Search

Background: Safe and effective vaccines could help to end the ongoing Ebola virus disease epidemic in parts of west Africa, and mitigate future outbreaks of the virus. We assess the statistical validity and power of randomised controlled trial (RCT) and stepped-wedge cluster trial (SWCT) designs in Sierra Leone, where the incidence of Ebola virus disease is spatiotemporally heterogeneous, and is decreasing rapidly. Methods: We projected district-level Ebola virus disease incidence for the next 6 months, using a stochastic model fitted to data from Sierra Leone. We then simulated RCT and SWCT designs in trial populations comprising geographically distinct clusters at high risk, taking into account realistic logistical constraints, and both individual-level and cluster-level variations in risk. We assessed false-positive rates and power for parametric and non-parametric analyses of simulated trial data, across a range of vaccine efficacies and trial start dates. Findings: For an SWCT, regional variation in Ebola virus disease incidence trends produced increased false-positive rates (up to 0·15 at α=0·05) under standard statistical models, but not when analysed by a permutation test, whereas analyses of RCTs remained statistically valid under all models. With the assumption of a 6-month trial starting on Feb 18, 2015, we estimate the power to detect a 90% effective vaccine to be between 49% and 89% for an RCT, and between 6% and 26% for an SWCT, depending on the Ebola virus disease incidence within the trial population. We estimate that a 1-month delay in trial initiation will reduce the power of the RCT by 20% and that of the SWCT by 49%. Interpretation: Spatiotemporal variation in infection risk undermines the statistical power of the SWCT. This variation also undercuts the SWCT's expected ethical advantages over the RCT, because an RCT, but not an SWCT, can prioritise vaccination of high-risk clusters. Funding: US National Institutes of Health, US National Science Foundation, and Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Context: Norovirus outbreaks are common among vulnerable, elderly populations in US nursing homes.Objectives: To assess whether all-cause hospitalization and mortality rates are increased during norovirus outbreak vs nonoutbreak periods in nursing homes, and to identify factors associated with increased risk.Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study of Medicare-certified nursing homes in Oregon, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania that reported at least 1 confirmed or suspected norovirus outbreak to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS), January 2009 to December 2010. Deaths and hospitalizations occurring among residents of these nursing homes were identified through the Medicare Minimum Data Set (MDS).Main Outcome Measures: Rates of all-cause hospitalization and mortality during outbreak compared with nonoutbreak periods were estimated using a random-effects Poisson regression model controlling for background seasonality in both outcomes.Results: The cohort consisted of 308 nursing homes that reported 407 norovirus outbreaks to NORS. Per MDS, 67 730 hospitalizations and 26 055 deaths occurred in these homes during the 2-year study. Hospitalization rates were 124.0 (95% CI, 119.4-129.1) vs 109.5 (95% CI, 108.6-110.3) hospitalizations per nursing home−year during outbreak vs nonoutbreak periods, yielding a seasonally adjusted rate ratio (RR) of 1.09 (95% CI, 1.05-1.14). Similarly, mortality rates were 53.7 (95% CI, 50.6-57.0) vs 41.9 (95% CI, 41.4-42.4) deaths per nursing home−year in outbreak vs nonoutbreak periods (seasonally adjusted RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05-1.18). The increases in hospitalizations and mortality were concentrated in the first 2 weeks (week 0 and 1) and the initial week (week 0) of the outbreak, respectively. Homes with lower daily registered nurse (RN) hours per resident (<0.75) had increased mortality rates during norovirus outbreaks compared with baseline (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.14-1.40), while no increased risk (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.96-1.12) was observed in homes with higher daily RN hours per resident (P = .007 by likelihood ratio test); the increase in hospitalization rates did not show a similar pattern.Conclusion: Norovirus outbreaks were associated with significant concurrent increases in all-cause hospitalization and mortality in nursing homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(See the editorial commentary by Glass, on pages 975-7.) Following the introduction of rotavirus vaccination in the United States, rotavirus and cause-unspecified gastroenteritis discharges significantly decreased in 2008 in the 0-4, 5-14, and 15-24-year age groups, with significant reductions observed in March, the historic peak rotavirus month, in all age groups. We estimate that 15% of the total 66 000 averted hospitalizations and 20% of the $204 million in averted direct medical costs attributable to the vaccination program were among unvaccinated 5-24 year-olds. This study demonstrates a previously unrecognized burden of severe rotavirus in the population >5 years and the primacy of very young children in the transmission of rotavirus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately 179 million cases of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) occur annually in the United States. However, lack of routine clinical testing for viruses limits understanding of their role among persons seeking medical care. Fecal specimens submitted for routine bacterial culture through a health maintenance organization in Georgia, USA, were tested with molecular diagnostic assays for norovirus, rotavirus, astrovirus, sapovirus, and adenovirus. Incidence was estimated by using national health care utilization rates. Routine clinical diagnostics identified a pathogen in 42 (7.3%) of 572 specimens; inclusion of molecular viral testing increased pathogen detection to 15.7%. Community AGE incidence was 41,000 cases/100,000 person-years and outpatient incidence was 5,400/100,000 person-years. Norovirus was the most common pathogen, accounting for 6,500 (16%) and 640 (12%) per 100,000 person-years of community and outpatient AGE episodes, respectively. This study demonstrates that noroviruses are leading causes of AGE among persons seeking medical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To compare alternative methods to vital registration systems for estimating adult mortality, and describe patterns of mortality in Manicaland, Zimbabwe, which has been severely affected by HIV. METHODS: We compared estimates of adult mortality from (1) a single question on household mortality, (2) repeated household censuses, and (3) an adult cohort study with linked HIV testing from Manicaland, with a mathematical model fitted to local age-specific HIV prevalence (1998 -2000). FINDINGS: The crude death rate from the single question (29 per 1000 person-years) was roughly consistent with that from the mathematical model (22 -25 per 1000 person-years), but much higher than that from the household censuses (12 per 1000 person-years). Adult mortality in the household censuses (males 0.65; females 0.51) was lower than in the cohort study (males 0.77; females 0.57), while mathematical models gave a much higher estimate, especially for females (males 0.80 -0.83; females 0.75 -0.80). The population attributable fraction of adult deaths due to HIV was 0.61 for men and 0.70 for women, with life expectancy estimated to be 34.3 years for males and 38.2 years for females. CONCLUSION: Each method for estimating adult mortality had limitations in terms of loss to follow-up (cohort study), under-ascertainment (household censuses), transparency of underlying processes (single question), and sensitivity to parameterization (mathematical model). However, these analyses make clear the advantages of longitudinal cohort data, which provide more complete ascertainment than household censuses, highlight possible inaccuracies in model assumptions, and allow direct quantification of the impact of HIV. Copyright © 2006 World Health Organization [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Available live-oral rotavirus vaccines are associated with low to moderate performance in low- and middle-income settings. There is limited evidence relating to how the vaccine dosing schedule might be adjusted to improve vaccine performance in these settings., Methods: We used mathematical models fitted to rotavirus surveillance data for children <5 years of age from three different hospitals in Ghana (Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in Accra, Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital in Kumasi and War Memorial Hospital in Navrongo) to project the impact of rotavirus vaccination over a 10-year period (April 2012-March 2022). We quantified and compared the impact of the previous vaccination program in Ghana to the model-predicted impact for other vaccine dosing schedules across the three hospitals and the entire country, under different assumptions about vaccine protection. To project the rotavirus vaccine impact over Ghana, we sampled from the range of model parameters for Accra and Navrongo, assuming that these two settings represent the "extremes" of rotavirus epidemiology within Ghana., Results: For the previously implemented 6/10-week monovalent Rotarix vaccine (RV1) schedule, the model-estimated average annual incidence of moderate-to-severe rotavirus-associated gastroenteritis (RVGE) ranged between 1,151 and 3,002 per 100,000 people per year over the 10-year period for the three sites. Compared to no vaccination, the model-estimated median percentage reductions in RVGE ranged from 28-85% and 12-71% among children <1 year and <5 years of age respectively, with the highest and lowest percentage reductions predicted using model parameters estimated for Accra and Navrongo, respectively. The median predicted reductions in RVGE for the whole country ranged from 57-66% and 35-45% among children <1 year and <5 years of age, respectively. The 1/6/10- and 6/10/14-week schedules provided the best and comparable reductions in RVGE compared to the original 6/10-week schedule, whereas there was no improvement in impact for the 10/14-week schedule., Conclusions: We found that administering an additional dose of RV1 might be an effective strategy to improve rotavirus vaccine impact, particularly in settings with low vaccine effectiveness. The results could be extrapolated to other countries using a 2-dose vaccine schedule with low to moderate vaccine performance., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest VEP is a member of the WHO Immunization and Vaccine-related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC).

