Explore the vast range of titles available.

During transmission of seasonal endemic diseases such as measles and influenza, spatial waves of infection have been observed between large distant populations. Also, during the initial stages of an outbreak of a new or reemerging pathogen, disease incidence tends to occur in spatial clusters, which makes containment possible if you can predict the subsequent spread of disease. Spatial models are being used with increasing frequency to help characterize these large-scale patterns and to evaluate the impact of interventions. Here, I review several recent studies on four diseases that show the benefits of different methodologies: measles (patch models), foot-and-mouth disease (distance-transmission models), pandemic influenza (multigroup models), and smallpox (network models). This review highlights the importance of the household in spatial studies of human diseases, such as smallpox and influenza. It also demonstrates the need to develop a simple model of household demographics, so that these large-scale models can be extended to the investigation of long-time scale human pathogens, such as tuberculosis and HIV.

Long COVID remains a broadly defined syndrome, with estimates of prevalence and duration varying widely. We use data from rounds 3–5 of the REACT-2 study ( n   =  508,707; September 2020 – February 2021), a representative community survey of adults in England, and replication data from round 6 ( n   =  97,717; May 2021) to estimate the prevalence and identify predictors of persistent symptoms lasting 12 weeks or more; and unsupervised learning to cluster individuals by reported symptoms. At 12 weeks in rounds 3–5, 37.7% experienced at least one symptom, falling to 21.6% in round 6. Female sex, increasing age, obesity, smoking, vaping, hospitalisation with COVID-19, deprivation, and being a healthcare worker are associated with higher probability of persistent symptoms in rounds 3–5, and Asian ethnicity with lower probability. Clustering analysis identifies a subset of participants with predominantly respiratory symptoms. Managing the long-term sequelae of COVID-19 will remain a major challenge for affected individuals and their families and for health services. This study characterises Long COVID using data from the REACT-2 community-based study in England. It estimates that 38% (in autumn/winter 2020/21) and 22% (in spring 2021) of people reported at least one symptom 12 weeks after symptom onset; identifies risk factors for persistent symptoms; and finds evidence of symptom clustering.

The novel Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) had, as of Aug 8, 2013, caused 111 virologically confirmed or probable human cases of infection worldwide. We analysed epidemiological and genetic data to assess the extent of human infection, the performance of case detection, and the transmission potential of MERS-CoV with and without control measures. We assembled a comprehensive database of all confirmed and probable cases from public sources and estimated the incubation period and generation time from case cluster data. Using data of numbers of visitors to the Middle East and their duration of stay, we estimated the number of symptomatic cases in the Middle East. We did independent analyses, looking at the growth in incident clusters, the growth in viral population, the reproduction number of cluster index cases, and cluster sizes to characterise the dynamical properties of the epidemic and the transmission scenario. The estimated number of symptomatic cases up to Aug 8, 2013, is 940 (95% CI 290–2200), indicating that at least 62% of human symptomatic cases have not been detected. We find that the case-fatality ratio of primary cases detected via routine surveillance (74%; 95% CI 49–91) is biased upwards because of detection bias; the case-fatality ratio of secondary cases was 20% (7–42). Detection of milder cases (or clinical management) seemed to have improved in recent months. Analysis of human clusters indicated that chains of transmission were not self-sustaining when infection control was implemented, but that R in the absence of controls was in the range 0·8–1·3. Three independent data sources provide evidence that R cannot be much above 1, with an upper bound of 1·2–1·5. By showing that a slowly growing epidemic is underway either in human beings or in an animal reservoir, quantification of uncertainty in transmissibility estimates, and provision of the first estimates of the scale of the epidemic and extent of case detection biases, we provide valuable information for more informed risk assessment. Medical Research Council, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU FP7, and National Institute of General Medical Sciences.

England has experienced a large outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, disproportionately affecting people from disadvantaged and ethnic minority communities. It is unclear how much of this excess is due to differences in exposure associated with structural inequalities. Here, we report from the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-2 (REACT-2) national study of over 100,000 people. After adjusting for test characteristics and re-weighting to the population, overall antibody prevalence is 6.0% (95% CI: 5.8-6.1). An estimated 3.4 million people had developed antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 by mid-July 2020. Prevalence is two- to three-fold higher among health and care workers compared with non-essential workers, and in people of Black or South Asian than white ethnicity, while age- and sex-specific infection fatality ratios are similar across ethnicities. Our results indicate that higher hospitalisation and mortality from COVID-19 in minority ethnic groups may reflect higher rates of infection rather than differential experience of disease or care. REACT-2 is a large-scale community study of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in England. Here, the authors estimate that 6% of adults in England had been infected by mid-July 2020, with health and long-term care workers and those of Black or South Asian ethnicity disproportionately affected.

