IntroductionEstimating COVID-19 cumulative incidence in Africa remains problematic due to challenges in contact tracing, routine surveillance systems and laboratory testing capacities and strategies. We undertook a meta-analysis of population-based seroprevalence studies to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Africa to inform evidence-based decision making on public health and social measures (PHSM) and vaccine strategy.MethodsWe searched for seroprevalence studies conducted in Africa published 1 January 2020–30 December 2021 in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Europe PMC (preprints), grey literature, media releases and early results from WHO Unity studies. All studies were screened, extracted, assessed for risk of bias and evaluated for alignment with the WHO Unity seroprevalence protocol. We conducted descriptive analyses of seroprevalence and meta-analysed seroprevalence differences by demographic groups, place and time. We estimated the extent of undetected infections by comparing seroprevalence and cumulative incidence of confirmed cases reported to WHO.PROSPERO: CRD42020183634.ResultsWe identified 56 full texts or early results, reporting 153 distinct seroprevalence studies in Africa. Of these, 97 (63%) were low/moderate risk of bias studies. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence rose from 3.0% (95% CI 1.0% to 9.2%) in April–June 2020 to 65.1% (95% CI 56.3% to 73.0%) in July–September 2021. The ratios of seroprevalence from infection to cumulative incidence of confirmed cases was large (overall: 100:1, ranging from 18:1 to 954:1) and steady over time. Seroprevalence was highly heterogeneous both within countries—urban versus rural (lower seroprevalence for rural geographic areas), children versus adults (children aged 0–9 years had the lowest seroprevalence)—and between countries and African subregions.ConclusionWe report high seroprevalence in Africa suggesting greater population exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and potential protection against COVID-19 severe disease than indicated by surveillance data. As seroprevalence was heterogeneous, targeted PHSM and vaccination strategies need to be tailored to local epidemiological situations.

No abstract

Background Our understanding of the global scale of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains incomplete: Routine surveillance data underestimate infection and cannot infer on population immunity; there is a predominance of asymptomatic infections, and uneven access to diagnostics. We meta-analyzed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies, standardized to those described in the World Health Organization’s Unity protocol (WHO Unity) for general population seroepidemiological studies, to estimate the extent of population infection and seropositivity to the virus 2 years into the pandemic. Methods and findings We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, preprints, and grey literature for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence published between January 1, 2020 and May 20, 2022. The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183634). We included general population cross-sectional and cohort studies meeting an assay quality threshold (90% sensitivity, 97% specificity; exceptions for humanitarian settings). We excluded studies with an unclear or closed population sample frame. Eligible studies—those aligned with the WHO Unity protocol—were extracted and critically appraised in duplicate, with risk of bias evaluated using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. We meta-analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, pooling to estimate regional and global seroprevalence over time; compared seroprevalence from infection to confirmed cases to estimate underascertainment; meta-analyzed differences in seroprevalence between demographic subgroups such as age and sex; and identified national factors associated with seroprevalence using meta-regression. We identified 513 full texts reporting 965 distinct seroprevalence studies (41% low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) sampling 5,346,069 participants between January 2020 and April 2022, including 459 low/moderate risk of bias studies with national/subnational scope in further analysis. By September 2021, global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from infection or vaccination was 59.2%, 95% CI [56.1% to 62.2%]. Overall seroprevalence rose steeply in 2021 due to infection in some regions (e.g., 26.6% [24.6 to 28.8] to 86.7% [84.6% to 88.5%] in Africa in December 2021) and vaccination and infection in others (e.g., 9.6% [8.3% to 11.0%] in June 2020 to 95.9% [92.6% to 97.8%] in December 2021, in European high-income countries [HICs]). After the emergence of Omicron in March 2022, infection-induced seroprevalence rose to 47.9% [41.0% to 54.9%] in Europe HIC and 33.7% [31.6% to 36.0%] in Americas HIC. In 2021 Quarter Three (July to September), median seroprevalence to cumulative incidence ratios ranged from around 2:1 in the Americas and Europe HICs to over 100:1 in Africa (LMICs). Children 0 to 9 years and adults 60+ were at lower risk of seropositivity than adults 20 to 29 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). In a multivariable model using prevaccination data, stringent public health and social measures were associated with lower seroprevalence (p = 0.02). The main limitations of our methodology include that some estimates were driven by certain countries or populations being overrepresented. Conclusions In this study, we observed that global seroprevalence has risen considerably over time and with regional variation; however, over one-third of the global population are seronegative to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Our estimates of infections based on seroprevalence far exceed reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Quality and standardized seroprevalence studies are essential to inform COVID-19 response, particularly in resource-limited regions.