It is important to understand real-world BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE), especially among racial and ethnic minority groups. We performed a test-negative case-control study to measure BNT162b2 COVID-19 VE in the prevention of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory illness (ARI) hospitalizations at two Atlanta hospitals from May 2021-January 2023 and adjusted for potential confounders by multivariate analysis. Among 5139 eligible adults with ARI, 2763 (53.8%) were enrolled, and 1571 (64.5%) were included in the BNT162b2 analysis. The median age was 58 years (IQR, 44-68), 889 (56.6%) were female, 1034 (65.8%) were African American, 359 (22.9%) were White, 56 (3.6%) were Hispanic ethnicity, 645 (41.1%) were SARS-CoV-2-positive, 412 (26.2%) were vaccinated with a primary series, and 273 (17.4%) had received ≥1 booster of BNT162b2. The overall adjusted VE of the BNT162b2 primary series was 58.5% (95% CI 46.0, 68.1), while the adjusted VE of ≥1 booster was 78.9% (95% CI 70.0, 85.1). The adjusted overall VE of primary series for African American/Black individuals was 64.0% (95% CI 49.9, 74.1) and 82.7% (95% CI 71.9, 89.4) in those who received ≥1 booster. When analysis was limited to the period of Omicron predominance, overall VE of the primary series decreased with widened confidence intervals (24.5%, 95% CI -4.5, 45.4%), while VE of ≥1 booster was maintained at 60.9% (95% CI 42.0, 73.6). BNT162b2 primary series and booster vaccination provided protection against COVID-19-associated ARI hospitalization among a predominantly African American population.

Background: Even moderate differences in rotavirus vaccine effectiveness against nonvaccine genotypes may exert selective pressures on circulating rotaviruses. Whether this vaccine effect or natural temporal fluctuations underlie observed changes in genotype distributions is unclear., Methods: We systematically reviewed studies reporting rotavirus genotypes from children <5 years of age globally between 2005 and 2023. We compared rotavirus genotypes between vaccine-introducing and nonintroducing settings globally and by World Health Organization (WHO) region, calendar time, and time since vaccine introduction., Results: Crude pooling of genotype data from 361 studies indicated higher G2P[4], a nonvaccine genotype, prevalence in vaccine-introducing settings, both globally and by WHO region. This difference did not emerge when examining genotypes over time in the Americas, the only region with robust longitudinal data. Relative to nonintroducing settings, G2P[4] detections were more likely in settings with recent introduction (eg, 1-2 years postintroduction adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 4.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.87-6.72) but were similarly likely in settings with more time elapsed since introduction, (eg, 7 or more years aOR, 1.62; 95% CI, .49-5.37)., Conclusions: When accounting for both regional and temporal trends, there was no substantial evidence of long-term vaccine-related selective pressures on circulating genotypes. Increased prevalence of G2P[4] may be transient after rotavirus vaccine introduction., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. B. A. L. reports personal fees outside the submitted work from Epidemiologic Research and Methods, LLC and Hillevax, Inc; and has participated on the Data Safety Monitoring Board for the HICRota study in Zambia. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2023.)

Background: There have been declines in global immunisation coverage due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Recovery has begun but is geographically variable. This disruption has led to under-immunised cohorts and interrupted progress in reducing vaccine-preventable disease burden. There have, so far, been few studies of the effects of coverage disruption on vaccine effects. We aimed to quantify the effects of vaccine-coverage disruption on routine and campaign immunisation services, identify cohorts and regions that could particularly benefit from catch-up activities, and establish if losses in effect could be recovered., Methods: For this modelling study, we used modelling groups from the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium from 112 low-income and middle-income countries to estimate vaccine effect for 14 pathogens. One set of modelling estimates used vaccine-coverage data from 1937 to 2021 for a subset of vaccine-preventable, outbreak-prone or priority diseases (ie, measles, rubella, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus [HPV], meningitis A, and yellow fever) to examine mitigation measures, hereafter referred to as recovery runs. The second set of estimates were conducted with vaccine-coverage data from 1937 to 2020, used to calculate effect ratios (ie, the burden averted per dose) for all 14 included vaccines and diseases, hereafter referred to as full runs. Both runs were modelled from Jan 1, 2000, to Dec 31, 2100. Countries were included if they were in the Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance portfolio; had notable burden; or had notable strategic vaccination activities. These countries represented the majority of global vaccine-preventable disease burden. Vaccine coverage was informed by historical estimates from WHO-UNICEF Estimates of National Immunization Coverage and the immunisation repository of WHO for data up to and including 2021. From 2022 onwards, we estimated coverage on the basis of guidance about campaign frequency, non-linear assumptions about the recovery of routine immunisation to pre-disruption magnitude, and 2030 endpoints informed by the WHO Immunization Agenda 2030 aims and expert consultation. We examined three main scenarios: no disruption, baseline recovery, and baseline recovery and catch-up., Findings: We estimated that disruption to measles, rubella, HPV, hepatitis B, meningitis A, and yellow fever vaccination could lead to 49 119 additional deaths (95% credible interval [CrI] 17 248-134 941) during calendar years 2020-30, largely due to measles. For years of vaccination 2020-30 for all 14 pathogens, disruption could lead to a 2·66% (95% CrI 2·52-2·81) reduction in long-term effect from 37 378 194 deaths averted (34 450 249-40 241 202) to 36 410 559 deaths averted (33 515 397-39 241 799). We estimated that catch-up activities could avert 78·9% (40·4-151·4) of excess deaths between calendar years 2023 and 2030 (ie, 18 900 [7037-60 223] of 25 356 [9859-75 073])., Interpretation: Our results highlight the importance of the timing of catch-up activities, considering estimated burden to improve vaccine coverage in affected cohorts. We estimated that mitigation measures for measles and yellow fever were particularly effective at reducing excess burden in the short term. Additionally, the high long-term effect of HPV vaccine as an important cervical-cancer prevention tool warrants continued immunisation efforts after disruption., Funding: The Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium, funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., Translations: For the Arabic, Chinese, French, Portguese and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests A-MH, XL, SE-L, JR, KA, MA, MJdV, MJF, KF, HF, TH, MJ, AK, SMM, SN, TP, TAP, AP, QTM, EV, AKW, HB, CC, HEC, AD, SH, JH, KJ, CK, J-HK, JK, BAL, VEP, YT, KW, NMF, CLT, and KAMG received funding from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation via the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (VIMC) during the study. A-MH, JR, SE-L, XL, SN, MJdV, TH, WH, KW, NMF, CLT, and KAMG receive funding from the Medical Research Council Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis (reference MR/R015600/1), which is jointly funded by the UK Medical Research Council and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office under a concordant agreement, and is also part of the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership programme supported by the EU. A-MH, JR, SE-L, XL, SN, MJdV, TH, WH, KW, NMF, CLT, and KAMG receive funding from Community Jameel. A-MH is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (grant 01LN2210A) and declares stock options in BIONTECH. CLT received payment for advice from GlaxoSmithKline. KA is supported by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (JP223fa627004). KAMG received a speaker fee from Sanofi Pasteur. SN receives consulting fees from WHO. VEP is a member of the WHO Immunization and Implementation Research Advisory Committee. BAL receives personal fees from Epidemiologic Research and Methods and Hillevax. SMM receives consultant fees from Emergent Biosolutions. NMF receives grant funding from Janssen Pharmaceuticals, UK Research and Innovation, and the UK National Institute for Health and Care Research; declares consulting fees from the World Bank, WHO, and Gavi; receives travel expenses for WHO meetings; was on an advisory board for Takeda; and is a senior editor for eLife. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The optimal interval between the first and second doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines has not been thoroughly evaluated. Employing a target trial emulation approach, we compared the effectiveness of different interdose intervals among >6 million mRNA vaccine recipients in Georgia, USA, from December 2020 to March 2022. We compared three protocols defined by interdose interval: recommended by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (17-25 days for Pfizer-BioNTech; 24-32 days for Moderna), late-but-allowable (26-42 days for Pfizer-BioNTech; 33-49 days for Moderna), and late ( ≥ 43 days for Pfizer-BioNTech; ≥50 days for Moderna). In the short-term, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection was lowest under the FDA-recommended protocol. Longer-term, the late-but-allowable protocol resulted in the lowest risk (risk ratio on Day 120 after the first dose administration compared to the FDA-recommended protocol: 0.83 [95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.84]). Here, we showed that delaying the second dose by 1-2 weeks may provide stronger long-term protection., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Non-pharmaceutical interventions minimize social contacts, hence the spread of respiratory pathogens such as influenza and SARS-CoV-2. Globally, there is a paucity of social contact data from the workforce. In this study, we quantified two-day contact patterns among USA employees. Contacts were defined as face-to-face conversations, involving physical touch or proximity to another individual and were collected using electronic self-kept diaries. Data were collected over 4 rounds from 2020 to 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mean (standard deviation) contacts reported by 1456 participants were 2.5 (2.5), 8.2 (7.1), 9.2 (7.1) and 10.1 (9.5) across round 1 (April-June 2020), 2 (November 2020-January 2021), 3 (June-August 2021), and 4 (November-December 2021), respectively. Between round 1 and 2, we report a 3-fold increase in the mean number of contacts reported per participant with no major increases from round 2-4. We then modeled SARS-CoV-2 transmission at home, work, and community settings. The model revealed reduced relative transmission in all settings in round 1. Subsequently, transmission increased at home and in the community but remained exceptionally low in work settings. To accurately parameterize models of infection transmission and control, we need empirical social contact data that capture human mixing behavior across time., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Norovirus is attributed to nearly 1 out of every 5 episodes of diarrheal disease globally and is estimated to cause approximately 200,000 deaths annually worldwide, with 70,000 or more among children in developing countries. Noroviruses remain a leading cause of sporadic disease and outbreaks of acute gastroenteritis even in industrialized settings, highlighting that improved hygiene and sanitation alone may not be fully effective in controlling norovirus. Strengths in global progress towards a Norovirus vaccine include a diverse though not deep pipeline which includes multiple approaches, including some with proven technology platforms (e.g., VLP-based HPV vaccines). However, several gaps in knowledge persist, including a fulsome mechanistic understanding of how the virus attaches to human host cells, internalizes, and induces disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest BAL reports personal fees from Epidemiological Research and Methods, LLC. MO acknowledges financial support from ANID PIA/PUENTE AFB220003 and reports receiving grants and research support from Janssen Vaccines & Prevention B.V., Bharat Biotech International Limited, and HilleVax Inc. CFL declares that he receives research grant funding to his Institute from Takeda Vaccines Inc. and HilleVax Inc. for norovirus epidemiology and a norovirus vaccine phase II trial, respectively. All other authors declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We measured contact patterns using social contact diaries for 157 U.S. long-term care facility employees from December 2020 - June 2021. These data are crucial for analyzing mathematical transmission models and for informing healthcare setting infection control policy., Results: The median number of daily contacts was 10 (IQR 8-11). Household contacts were more likely partially masked than fully masked, more likely to involve physical contact, and longer in duration compared to facility contacts., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Essential food workers experience elevated risks of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection due to prolonged occupational exposures in food production and processing areas, shared transportation (car or bus), and employer-provided shared housing. Our goal was to quantify the daily cumulative risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for healthy susceptible produce workers and to evaluate the relative reduction in risk attributable to food industry interventions and vaccination. We simulated daily SARS-CoV-2 exposures of indoor and outdoor produce workers through six linked quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) model scenarios. For each scenario, the infectious viral dose emitted by a symptomatic worker was calculated across aerosol, droplet, and fomite-mediated transmission pathways. Standard industry interventions (2-m physical distancing, handwashing, surface disinfection, universal masking, ventilation) were simulated to assess relative risk reductions from baseline risk (no interventions, 1-m distance). Implementation of industry interventions reduced an indoor worker's relative infection risk by 98.0% (0.020; 95% uncertainty interval [UI], 0.005 to 0.104) from baseline risk (1.00; 95% UI, 0.995 to 1.00) and an outdoor worker's relative infection risk by 94.5% (0.027; 95% UI, 0.013 to 0.055) from baseline risk (0.487; 95% UI, 0.257 to 0.825). Integrating these interventions with two-dose mRNA vaccinations (86 to 99% efficacy), representing a worker's protective immunity to infection, reduced the relative infection risk from baseline for indoor workers by 99.9% (0.001; 95% UI, 0.0002 to 0.005) and outdoor workers by 99.6% (0.002; 95% UI, 0.0003 to 0.005). Consistent implementation of combined industry interventions, paired with vaccination, effectively mitigates the elevated risks from occupationally acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection faced by produce workers. IMPORTANCE This is the first study to estimate the daily risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection across a variety of indoor and outdoor environmental settings relevant to food workers (e.g., shared transportation [car or bus], enclosed produce processing facility and accompanying breakroom, outdoor produce harvesting field, shared housing facility) through a linked quantitative microbial risk assessment framework. Our model has demonstrated that the elevated daily SARS-CoV-2 infection risk experienced by indoor and outdoor produce workers can be reduced below 1% when vaccinations (optimal vaccine efficacy, 86 to 99%) are implemented with recommended infection control strategies (e.g., handwashing, surface disinfection, universal masking, physical distancing, and increased ventilation). Our novel findings provide scenario-specific infection risk estimates that can be utilized by food industry managers to target high-risk scenarios with effective infection mitigation strategies, which was informed through more realistic and context-driven modeling estimates of the infection risk faced by essential food workers daily. Bundled interventions, particularly if they include vaccination, yield significant reductions (>99%) in daily SARS-CoV-2 infection risk for essential food workers in enclosed and open-air environments., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

