ABSTRACT
In 2016/2017, Washington State experienced a mumps outbreak despite high childhood vaccination rates, with cases more frequently detected among school-aged children and members of the Marshallese community. We sequenced 166 mumps virus genomes collected in Washington and other US states, and traced mumps introductions and transmission within Washington. We uncover that mumps was introduced into Washington approximately 13 times, primarily from Arkansas, sparking multiple co-circulating transmission chains. Although age and vaccination status may have impacted transmission, our data set could not quantify their precise effects. Instead, the outbreak in Washington was overwhelmingly sustained by transmission within the Marshallese community. Our findings underscore the utility of genomic data to clarify epidemiologic factors driving transmission and pinpoint contact networks as critical for mumps transmission. These results imply that contact structures and historic disparities may leave populations at increased risk for respiratory virus disease even when a vaccine is effective and widely used.
Subject(s)
Disease Outbreaks , Mumps virus/physiology , Mumps/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Child, Preschool , Disease Outbreaks/statistics & numerical data , Genome, Viral , Humans , Infant , Micronesia/ethnology , Middle Aged , Mumps/transmission , Mumps/virology , Mumps virus/genetics , Washington/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
We describe the contact investigation for an early confirmed case of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in the United States. Contacts of the case-patient were identified, actively monitored for symptoms, interviewed for a detailed exposure history, and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection by real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) and ELISA. Fifty contacts were identified and 38 (76%) were interviewed, of whom 11 (29%) reported unprotected face-to-face interaction with the case-patient. Thirty-seven (74%) had respiratory specimens tested by rRT-PCR, and all tested negative. Twenty-three (46%) had ELISA performed on serum samples collected ≈6 weeks after exposure, and none had detectable antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Among contacts who were tested, no secondary transmission was identified in this investigation, despite unprotected close interactions with the infectious case-patient.
Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Contact Tracing/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Betacoronavirus/genetics , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Child , Child, Preschool , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Public Health/methods , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Travel , Washington/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Rabies is a zoonotic viral disease that can affect all mammals. In the United States, the majority of human rabies cases are caused by bats, which are the only known reservoirs for rabies virus (RABV) in Washington State. We sought to characterize bat RABV epidemiology in Washington among bats submitted by the public for RABV testing. METHODS: We examined temporal and spatial trends in RABV positivity (% positive) for taxonomically identified bats submitted to diagnostic laboratories during 2006-2017. For a subset of Myotis species, we evaluated sensitivity and predictive value positive (PPV) of morphological identification keys, using mitochondrial markers (cytochrome b) as a reference. For bats tested during 2000-2016, we analyzed RABV positivity by circumstances of encounters with humans, cats, and dogs. RESULTS: During 2006-2017, RABV positivity for all bat species was 6.0% (176/2,928). Among species with ≥100 submissions, RABV positivity was 2.0%-11.7% and highest among big brown bats (Eptesicus fuscus). An increasing trend in annual positivity was significant only for big brown bats (P = 0.02), and was circumstantially linked to a geographic cluster. Sensitivity and PPV of morphological identification keys was high for M. evotis but varied for M. lucifugus, M. californicus, M. yumanensis, and M. septentrionalis. A positive RABV result was significantly associated with nonsynanthropic species, abnormal behavior, abnormal hiding, injury, biting, found in a body of water, found alive, found outdoors, and caught by a dog. CONCLUSION: Monitoring passive RABV surveillance trends enables public health authorities to perform more accurate risk assessments. Differences in temporal and spatial trends in RABV positivity by bat species indicate the importance of collecting taxonomic data, although morphological identification can be unreliable for certain Myotis species. Current public health practices for RABV exposures should be maintained as RABV infection in bats can never be excluded without diagnostic testing.
