An emerging outbreak of monkeypox infection is quickly spreading worldwide, being currently reported in more than 30 countries, with slightly less than 1000 cases. In the present preliminary report, we collected and synthesized early data concerning epidemiological trends and clinical features of the ongoing outbreak and we compared them with those of previous outbreaks. Data were pooled from six clusters in Italy, Australia, the Czech Republic, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, totaling 124 cases (for 35 of which it was possible to retrieve detailed information). The ongoing epidemic differs from previous outbreaks in terms of age (54.29% of individuals in their thirties), sex/gender (most cases being males), risk factors, and transmission route, with sexual transmission being highly likely. Also, the clinical presentation is atypical and unusual, being characterized by anogenital lesions and rashes that relatively spare the face and extremities. The most prevalent sign/symptom reported was fever (in 54.29% of cases) followed by inguinal lymphadenopathy (45.71%) and exanthema (40.00%). Asthenia, fatigue, and headache were described in 22.86% and 25.71% of the subjects, respectively. Myalgia was present in 17.14% of the cases. Both genital and anal lesions (ulcers and vesicles) were reported in 31.43% of the cases. Finally, cervical lymphadenopathy was described in 11.43% of the sample, while the least commonly reported symptoms were diarrhea and axillary lymphadenopathy (5.71% of the case series for both symptoms). Some preliminary risk factors can be identified (being a young male, having sex with other men, engaging in risky behaviors and activities, including condomless sex, human immunodeficiency virus positivity (54.29% of the sample analyzed), and a story of previous sexually transmitted infections, including syphilis). On the other hand, being fully virally suppressed and undetectable may protect against a more severe infectious course. However, further research in the field is urgently needed.
DISCLAIMER This paper was submitted to the Bulletin of the World Health Organization and was posted to the COVID-19 open site, according to the protocol for public health emergencies for international concern as described in Vasee Moorthy et al. (http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.20.251561). The information herein is available for unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited as indicated by the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Intergovernmental Organizations licence (CC BY IGO 3.0).
Objective To assess whether the basic reproduction number (R0) of COVID-19 is different across countries and what national-level demographic, social, and environmental factors other than interventions characterize initial vulnerability to the virus. Methods We fit logistic growth curves to reported daily case numbers, up to the first epidemic peak, for 58 countries for which 16 explanatory covariates are available. This fitting has been shown to robustly estimate R0 from the specified period. We then use a generalized additive model (GAM) to discern both linear and nonlinear effects, and include 5 random effect covariates to account for potential differences in testing and reporting that can bias the estimated R0. Findings We found that the mean R0 is 1.70 (S.D. 0.57), with a range between 1.10 (Ghana) and 3.52 (South Korea). We identified four factors—population between 20–34 years old (youth), population residing in urban agglomerates over 1 million (city), social media use to organize offline action (social media), and GINI income inequality—as having strong relationships with R0, across countries. An intermediate level of youth and GINI inequality are associated with high R0, (n-shape relationships), while high city population and high social media use are associated with high R0. Pollution, temperature, and humidity did not have strong relationships with R0 but were positive. Conclusion Countries have different characteristics that predispose them to greater intrinsic vulnerability to COVID-19. Studies that aim to measure the effectiveness of interventions across locations should account for these baseline differences in social and demographic characteristics.
A mathematical model of COVID-19 is presented where the decision to increase or decrease social distancing is modelled dynamically as a function of the measured active and total cases as well as the perceived cost of isolating. Along with the cost of isolation, we define an overburden healthcare cost and a total cost. We explore these costs by adjusting parameters that could change with policy decisions. We observe that two disease prevention practices, namely increasing isolation activity and increasing incentive to isolate do not always lead to optimal health outcomes. We demonstrate that this is due to the fatigue and cost of isolation. We further demonstrate that an increase in the number of lock-downs, each of shorter duration can lead to minimal costs. Our results are compared with case data in Ontario, Canada from March to August 2020 and details of expanding the results to other regions are presented.
