skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Inferring the differences in incubation-period and generation-interval distributions of the Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2
Estimating the differences in the incubation-period, serial-interval, and generation-interval distributions of SARS-CoV-2 variants is critical to understanding their transmission. However, the impact of epidemic dynamics is often neglected in estimating the timing of infection—for example, when an epidemic is growing exponentially, a cohort of infected individuals who developed symptoms at the same time are more likely to have been infected recently. Here, we reanalyze incubation-period and serial-interval data describing transmissions of the Delta and Omicron variants from the Netherlands at the end of December 2021. Previous analysis of the same dataset reported shorter mean observed incubation period (3.2 d vs. 4.4 d) and serial interval (3.5 d vs. 4.1 d) for the Omicron variant, but the number of infections caused by the Delta variant decreased during this period as the number of Omicron infections increased. When we account for growth-rate differences of two variants during the study period, we estimate similar mean incubation periods (3.8 to 4.5 d) for both variants but a shorter mean generation interval for the Omicron variant (3.0 d; 95% CI: 2.7 to 3.2 d) than for the Delta variant (3.8 d; 95% CI: 3.7 to 4.0 d). The differences in estimated generation intervals may be driven by the “network effect”—higher effective transmissibility of the Omicron variant can cause faster susceptible depletion among contact networks, which in turn prevents late transmission (therefore shortening realized generation intervals). Using up-to-date generation-interval distributions is critical to accurately estimating the reproduction advantage of the Omicron variant.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1806833
PAR ID:
10461024
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Volume:
120
Issue:
22
ISSN:
0027-8424
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. null (Ed.)
    Background The natural history of disease in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) remained obscure during the early pandemic. Aim Our objective was to estimate epidemiological parameters of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and assess the relative infectivity of the incubation period. Methods We estimated the distributions of four epidemiological parameters of SARS-CoV-2 transmission using a large database of COVID-19 cases and potential transmission pairs of cases, and assessed their heterogeneity by demographics, epidemic phase and geographical region. We further calculated the time of peak infectivity and quantified the proportion of secondary infections during the incubation period. Results The median incubation period was 7.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9‒7.5) days. The median serial and generation intervals were similar, 4.7 (95% CI: 4.2‒5.3) and 4.6 (95% CI: 4.2‒5.1) days, respectively. Paediatric cases < 18 years had a longer incubation period than adult age groups (p = 0.007). The median incubation period increased from 4.4 days before 25 January to 11.5 days after 31 January (p < 0.001), whereas the median serial (generation) interval contracted from 5.9 (4.8) days before 25 January to 3.4 (3.7) days after. The median time from symptom onset to discharge was also shortened from 18.3 before 22 January to 14.1 days after. Peak infectivity occurred 1 day before symptom onset on average, and the incubation period accounted for 70% of transmission. Conclusion The high infectivity during the incubation period led to short generation and serial intervals, necessitating aggressive control measures such as early case finding and quarantine of close contacts. 