Population antibody surveillance helps track immune responses to COVID-19 vaccinations at scale, and identify host factors that may affect antibody production. We analyse data from 212,102 vaccinated individuals within the REACT-2 programme in England, which uses self-administered lateral flow antibody tests in sequential cross-sectional community samples; 71,923 (33.9%) received at least one dose of BNT162b2 vaccine and 139,067 (65.6%) received ChAdOx1. For both vaccines, antibody positivity peaks 4-5 weeks after first dose and then declines. At least 21 days after second dose of BNT162b2, close to 100% of respondents test positive, while for ChAdOx1, this is significantly reduced, particularly in the oldest age groups (72.7% [70.9–74.4] at ages 75 years and above). For both vaccines, antibody positivity decreases with age, and is higher in females and those with previous infection. Antibody positivity is lower in transplant recipients, obese individuals, smokers and those with specific comorbidities. These groups will benefit from additional vaccine doses. The authors present results from the REACT-2 study, a series of cross-sectional community surveys during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in England. They measure antibodies by self-administered lateral flow tests and describe antibody positivity by time since vaccination, age, sex, co-morbidities, infection history, and vaccine type.

Rapid detection, isolation, and contact tracing of community COVID-19 cases are essential measures to limit the community spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We aimed to identify a parsimonious set of symptoms that jointly predict COVID-19 and investigated whether predictive symptoms differ between the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) lineage (predominating as of April 2021 in the US, UK, and elsewhere) and wild type. We obtained throat and nose swabs with valid SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results from 1,147,370 volunteers aged 5 years and above (6,450 positive cases) in the REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission-1 (REACT-1) study. This study involved repeated community-based random surveys of prevalence in England (study rounds 2 to 8, June 2020 to January 2021, response rates 22%-27%). Participants were asked about symptoms occurring in the week prior to testing. Viral genome sequencing was carried out for PCR-positive samples with N-gene cycle threshold value < 34 (N = 1,079) in round 8 (January 2021). In univariate analysis, all 26 surveyed symptoms were associated with PCR positivity compared with non-symptomatic people. Stability selection (1,000 penalized logistic regression models with 50% subsampling) among people reporting at least 1 symptom identified 7 symptoms as jointly and positively predictive of PCR positivity in rounds 2-7 (June to December 2020): loss or change of sense of smell, loss or change of sense of taste, fever, new persistent cough, chills, appetite loss, and muscle aches. The resulting model (rounds 2-7) predicted PCR positivity in round 8 with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.77. The same 7 symptoms were selected as jointly predictive of B.1.1.7 infection in round 8, although when comparing B.1.1.7 with wild type, new persistent cough and sore throat were more predictive of B.1.1.7 infection while loss or change of sense of smell was more predictive of the wild type. The main limitations of our study are (i) potential participation bias despite random sampling of named individuals from the National Health Service register and weighting designed to achieve a representative sample of the population of England and (ii) the necessary reliance on self-reported symptoms, which may be prone to recall bias and may therefore lead to biased estimates of symptom prevalence in England. Where testing capacity is limited, it is important to use tests in the most efficient way possible. We identified a set of 7 symptoms that, when considered together, maximize detection of COVID-19 in the community, including infection with the B.1.1.7 lineage.

To define appropriate planning scenarios for future pandemics of respiratory pathogens, it is important to understand the initial transmission dynamics of COVID-19 during 2020. Here, we fit an age-stratified compartmental model with a flexible underlying transmission term to daily COVID-19 death data from states in the contiguous U.S. and to national and sub-national data from around the world. The daily death data of the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic was qualitatively categorized into one of four main profile types: “spring single-peak”, “summer single-peak”, “spring/summer two-peak” and “broad with shoulder”. We estimated a reproduction number R as a function of calendar time t c and as a function of time since the first death reported in that population (local pandemic time, t p ). Contrary to the diversity of categories and range of magnitudes in death incidence profiles, the R ( t p ) profiles were much more homogeneous. We found that in both the contiguous U.S. and globally, the initial value of both R ( t c ) and R ( t p ) was substantial: at or above two. However, during the early months, pandemic time R ( t p ) decreased exponentially to a value that hovered around one. This decrease was accompanied by a reduction in the variance of R ( t p ). For calendar time R ( t c ), the decrease in magnitude was slower and non-exponential, with a smaller reduction in variance. Intriguingly, similar trends of exponential decrease and reduced variance were not observed in raw death data. Our findings suggest that the combination of specific government responses and spontaneous changes in behaviour ensured that transmissibility dropped, rather than remaining constant, during the initial phases of a pandemic. Future pandemic planning scenarios should include models that assume similar decreases in transmissibility, which lead to longer epidemics with lower peaks when compared with models based on constant transmissibility.

Reflecting on new research by Cécile Viboud and colleagues, Steven Riley describes how understanding complex influenza dynamics can aid the design of influenza programs in China. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.