At-home rapid antigen COVID-19 tests were first authorized by the Food and Drug Administration in late 2020 (1-3). In January 2022, the White House launched COVIDTests.gov, which made all U.S. households eligible to receive free-to-the-user at-home test kits distributed by the U.S. Postal Service (2). By May 2022, more than 70 million test kit packages had been shipped to households across the United States (2); however, how these kits were used, and which groups were using them, has not been reported. Data from a national probability survey of U.S. households (COVIDVu), collected during April-May 2022, were used to evaluate awareness about and use of these test kits (4). Most respondent households (93.8%) were aware of the program, and more than one half (59.9%) had ordered kits. Among persons who received testing for COVID-19 during the preceding 6 months, 38.3% used a COVIDTests.gov kit. Among kit users, 95.5% rated the experience as acceptable, and 23.6% reported being unlikely to have tested without the COVIDTests.gov program. Use of COVIDTests.gov kits was similar among racial and ethnic groups (42.1% non-Hispanic Black or African American [Black]; 41.5% Hispanic or Latino [Hispanic]; 34.8% non-Hispanic White [White]; and 53.7% non-Hispanic other races [other races]). Use of other home COVID-19 tests differed by race and ethnicity (11.8% Black, 44.4% Hispanic, 45.8% White, 43.8% other races). Compared with White persons, Black persons were 72% less likely to use other home test kits (adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.16-0.50). Provision of tests through this well-publicized program likely improved use of COVID-19 home testing and health equity in the United States, particularly among Black persons. National programs to address availability and accessibility of critical health services in a pandemic response have substantial health value., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Nicole Luisi reports institutional support from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and National Institutes of Health (NIH). Patrick S. Sullivan reports institutional support from NIH, Gilead Sciences, and Merck; receipt of consulting fees from Merck and Molecular Testing Laboratories; and honoraria from Gilead Sciences. Travis Sanchez reports institutional support from NIH. Heather Bradley reports institutional support from NIH and receipt of consulting fees from Merck. Mansour Fahimi reports support and receipt of consulting fees from Emory University. Kristin N. Nelson reports institutional support from NIAID and NIH. Benjamin A. Lopman reports grant support from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, NIH, and personal fees from Epidemiologic Research and Methods, LLC, and Hillevax, Inc., outside the submitted work. Aaron J. Siegler reports institutional support from NIAID and NIH. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: To reduce the burden from the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, federal and state local governments implemented restrictions such as limitations on gatherings, restaurant dining, and travel, and recommended non-pharmaceutical interventions including physical distancing, mask-wearing, surface disinfection, and increased hand hygiene. Resulting behavioral changes impacted other infectious diseases including enteropathogens such as norovirus and rotavirus, which had fairly regular seasonal patterns prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. The study objective was to project future incidence of norovirus and rotavirus gastroenteritis as contacts resumed and other NPIs are relaxed., Methods: We fitted compartmental mathematical models to pre-pandemic U.S. surveillance data (2012-2019) for norovirus and rotavirus using maximum likelihood estimation. Then, we projected incidence for 2022-2030 under scenarios where the number of contacts a person has per day varies from70%, 80%, 90%, and full resumption (100%) of pre-pandemic levels., Results: We found that the population susceptibility to both viruses increased between March 2020 and November 2021. The 70-90% contact resumption scenarios led to lower incidence than observed pre-pandemic for both viruses. However, we found a greater than two-fold increase in community incidence relative to the pre-pandemic period under the 100% contact scenarios for both viruses. With rotavirus, for which population immunity is driven partially by vaccination, patterns settled into a new steady state quickly in 2022 under the 70-90% scenarios. For norovirus, for which immunity is relatively short-lasting and only acquired through infection, surged under the 100% contact scenario projection., Conclusions: These results, which quantify the consequences of population susceptibility build-up, can help public health agencies prepare for potential resurgence of enteric viruses., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Immune protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be induced by natural infection or vaccination or both. Interaction between vaccine-induced immunity and naturally acquired immunity at the population level has been understudied., Methods: We used regression models to evaluate whether the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines differed across states with different levels of naturally acquired immunity from March 2021 to April 2022 in the United States. Analysis was conducted for 3 evaluation periods separately (Alpha, Delta, and Omicron waves). As a proxy for the proportion of the population with naturally acquired immunity, we used either the reported seroprevalence or the estimated proportion of the population ever infected in each state., Results: COVID-19 mortality decreased as coverage of ≥1 dose increased among people ≥65 years of age, and this effect did not vary by seroprevalence or proportion of the total population ever infected. Seroprevalence and proportion ever infected were not associated with COVID-19 mortality, after controlling for vaccine coverage. These findings were consistent in all evaluation periods., Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a sustained reduction in mortality at state level during the Alpha, Delta, and Omicron periods. The effect did not vary by naturally acquired immunity., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. B. L. serves as a consultant to Epidemiological Research and Methods, LLC and Hillevax, LLC. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed, (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Rotavirus is a leading cause of diarrhea deaths in children, particularly in low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). Licensed rotavirus vaccines provide strong direct protection, but their indirect effect-the protection due to reduced transmission-is not fully understood. We aimed to quantify the population-level effects of rotavirus vaccination and identify factors that drive indirect protection. We used an SIR-like transmission model to estimate the indirect effects of vaccination on rotavirus deaths in 112 LMICs. We performed a regression analysis to identify predictors of indirect effect magnitude (linear regression) and the occurrence of negative indirect effects (logistic regression). Indirect effects contributed to vaccine impacts in all regions, with effect sizes 8-years post-vaccine introduction ranging from 16.9% in the WHO European region to 1.0% in the Western Pacific region. Indirect effect estimates were higher in countries with higher under-5 mortality, higher vaccine coverage, and lower birth rates. Of the 112 countries analyzed, 18 (16%) had at least 1 year with a predicted negative indirect effect. Negative indirect effects were more common in countries with higher birth rate, lower under-5 mortality and lower vaccine coverage. Rotavirus vaccination may have a larger impact than would be expected from direct effects alone, but the impact of these indirect effects is expected to vary by country., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Norovirus is the most common cause of gastroenteritis outbreaks in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) in the United States, causing a high burden of disease in both residents and staff. Understanding how case symptoms and characteristics contribute to norovirus transmission can lead to more informed outbreak control measures in LTCFs. We examined line lists for 107 norovirus outbreaks that took place in LTCFs in five U.S. states from 2015 to 2019. We estimated the individual effective reproduction number, R i , to quantify individual case infectiousness and examined the contribution of vomiting, diarrhea, and being a resident (vs. staff) to case infectiousness. The associations between case characteristics and R i were estimated using a multivariable, log-linear mixed model with inverse variance weighting. We found that cases with vomiting infected 1.28 (95 % CI: 1.11, 1.48) times the number of secondary cases compared to cases without vomiting, and LTCF residents infected 1.31 (95 % CI: 1.15, 1.50) times the number of secondary cases compared to staff. There was no difference in infectiousness between cases with and without diarrhea (1.07; 95 % CI: 0.90, 1.29). This suggests that vomiting, particularly by LTCF residents, was a primary driver of norovirus transmission. These