shows that many of the determinants of their emergence and countermeasures used to halt transmission were common. Therefore, it is important to further improve and optimize such approaches and adapt it to future threatening emerging infectious diseases.

Serial Intervals for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron and Delta Variants, Belgium, November 19-December 31, 2021.

We investigated the serial interval for SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and Delta variants and observed a shorter serial interval for Omicron, suggesting faster transmission. Results indicate a relationship between empirical serial interval and vaccination status for both variants. Further assessment of the causes and extent of Omicron dominance over Delta is warranted.

Quantifying superspreading for COVID-19 using Poisson mixture distributions.

The number of secondary cases, i.e. the number of new infections generated by an infectious individual, is an important parameter for the control of infectious diseases. When individual variation in disease transmission is present, like for COVID-19, the distribution of the number of secondary cases is skewed and often modeled using a negative binomial distribution. However, this may not always be the best distribution to describe the underlying transmission process. We propose the use of three other offspring distributions to quantify heterogeneity in transmission, and we assess the possible bias in estimates of the mean and variance of this distribution when the data generating distribution is different from the one used for inference. We also analyze COVID-19 data from Hong Kong, India, and Rwanda, and quantify the proportion of cases responsible for 80% of transmission, [Formula: see text], while acknowledging the variation arising from the assumed offspring distribution. In a simulation study, we find that variance estimates may be biased when there is a substantial amount of heterogeneity, and that selection of the most accurate distribution from a set of distributions is important. In addition we find that the number of secondary cases for two of the three COVID-19 datasets is better described by a Poisson-lognormal distribution.

On realized serial and generation intervals given control measures: The COVID-19 pandemic case.

The SARS-CoV-2 pathogen is currently spreading worldwide and its propensity for presymptomatic and asymptomatic transmission makes it difficult to control. The control measures adopted in several countries aim at isolating individuals once diagnosed, limiting their social interactions and consequently their transmission probability. These interventions, which have a strong impact on the disease dynamics, can affect the inference of the epidemiological quantities. We first present a theoretical explanation of the effect caused by non-pharmaceutical intervention measures on the mean serial and generation intervals. Then, in a simulation study, we vary the assumed efficacy of control measures and quantify the effect on the mean and variance of realized generation and serial intervals. The simulation results show that the realized serial and generation intervals both depend on control measures and their values contract according to the efficacy of the intervention strategies. Interestingly, the mean serial interval differs from the mean generation interval. The deviation between these two values depends on two factors. First, the number of undiagnosed infectious individuals. Second, the relationship between infectiousness, symptom onset and timing of isolation. Similarly, the standard deviations of realized serial and generation intervals do not coincide, with the former shorter than the latter on average. The findings of this study are directly relevant to estimates performed for the current COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, the effective reproduction number is often inferred using both daily incidence data and the generation interval. Failing to account for either contraction or mis-specification by using the serial interval could lead to biased estimates of the effective reproduction number. Consequently, this might affect the choices made by decision makers when deciding which control measures to apply based on the value of the quantity thereof.

Assessing the feasibility and effectiveness of household-pooled universal testing to control COVID-19 epidemics.

Outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 are threatening the health care systems of several countries around the world. The initial control of SARS-CoV-2 epidemics relied on non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as social distancing, teleworking, mouth masks and contact tracing. However, as pre-symptomatic transmission remains an important driver of the epidemic, contact tracing efforts struggle to fully control SARS-CoV-2 epidemics. Therefore, in this work, we investigate to what extent the use of universal testing, i.e., an approach in which we screen the entire population, can be utilized to mitigate this epidemic. To this end, we rely on PCR test pooling of individuals that belong to the same households, to allow for a universal testing procedure that is feasible with the limited testing capacity. We evaluate two isolation strategies: on the one hand pool isolation, where we isolate all individuals that belong to a positive PCR test pool, and on the other hand individual isolation, where we determine which of the individuals that belong to the positive PCR pool are positive, through an additional testing step. We evaluate this universal testing approach in the STRIDE individual-based epidemiological model in the context of the Belgian COVID-19 epidemic. As the organisation of universal testing will be challenging, we discuss the different aspects related to sample extraction and PCR testing, to demonstrate the feasibility of universal testing when a decentralized testing approach is used. We show through simulation, that weekly universal testing is able to control the epidemic, even when many of the contact reductions are relieved. Finally, our model shows that the use of universal testing in combination with stringent contact reductions could be considered as a strategy to eradicate the virus.

A prospect on the use of antiviral drugs to control local outbreaks of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Current outbreaks of COVID-19 are threatening the health care systems of several countries around the world. Control measures, based on isolation, contact tracing, and quarantine, can decrease and delay the burden of the ongoing epidemic. With respect to the ongoing COVID-19 epidemic, recent modeling work shows that these interventions may be inadequate to control local outbreaks, even when perfect isolation is assumed. The effect of infectiousness prior to symptom onset combined with asymptomatic infectees further complicates the use of contact tracing. We aim to study whether antivirals, which decrease the viral load and reduce infectiousness, could be integrated into control measures in order to augment the feasibility of controlling the epidemic. METHODS: Using a simulation-based model of viral transmission, we tested the efficacy of different intervention measures to control local COVID-19 outbreaks. For individuals that were identified through contact tracing, we evaluate two procedures: monitoring individuals for symptoms onset and testing of individuals. Additionally, we investigate the implementation of an antiviral compound combined with the contact tracing process. RESULTS: For an infectious disease in which asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections are plausible, an intervention measure based on contact tracing performs better when combined with testing instead of monitoring, provided that the test is able to detect infections during the incubation period. Antiviral drugs, in combination with contact tracing, quarantine, and isolation, result in a significant decrease of the final size and the peak incidence, and increase the probability that the outbreak will fade out. CONCLUSION: In all tested scenarios, the model highlights the benefits of control measures based on the testing of traced individuals. In addition, the administration of an antiviral drug, together with quarantine, isolation, and contact tracing, is shown to decrease the spread of the epidemic. This control measure could be an effective strategy to control local and re-emerging outbreaks of COVID-19.

Estimating the generation interval for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) based on symptom onset data, March 2020.

BackgroundEstimating key infectious disease parameters from the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak is essential for modelling studies and guiding intervention strategies.AimWe estimate the generation interval, serial interval, proportion of pre-symptomatic transmission and effective reproduction number of COVID-19. We illustrate that reproduction numbers calculated based on serial interval estimates can be biased.MethodsWe used outbreak data from clusters in Singapore and Tianjin, China to estimate the generation interval from symptom onset data while acknowledging uncertainty about the incubation period distribution and the underlying transmission network. From those estimates, we obtained the serial interval, proportions of pre-symptomatic transmission and reproduction numbers.ResultsThe mean generation interval was 5.20 days (95% credible interval (CrI): 3.78-6.78) for Singapore and 3.95 days (95% CrI: 3.01-4.91) for Tianjin. The proportion of pre-symptomatic transmission was 48% (95% CrI: 32-67) for Singapore and 62% (95% CrI: 50-76) for Tianjin. Reproduction number estimates based on the generation interval distribution were slightly higher than those based on the serial interval distribution. Sensitivity analyses showed that estimating these quantities from outbreak data requires detailed contact tracing information.ConclusionHigh estimates of the proportion of pre-symptomatic transmission imply that case finding and contact tracing need to be supplemented by physical distancing measures in order to control the COVID-19 outbreak. Notably, quarantine and other containment measures were already in place at the time of data collection, which may inflate the proportion of infections from pre-symptomatic individuals.