Background This article presents the first detailed analysis of the prevalence and disability burden of Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) from 1990 to 2019 by cause, age, sex, and Socio-demographic Index (SDI) in 204 countries and territories. Methods Data from the Global Burden of Diseases Study (GBD) 2019 were used. GBD 2019 modelled the prevalence of GBS using hospital and claims data. Years lived with disability (YLDs) were estimated as the product of the GBS prevalence and the disability weight. This article also reported proportions in the age-standardised prevalence rate that were due to six underlying causes of GBS. Results In 2019, there were 150,095 [95% uncertainty intervals (UI) 119,924 to 188,309] total cases of GBS worldwide, which resulted in 44,407 (95% UI 28,016 to 64,777) YLDs. Globally, there was a 6.4% (95% UI 3.6 to 9.5) increase in the age-standardised prevalence of GBS per 100,000 population between 1990 and 2019. High-income Asia Pacific [1.9 (95% UI: 1.5 to 2.4)] and East Asia [0.8 (95% UI: 0.6 to 1.0)] had the highest and lowest age-standardised prevalence rates (per 100,000), respectively, in 2019. Nationally, Japan [6.4 (95% UI: 5.3 to 7.7)] and China [0.8 (95% UI: 0.6 to 1.0)] had the highest and lowest age-standardised prevalence rates (per 100,000). The age-standardised burden of GBS increased with increasing age and was higher in males in all age groups. Furthermore, the age-standardised prevalence of GBS (per 100,000) had a positive association with the level of development, as measured by SDI, although this association was not strong. Upper respiratory infections and unknown causes accounted for the highest proportions of underlying causes. Conclusions Globally, the prevalence of GBS continues to increase. Geographical differences and strategies aimed at preventing infectious diseases should be considered in future health policy planning and decision-making processes. This study had several limitations, such as using the same disability weight for all causes and a reliance on hospital- and self-reported data, which should be addressed in future research.
Background: More than 1 year after the beginning of the international spread of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), the reasons explaining its apparently lower reported burden in Africa are still to be fully elucidated. Few studies previously investigated the potential reasons explaining this epidemiological observation using data at the level of a few African countries. However, an updated analysis considering the various epidemiological waves and variables across an array of categories, with a focus on African countries might help to better understand the COVID-19 pandemic on the continent. Thus, we investigated the potential reasons for the persistently lower transmission and mortality rates of COVID-19 in Africa.Methods: Data were collected from publicly available and well-known online sources. The cumulative numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths per 1 million population reported by the African countries up to February 2021 were used to estimate the transmission and mortality rates of COVID-19, respectively. The covariates were collected across several data sources: clinical/diseases data, health system performance, demographic parameters, economic indicators, climatic, pollution, and radiation variables, and use of social media. The collinearities were corrected using variance inflation factor (VIF) and selected variables were fitted to a multiple regression model using the R statistical package.Results: Our model (adjusted R-squared: 0.7) found that the number of COVID-19 tests per 1 million population, GINI index, global health security (GHS) index, and mean body mass index (BMI) were significantly associated (P < 0.05) with COVID-19 cases per 1 million population. No association was found between the median life expectancy, the proportion of the rural population, and Bacillus Calmette–Guérin (BCG) coverage rate. On the other hand, diabetes prevalence, number of nurses, and GHS index were found to be significantly associated with COVID-19 deaths per 1 million population (adjusted R-squared of 0.5). Moreover, the median life expectancy and lower respiratory infections rate showed a trend towards significance. No association was found with the BCG coverage or communicable disease burden.Conclusions: Low health system capacity, together with some clinical and socio-economic factors were the predictors of the reported burden of COVID-19 in Africa. Our results emphasize the need for Africa to strengthen its overall health system capacity to efficiently detect and respond to public health crises.
Infections represent highly dynamic processes, characterized by evolutionary changes and events that involve both the pathogen and the host. Among infectious agents, viruses, such as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-related Coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the infectious agent responsible for the currently ongoing Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) pandemic, have a particularly high mutation rate. Taking into account the mutational landscape of an infectious agent, it is important to shed light on its evolution capability over time. As new, more infectious strains of COVID-19 emerge around the world, it is imperative to estimate when these new strains may overtake the wild-type strain in different populations. Therefore, we developed a general-purpose framework to estimate the time at which a mutant variant is able to take over a wild-type strain during an emerging infectious disease outbreak. In this study, we used COVID-19 as a case-study; however, the model is adaptable to any emerging pathogen. We devised a two-strain mathematical framework to model a wild- and a mutant-type viral population and fit cumulative case data to parameterize the model, using Ontario as a case study. We found that, in the context of under-reporting and the current case levels, a variant strain was unlikely to dominate until March/April 2021. The current non-pharmaceutical interventions in Ontario need to be kept in place longer even with vaccination in order to prevent another outbreak. The spread of a variant strain in Ontario will likely be observed by a widened peak of the daily reported cases. If vaccine efficacy is maintained across strains, then it is still possible to achieve high levels of immunity in the population by the end of 2021. Our findings have important practical implications in terms of public health as policy- and decision-makers are equipped with a mathematical tool that can enable the estimation of the take-over of a mutant strain of an emerging infectious disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.