results support control measures that limit exposure to vomitus during norovirus outbreaks in LTCFs., Competing Interests: Declarations of interest BAL reports grants and personal fees from Takeda Pharmaceuticals and personal fees from the World Health Organization, outside the submitted work. YC, CA, and AK report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Rotavirus vaccine performance appears worse in countries with high rotavirus genotype diversity. Evidence suggests diminished vaccine efficacy (VE) against G2P[4], which is heterotypic with existing monovalent rotavirus vaccine formulations. Most studies assessing genotype-specific VE have been underpowered and inconclusive., Methods: We pooled individual-level data from 10 Phase II and III clinical trials of rotavirus vaccine containing G1 and P[8] antigens (RV1) conducted between 2000 and 2012. We estimated VE against both any-severity and severe (Vesikari score ≥11) rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE) using binomial and multinomial logistic regression models for non-specific VE against any RVGE, genotype-specific VE, and RV1-typic VE against genotypes homotypic, partially heterotypic, or fully heterotypic with RV1 antigens. We adjusted models for concomitant oral poliovirus and RV1 vaccination and the country's designated child mortality stratum., Results: Analysis included 87 644 infants from 22 countries in the Americas, Europe, Africa, and Asia. For VE against severe RVGE, non-specific VE was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87-94%). Genotype-specific VE ranged from 96% (95% CI: 89-98%) against G1P[8] to 71% (43-85%) against G2P[4]. RV1-typic VE was 92% (95% CI: 84-96%) against partially heterotypic genotypes but 83% (67-91%) against fully heterotypic genotypes. For VE against any-severity RVGE, non-specific VE was 82% (95% CI: 75-87%). Genotype-specific VE ranged from 94% (95% CI: 86-97%) against G1P[8] to 63% (41-77%) against G2P[4]. RV1-typic VE was 83% (95% CI: 72-90%) against partially heterotypic genotypes but 63% (40-77%) against fully heterotypic genotypes., Conclusions: RV1 VE is comparatively diminished against fully heterotypic genotypes including G2P[4]., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interests. B. A. L. reports personal fees from Epidemiologic Research and Methods, LLC, and Hillevax, Inc, outside the subject of the submitted work and reports participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for HICRota study in Zambia. L. A. W. reports honoraria and support for attending meetings and/or travel for serving as a Member of the Independent Advisory Committee for the Global Burden of Disease Study, University of Washington, received from London School of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene and outside the subject of the submitted work. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2022.)

Rotavirus vaccination has been shown to reduce rotavirus burden in many countries, but the long-term magnitude of vaccine impacts is unclear, particularly in low-income countries. We use a transmission model to estimate the long-term impact of rotavirus vaccination on deaths and disability adjusted life years (DALYs) from 2006 to 2034 for 112 low- and middle-income countries. We also explore the predicted effectiveness of a one- vs two- dose series and the relative contribution of direct vs indirect effects to overall impacts. To validate the model, we compare predicted percent reductions in severe rotavirus cases with the percent reduction in rotavirus positivity among gastroenteritis hospital admissions for 10 countries with pre- and post-vaccine introduction data. We estimate that vaccination would reduce deaths from rotavirus by 49.1 % (95 % UI: 46.6-54.3 %) by 2034 under realistic coverage scenarios, compared to a scenario without vaccination. Most of this benefit is due to direct benefit to vaccinated individuals (explaining 69-97 % of the overall impact), but indirect protection also appears to enhance impacts. We find that a one-dose schedule would only be about 57 % as effective as a two-dose schedule 12 years after vaccine introduction. Our model closely reproduced observed reductions in rotavirus positivity in the first few years after vaccine introduction in select countries. Rotavirus vaccination is likely to have a substantial impact on rotavirus gastroenteritis and its mortality burden. To sustain this benefit, the complete series of doses is needed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: JMB reports personal fees from WHO outside the submitted work. EWH reports personal fees from Merck & Co for unrelated work. VEP is a member of the WHO Immunization and Vaccine-related Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC) and has received reimbursement from Merck and Pfizer for travel expenses to Scientific Input Engagements unrelated to the topic of this manuscript., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: To determine the incidence of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among healthcare personnel (HCP) and to assess occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection., Design: Prospective cohort of healthcare personnel (HCP) followed for 6 months from May through December 2020., Setting: Large academic healthcare system including 4 hospitals and affiliated clinics in Atlanta, Georgia., Participants: HCP, including those with and without direct patient-care activities, working during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Methods: Incident SARS-CoV-2 infections were determined through serologic testing for SARS-CoV-2 IgG at enrollment, at 3 months, and at 6 months. HCP completed monthly surveys regarding occupational activities. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify occupational factors that increased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection., Results: Of the 304 evaluable HCP that were seronegative at enrollment, 26 (9%) seroconverted for SARS-CoV-2 IgG by 6 months. Overall, 219 participants (73%) self-identified as White race, 119 (40%) were nurses, and 121 (40%) worked on inpatient medical-surgical floors. In a multivariable analysis, HCP who identified as Black race were more likely to seroconvert than HCP who identified as White (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-14.2). Increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection was not identified for any occupational activity, including spending >50% of a typical shift at a patient's bedside, working in a COVID-19 unit, or performing or being present for aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs)., Conclusions: In our study cohort of HCP working in an academic healthcare system, <10% had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection over 6 months. No specific occupational activities were identified as increasing risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Background: Estimates of the relative contribution of different pathogens to all-cause diarrhoea mortality are needed to inform global diarrhoea burden models and prioritize interventions. We aimed to investigate and estimate heterogeneity in the case fatality risk (CFR) of different diarrhoeal pathogens., Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that reported cases and deaths for 15 enteric pathogens published between 1990 and 2019. The primary outcome was the pathogen-specific CFR stratified by age group, country-specific under-5 mortality rate, setting, study year and rotavirus vaccine introduction status. We developed fixed-effects and multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression models to estimate the pooled CFR overall and for each pathogen, controlling for potential predictors of heterogeneity., Results: A total of 416 studies met review criteria and were included in the analysis. The overall crude CFR for all pathogens was 0.65%, but there was considerable heterogeneity between and within studies. The overall CFR estimated from a random-effects model was 0.04% (95% CI: 0.026%-0.062%), whereas the pathogen-specific CFR estimates ranged from 0% to 2.7%. When pathogens were included as predictors of the CFR in the overall model, the highest and lowest odds ratios were found for enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) [odds ratio (OR) = 3.0, 95% CI: 1.28-7.07] and rotavirus (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.13-0.39), respectively., Conclusion: We provide comprehensive estimates of the CFR across different diarrhoeal pathogens and highlight pathogens for which more studies are needed. The results motivate the need for diarrhoeal interventions and could help prioritize pathogens for vaccine development., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.)