BackgroundCOVID-19 case data underestimates infection and immunity, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We meta-analyzed standardized SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies to estimate global seroprevalence.Objectives/MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, preprints, and grey literature for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies aligned with the WHO UNITY protocol published between 2020-01-01 and 2021-10-29. Eligible studies were extracted and critically appraised in duplicate. We meta-analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, pooling to estimate regional and global seroprevalence over time; compared seroprevalence from infection to confirmed cases to estimate under-ascertainment; meta-analyzed differences in seroprevalence between demographic subgroups; and identified national factors associated with seroprevalence using meta-regression. PROSPERO: CRD42020183634.ResultsWe identified 396 full texts reporting 736 distinct seroprevalence studies (41% LMIC), including 355 low/moderate risk of bias studies with national/sub-national scope in further analysis. By April 2021, global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was 26.1%, 95% CI [24.6-27.6%]. Seroprevalence rose steeply in the first half of 2021 due to infection in some regions (e.g., 18.2% to 45.9% in Africa) and vaccination and infection in others (e.g., 11.3% to 57.4% in the Americas high-income countries), but remained low in others (e.g., 0.3% to 1.6% in the Western Pacific). In 2021 Q1, median seroprevalence to case ratios were 1.9:1 in HICs and 61.9:1 in LMICs. Children 0-9 years and adults 60+ were at lower risk of seropositivity than adults 20-29. In a multivariate model using data pre-vaccination, more stringent public health and social measures were associated with lower seroprevalence.ConclusionsGlobal seroprevalence has risen considerably over time and with regional variation, however much of the global population remains susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. True infections far exceed reported COVID-19 cases. Standardized seroprevalence studies are essential to inform COVID-19 control measures, particularly in resource-limited regions.

Risk of HIV infection is high in Chinese MSM, with an annual HIV incidence ranging from 3.41 to 13.7/100 person-years. Tenofovir-based PrEP is effective in preventing HIV transmission in MSM. This study evaluates the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness of implementing PrEP in Chinese MSM over the next two decades. A compartmental model for HIV was used to forecast the impact of PrEP on number of infections, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years (DALY) averted. We also provide an estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the cost per DALY averted of the intervention. Without PrEP, there will be 1.1-3.0 million new infections and 0.7-2.3 million HIV-related deaths in the next two decades. Moderate PrEP coverage (50%) would prevent 0.17-0.32 million new HIV infections. At Truvada's current price in China, daily oral PrEP costs $46,813-52,008 per DALY averted and is not cost-effective; on-demand Truvada reduces ICER to $25,057-27,838 per DALY averted, marginally cost-effective; daily generic tenofovir-based regimens further reduce ICER to $3675-8963, wholly cost-effective. The cost of daily oral Truvada PrEP regimen would need to be reduced by half to achieve cost-effectiveness and realize the public health good of preventing hundreds of thousands of HIV infections among MSM in China.

No abstract

Background Coinciding with the release of the first Chinese domestic human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Cecolin in 2019, and the substantial advancements in cervical cancer screening technology, we aimed to evaluate the costeffectiveness of the combined strategies of cervical cancer screening programmes and universal vaccination of girls (aged 9-14 years) with Cecolin in China.Methods We did a cost-effectiveness analysis in China, in which we developed a Markov model of cervical cancer to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 61 intervention strategies, including a combination of various screening methods at different frequencies with and without vaccination, and also vaccination alone, from a healthcare system perspective. We did univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the robustness of the model's findings.Findings Compared with no intervention, various combined screening and vaccination strategies would incur an additional cost of US$6 157 000-22 146 000 and result in 691-970 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained in a designated cohort of 100 000 girls aged 9-14 years over a lifetime. With a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times the Chinese per-capita gross domestic product (GDP), careHPV screening (a rapid HPV test) once every 5 years with vaccination would be the most cost-effective strategy with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $21 799 per QALY compared with the lower-cost non-dominated strategy on the cost-effectiveness frontier, and the probability of it being cost-effective (44%) outperformed other strategies. Strategies that combined screening and vaccination would be more cost-effective than screening alone strategies when the vaccination cost was less than $50 for two doses, even with a lower willingness-to-pay of one times the per-capita GDP.Interpretation careHPV screening once every 5 years with vaccination is the most cost-effective strategy for cervical cancer prevention in China. A reduction in the domestic HPV vaccine price is necessary to ascertain a good economic return for the future vaccination programme. The findings provide important evidence that informs health policies for cervical cancer prevention in China.

HPV infection is prevalent in China, particularly in Central China, in comparison with the global level and neighbouring countries. Targeted HPV vaccination for women, MSM and PLHIV and scale-up of cervical screening for women are priorities in curbing the HPV epidemic in China.