Periodic resurgences of COVID-19 in the coming years can be expected, while public health interventions may be able to reduce their intensity. We used a transmission model to assess how the use of booster doses and non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) amid ongoing pathogen evolution might influence future transmission waves. We find that incidence is likely to increase as NPIs relax, with a second seasonally driven surge expected in autumn 2022. However, booster doses can greatly reduce the intensity of both waves and reduce cumulative deaths by 20% between 7 January 2022 and 7 January 2023. Reintroducing NPIs during the autumn as incidence begins to increase again could also be impactful. Combining boosters and NPIs results in a 30% decrease in cumulative deaths, with potential for greater impacts if variant-adapted boosters are used. Reintroducing these NPIs in autumn 2022 as transmission rates increase provides similar benefits to sustaining NPIs indefinitely (307 000 deaths with indefinite NPIs and boosters compared with 304 000 deaths with transient NPIs and boosters). If novel variants with increased transmissibility or immune escape emerge, deaths will be higher, but vaccination and NPIs are expected to remain effective tools to decrease both cumulative and peak health system burden, providing proportionally similar relative impacts.

Background: US long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have experienced a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality., Methods: We examined SARS-CoV-2 transmission among residents and staff in 60 LTCFs in Fulton County, Georgia, from March 2020 to September 2021. Using the Wallinga-Teunis method to estimate the time-varying reproduction number, R(t), and linear-mixed regression models, we examined associations between case characteristics and R(t)., Results: Case counts, outbreak size and duration, and R(t) declined rapidly and remained low after vaccines were first distributed to LTCFs in December 2020, despite increases in community incidence in summer 2021. Staff cases were more infectious than resident cases (average individual reproduction number, R i = 0.6 [95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.4, 0.7] and 0.1 [95% CI = 0.1, 0.2], respectively). Unvaccinated resident cases were more infectious than vaccinated resident cases (R i = 0.5 [95% CI = 0.4, 0.6] and 0.2 [95% CI = 0.0, 0.8], respectively), but estimates were imprecise., Conclusions: COVID-19 vaccines slowed transmission and contributed to reduced caseload in LTCFs. However, due to data limitations, we were unable to determine whether breakthrough vaccinated cases were less infectious than unvaccinated cases. Staff cases were six times more infectious than resident cases, consistent with the hypothesis that staff were the primary drivers of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in LTCFs., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the U.S prompted abrupt and dramatic changes to social contact patterns. Monitoring changing social behavior is essential to provide reliable input data for mechanistic models of infectious disease, which have been increasingly used to support public health policy to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic. While some studies have reported on changing contact patterns throughout the pandemic, few have reported differences in contact patterns among key demographic groups and none have reported nationally representative estimates. We conducted a national probability survey of US households and collected information on social contact patterns during two time periods: August-December 2020 (before widespread vaccine availability) and March-April 2021 (during national vaccine rollout). Overall, contact rates in Spring 2021 were similar to those in Fall 2020, with most contacts reported at work. Persons identifying as non-White, non-Black, non-Asian, and non-Hispanic reported high numbers of contacts relative to other racial and ethnic groups. Contact rates were highest in those reporting occupations in retail, hospitality and food service, and transportation. Those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies reported a higher number of daily contacts than those who were seronegative. Our findings provide evidence for differences in social behavior among demographic groups, highlighting the profound disparities that have become the hallmark of the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Declarations of interest No conflicts to report., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Estimates of rotavirus vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the United States appear higher in years with more rotavirus activity. We hypothesized rotavirus VE is constant over time but appears to vary as a function of temporal variation in local rotavirus cases and/or misclassified diagnoses., Methods: We analyzed 6 years of data from eight US surveillance sites on 8- to 59-month olds with acute gastroenteritis symptoms. Children's stool samples were tested via enzyme immunoassay (EIA); rotavirus-positive results were confirmed with molecular testing at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We defined rotavirus gastroenteritis cases by either positive on-site EIA results alone or positive EIA with Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmation. For each case definition, we estimated VE against any rotavirus gastroenteritis, moderate-to-severe disease, and hospitalization using two mixed-effect regression models: the first including year plus a year-vaccination interaction, and the second including the annual percent of rotavirus-positive tests plus a percent positive-vaccination interaction. We used multiple overimputation to bias-adjust for misclassification of cases defined by positive EIA alone., Results: Estimates of annual rotavirus VE against all outcomes fluctuated temporally, particularly when we defined cases by on-site EIA alone and used a year-vaccination interaction. Use of confirmatory testing to define cases reduced, but did not eliminate, fluctuations. Temporal fluctuations in VE estimates further attenuated when we used a percent positive-vaccination interaction. Fluctuations persisted until bias-adjustment for diagnostic misclassification., Conclusions: Both controlling for time-varying rotavirus activity and bias-adjusting for diagnostic misclassification are critical for estimating the most valid annual rotavirus VE., Competing Interests: Disclosure: J.A.E. has research support from Merck, Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline and consults for Sanofi Pasteur and Meissa Vaccines. G.A.W. received an honorarium from Merck for authorship of chapters in the Merck Manual. M.M.M. has laboratory agreements with Merck Sharp & Dohme and Sanofi. C.J.H. has research support from Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Astra-Zeneca and has received honoraria from Frontline Medical Communications for contributions to Pediatric News. J.E.S. has research support from Merck. T.L.L. is a member of the Amgen Methods Advisory Council, for which he receives consulting fees and travel support. B.A.L. reports grants and personal fees from Takeda Pharmaceuticals and personal fees from World Health Organization, outside the subject of the submitted work. The other authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To examine whether declines in the crude U.S. COVID-19 case fatality ratio is due to improved clinical care and/or other factors., Methods: We used multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for age and other individual-level characteristics, to examine associations between report month and mortality among confirmed and probable COVID-19 cases and hospitalized cases in Georgia reported March 2, 2020 to March 31, 2021., Results: Compared to August 2020, mortality risk among cases was lowest in November 2020 (OR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.78-0.91) and remained lower until March 2021 (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77-0.95). Among hospitalized cases, mortality risk increased in December 2020 (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.07-1.27) and January 2021 (OR = 1.25; 95% CI: 1.14-1.36), before declining until March 2021 (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.78-1.04)., Conclusions: After adjusting for other factors, including the shift to a younger age distribution of cases, we observed lower mortality risk from November 2020 to March 2021 compared to August 2020 among cases. This suggests that improved clinical management may have contributed to lower mortality risk. Among hospitalized cases, mortality risk increased again in December 2020 and January 2021, but then decreased to a risk similar to that among all cases by March 2021., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Estimate incidence of and risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection among nursing home staff in the state of Georgia during the 2020-2021 Winter COVID-19 Surge in the United States., Design: Serial survey and serologic testing at 2 time points with 3-month interval exposure assessment., Setting and Participants: Fourteen nursing homes in the state of Georgia; 203 contracted or employed staff members from those 14 participating nursing homes who were seronegative at the first time point and provided a serology specimen at second time point, at which time they reported no COVID-19 vaccination or only very recent vaccination (≤4 weeks)., Methods: Interval infection was defined as seroconversion to antibody presence for both nucleocapsid protein and spike protein. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs by job type, using multivariable logistic regression, accounting for community-based risks including interval community incidence and interval change in resident infections per bed., Results: Among 203 eligible staff, 72 (35.5%) had evidence of interval infection. In multivariable analysis among unvaccinated staff, staff SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced seroconversion was significantly higher among nurses and certified nursing assistants accounting for race and interval infection incidence in both the community and facility (aOR 5.3, 95% CI 1.0-28.4). This risk persisted but was attenuated when using the full study cohort including those with very recent vaccination., Conclusions and Implications: Midway through the first year of the pandemic, job type continues to be associated with increased risk for infection despite enhanced infection prevention efforts including routine screening of staff. These results suggest that mitigation strategies prior to vaccination did not eliminate occupational risk for infection and emphasize critical need to maximize vaccine utilization to eliminate excess risk among front-line providers., (Copyright © 2022 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Countries continue to debate the need for decontamination of cold-chain food packaging to reduce possible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) fomite transmission among frontline workers. While laboratory-based studies demonstrate persistence of SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces, the likelihood of fomite-mediated transmission under real-life conditions is uncertain. Using a quantitative microbial risk assessment model of a frozen food packaging facility, we simulated 1) SARS-CoV-2 fomite-mediated infection risks following worker exposure to contaminated plastic packaging; and 2) reductions in these risks from masking, handwashing, and vaccination. In a frozen food facility without interventions, SARS-CoV-2 infection risk to a susceptible worker from contact with contaminated packaging was 1.5 × 10 -3 per 1h-period (5th - 95th percentile: 9.2 × 10 -6 , 1.2 × 10 -2 ). Standard food industry infection control interventions, handwashing and masking, reduced risk (99.4%) to 8.5 × 10 -6 risk per 1h-period (5th - 95th percentile: 2.8 × 10 -8 , 6.6 × 10 -5 ). Vaccination of the susceptible worker (two doses Pfizer/Moderna, vaccine effectiveness: 86-99%) with handwashing and masking reduced risk to 5.2 × 10 -7 risk per 1h-period (5th - 95th percentile: 1.8 × 10 -9 , 5.4 × 10 -6 ). Simulating increased transmissibility of current and future variants (Delta, Omicron), (2-, 10-fold viral shedding) among a fully vaccinated workforce, handwashing and masking continued to mitigate risk (1.4 × 10 -6 - 8.8 × 10 -6 risk per 1h-period). Additional decontamination of frozen food plastic packaging reduced infection risks to 1.2 × 10 -8 risk per 1h-period (5th - 95th percentile: 1.9 × 10 -11 , 9.5 × 10 -8 ). Given that standard infection control interventions reduced risks well below 1 × 10 -4 (World Health Organization water quality risk thresholds), additional packaging decontamination suggest no marginal benefit in risk reduction. Consequences of this decontamination may include increased chemical exposures to workers, food quality and hazard risks to consumers, and unnecessary added costs to governments and the global food industry., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest., (© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases underestimate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. We conducted a national probability survey of US households to estimate cumulative incidence adjusted for antibody waning., Methods: From August-December 2020 a random sample of US addresses were mailed a survey and self-collected nasal swabs and dried blood spot cards. One adult household member completed the survey and mail specimens for viral detection and total (immunoglobulin [Ig] A, IgM, IgG) nucleocapsid antibody by a commercial, emergency use authorization-approved antigen capture assay. We estimated cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 adjusted for waning antibodies and calculated reported fraction (RF) and infection fatality ratio (IFR). Differences in seropositivity among demographic, geographic, and clinical subgroups were explored., Results: Among 39 500 sampled households, 4654 respondents provided responses. Cumulative incidence adjusted for waning was 11.9% (95% credible interval [CrI], 10.5%-13.5%) as of 30 October 2020. We estimated 30 332 842 (CrI, 26 703 753-34 335 338) total infections in the US adult population by 30 October 2020. RF was 22.3% and IFR was 0.85% among adults. Black non-Hispanics (Prevalence ratio (PR) 2.2) and Hispanics (PR, 3.1) were more likely than White non-Hispanics to be seropositive., Conclusions: One in 8 US adults had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by October 2020; however, few had been accounted for in public health reporting. The COVID-19 pandemic is likely substantially underestimated by reported cases. Disparities in COVID-19 by race observed among reported cases cannot be attributed to differential diagnosis or reporting of infections in population subgroups., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Social distancing measures are effective in reducing overall community transmission but much remains unknown about how they have impacted finer-scale dynamics. In particular, much is unknown about how changes of contact patterns and other behaviors including adherence to social distancing, induced by these measures, may have impacted finer-scale transmission dynamics among different age groups. In this paper, we build a stochastic age-specific transmission model to systematically characterize the degree and variation of age-specific transmission dynamics, before and after lifting the lockdown in Georgia, USA. We perform Bayesian (missing-)data-augmentation model inference, leveraging reported age-specific case, seroprevalence and mortality data. We estimate that overall population-level transmissibility was reduced to 41.2% with 95% CI [39%, 43.8%] of the pre-lockdown level in about a week of the announcement of the shelter-in-place order. Although it subsequently increased after the lockdown was lifted, it only bounced back to 62% [58%, 67.2%] of the pre-lockdown level after about a month. We also find that during the lockdown susceptibility to infection increases with age. Specifically, relative to the oldest age group (> 65+), susceptibility for the youngest age group (0-17 years) is 0.13 [0.09, 0.18], and it increases to 0.53 [0.49, 0.59] for 18-44 and 0.75 [0.68, 0.82] for 45-64. More importantly, our results reveal clear changes of age-specific susceptibility (defined as average risk of getting infected during an infectious contact incorporating age-dependent behavioral factors) after the lockdown was lifted, with a trend largely consistent with reported age-specific adherence levels to social distancing and preventive measures. Specifically, the older groups (> 45) (with the highest levels of adherence) appear to have the most significant reductions of susceptibility (e.g., post-lockdown susceptibility reduced to 31.6% [29.3%, 34%] of the estimate before lifting the lockdown for the 6+ group). Finally, we find heterogeneity in case reporting among different age groups, with the lowest rate occurring among the 0-17 group (9.7% [6.4%, 19%]). Our results provide a more fundamental understanding of the impacts of stringent lockdown measures, and finer evidence that other social distancing and preventive measures may be effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These results may be exploited to guide more effective implementations of these measures in many current settings (with low vaccination rate globally and emerging variants) and in future potential outbreaks of novel pathogens., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Norovirus infection causing acute gastroenteritis could lead to adverse effects on the gut microbiome. We assessed the association of microbiome diversity with norovirus infection and secretor status in patients from Veterans Affairs medical centers. Alpha diversity metrics were lower among patients with acute gastroenteritis but were similar for other comparisons., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Among 353 healthcare personnel in a longitudinal cohort in 4 hospitals in Atlanta, Georgia (May-June 2020), 23 (6.5%) had severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) antibodies. Spending >50% of a typical shift at the bedside (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2-10.5) and black race (OR, 8.4; 95% CI, 2.7-27.4) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity.

The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic poses significant health risks to workers who are essential to maintaining the food supply chain. Using a quantitative risk assessment model, this study characterized the impact of risk reduction strategies for controlling SARS-CoV-2 transmission (droplet, aerosol, fomite-mediated) among front-line workers in a representative indoor fresh fruit and vegetable manufacturing facility. We simulated: 1) individual and cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infection risks from close contact (droplet and aerosols at 1-3 m), aerosol, and fomite-mediated exposures to a susceptible worker following exposure to an infected worker during an 8 h-shift; and 2) the relative reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection risk attributed to infection control interventions (physical distancing, mask use, ventilation, surface disinfection, hand hygiene, vaccination). Without mitigation measures, the SARS-CoV-2 infection risk was largest for close contact (droplet and aerosol) at 1 m (0.96, 5th - 95th percentile: 0.67-1.0). In comparison, risk associated with fomite (0.26, 5th - 95th percentile: 0.10-0.56) or aerosol exposure alone (0.05, 5th - 95th percentile: 0.01-0.13) at 1 m distance was substantially lower (73-95%). At 1 m, droplet transmission predominated over aerosol and fomite-mediated transmission, however, this changed by 3 m, with aerosols comprising the majority of the exposure dose. Increasing physical distancing reduced risk by 84% (1-2 m) and 91% (1-3 m). Universal mask use reduced infection risk by 52-88%, depending on mask type. Increasing ventilation (from 0.1 to 2-8 air changes/hour) resulted in risk reductions of 14-54% (1 m) and 55-85% (2 m). Combining these strategies, together with handwashing and surface disinfection, resulted in <1% infection risk. Partial or full vaccination of the susceptible worker resulted in risk reductions of 73-92% (1 m risk range: 0.08-0.26). However, vaccination paired with other interventions (ACH 2, mask use, or distancing) was necessary to achieve infection risks <1%. Current industry SARS-CoV-2 risk reduction strategies, particularly when bundled, provide significant protection to essential food workers., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although most norovirus outbreaks in high-income countries occur in healthcare facilities, information on associations between control measures and outbreak outcomes in these settings is lacking., Methods: We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis to assess associations between norovirus outbreak control measures and outcomes in hospitals and long-term care facilities (LTCFs), globally. Using regression analyses stratified by setting (hospital/LTCF), we compared durations, attack rates, and case counts for outbreaks in which control measures were reportedly implemented to those in which they were not., Results: We identified 102 papers describing 162 norovirus outbreaks. Control measures were reportedly implemented in 118 (73%) outbreaks and were associated with 0.6 (95% CI: 0.3-1.1) times smaller patient case counts and 0.7 (95% CI: 0.4, 1.0) times shorter durations in hospitals but 1.5 (95% CI: 1.1-2.2), 1.5 (95% CI: 1.0-2.1) and 1.6 (95% CI: 1.0-2.6) times larger overall, resident and staff case counts, respectively, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.0-2.0) times longer durations in LTCFs., Conclusions: Reported implementation of control measures was associated with smaller/shorter outbreaks in hospitals but larger/longer outbreaks in LTCFs. Control measures were likely implemented in response to larger/longer outbreaks in LTCFs, rather than causing them. Prospective observational or intervention studies are needed to determine effectiveness.

Background: Reported coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases underestimate true severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. Data on all infections, including asymptomatic infections, are needed. To minimize biases in estimates from reported cases and seroprevalence surveys, we conducted a household-based probability survey and estimated cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections adjusted for antibody waning., Methods: From August to December 2020, we mailed specimen collection kits (nasal swabs and blood spots) to a random sample of Georgia addresses. One household adult completed a survey and returned specimens for virus and antibody testing. We estimated cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections adjusted for waning antibodies, reported fraction, and infection fatality ratio (IFR). Differences in seropositivity among demographic, geographic, and clinical subgroups were explored with weighted prevalence ratios (PR)., Results: Among 1370 participants, adjusted cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 was 16.1% (95% credible interval [CrI], 13.5%-19.2%) as of 16 November 2020. The reported fraction was 26.6% and IFR was 0.78%. Non-Hispanic black (PR, 2.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-4.1) and Hispanic adults (PR, 1.98; 95% CI, .74-5.31) were more likely than non-Hispanic white adults to be seropositive., Conclusions: As of mid-November 2020, 1 in 6 adults in Georgia had been infected with SARS-CoV-2. The COVID-19 epidemic in Georgia is likely substantially underestimated by reported cases., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Serological testing remains a passive component of the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a transmission model, we examine how serological testing could have enabled seropositive individuals to increase their relative levels of social interaction while offsetting transmission risks. We simulate widespread serological testing in New York City, South Florida, and Washington Puget Sound and assume seropositive individuals partially restore their social contacts. Compared to no intervention, our model suggests that widespread serological testing starting in late 2020 would have averted approximately 3300 deaths in New York City, 1400 deaths in South Florida and 11,000 deaths in Washington State by June 2021. In all sites, serological testing blunted subsequent waves of transmission. Findings demonstrate the potential benefit of widespread serological testing, had it been implemented in the pre-vaccine era, and remain relevant now amid the potential for emergence of new variants., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: EL reports personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur for participation in a global influenza vaccination advisory board, outside the area of work commented on here. BAL and KN were supported by NIH/NIAID R01 AI143875 and NIH/NIGMS R01 GM124280.