    more » « less
  2. Mutheneni, Srinivasa Rao (Ed.)
    The lack of routine viral genomic surveillance delayed the initial detection of SARS-CoV-2, allowing the virus to spread unfettered at the outset of the U.S. epidemic. Over subsequent months, poor surveillance enabled variants to emerge unnoticed. Against this backdrop, long-standing social and racial inequities have contributed to a greater burden of cases and deaths among minority groups. To begin to address these problems, we developed a new variant surveillance model geared toward building ‘next generation’ genome sequencing capacity at universities in or near rural areas and engaging the participation of their local communities. The resulting genomic surveillance network has generated more than 1,000 SARS-CoV-2 genomes to date, including the first confirmed case in northeast Louisiana of Omicron, and the first and sixth confirmed cases in Georgia of the emergent BA.2.75 and BQ.1.1 variants, respectively. In agreement with other studies, significantly higher viral gene copy numbers were observed in Delta variant samples compared to those from Omicron BA.1 variant infections, and lower copy numbers were seen in asymptomatic infections relative to symptomatic ones. Collectively, the results and outcomes from our collaborative work demonstrate that establishing genomic surveillance capacity at smaller academic institutions in rural areas and fostering relationships between academic teams and local health clinics represent a robust pathway to improve pandemic readiness. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract BackgroundFour severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants predominated in the United States since 2021. Understanding disease severity related to different SARS-CoV-2 variants remains limited. MethodViral genome analysis was performed on SARS-CoV-2 clinical isolates circulating March 2021 through March 2022 in Cleveland, Ohio. Major variants were correlated with disease severity and patient outcomes. ResultsIn total 2779 patients identified with either Alpha (n = 1153), Gamma (n = 122), Delta (n = 808), or Omicron variants (n = 696) were selected for analysis. No difference in frequency of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death were found among Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants. However, patients with Omicron infection were significantly less likely to be admitted to the hospital, require oxygen, or admission to the ICU (χ2 = 12.8, P < .001; χ2 = 21.6, P < .002; χ2 = 9.6, P = .01, respectively). In patients whose vaccination status was known, a substantial number had breakthrough infections with Delta or Omicron variants (218/808 [26.9%] and 513/696 [73.7%], respectively). In breakthrough infections, hospitalization rate was similar regardless of variant by multivariate analysis. No difference in disease severity was identified between Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2. ConclusionsDisease severity associated with Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants is comparable while Omicron infections are significantly less severe. Breakthrough disease is significantly more common in patients with Omicron infection. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract BackgroundThe severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant has spread globally. However, the contribution of community versus household transmission to the overall risk of infection remains unclear. MethodsBetween November 2021 and March 2022, we conducted an active case-finding study in an urban informal settlement with biweekly visits across 1174 households with 3364 residents. Individuals displaying coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)–related symptoms were identified, interviewed along with household contacts, and defined as index and secondary cases based on reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and symptom onset. ResultsIn 61 households, we detected a total of 94 RT-PCR–positive cases. Of 69 sequenced samples, 67 cases (97.1%) were attributed to the Omicron BA.1* variant. Among 35 of their households, the secondary attack rate was 50.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 37.0%–63.0%). Women (relative risk [RR], 1.6 [95% CI, .9–2.7]), older individuals (median difference, 15 [95% CI, 2–21] years), and those reporting symptoms (RR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.0–3.0]) had a significantly increased risk for SARS-CoV-2 secondary infection. Genomic analysis revealed substantial acquisition of viruses from the community even among households with other SARS-CoV-2 infections. After excluding community acquisition, we estimated a household secondary attack rate of 24.2% (95% CI, 11.9%–40.9%). ConclusionsThese findings underscore the ongoing risk of community acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 among households with current infections. The observed high attack rate necessitates swift booster vaccination, rapid testing availability, and therapeutic options to mitigate the severe outcomes of COVID-19. 
    more » « less
  5. Abstract Objective: Current guidance states that asymptomatic screening for severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prior to admission to an acute-care setting is at the facility’s discretion. This study’s objective was to estimate the number of undetected cases of SARS-CoV-2 admitted as inpatients under 4 testing approaches and varying assumptions. Design and setting: Individual-based microsimulation of 104 North Carolina acute-care hospitals Patients: All simulated inpatient admissions to acute-care hospitals from December 15, 2021, to January 13, 2022 [ie, during the SARS-COV-2 ο (omicron) variant surge]. Interventions: We simulated (1) only testing symptomatic patients, (2) 1-stage antigen testing with no confirmatory polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, (3) 1-stage antigen testing with a confirmatory PCR for negative results, and (4) serial antigen screening (ie, repeat antigen test 2 days after a negative result). Results: Over 1 month, there were 77,980 admissions: 13.7% for COVID-19, 4.3% with but not for COVID-19, and 82.0% for non–COVID-19 indications without current infection. Without asymptomatic screening, 1,089 (credible interval [CI], 946–1,253) total SARS-CoV-2 infections (7.72%) went undetected. With 1-stage antigen screening, 734 (CI, 638–845) asymptomatic infections (67.4%) were detected, with 1,277 false positives. With combined antigen and PCR screening, 1,007 (CI, 875–1,159) asymptomatic infections (92.5%) were detected, with 5,578 false positives. A serial antigen testing policy detected 973 (CI, 845–1,120) asymptomatic infections (89.4%), with 2,529 false positives. Conclusions: Serial antigen testing identified >85% of asymptomatic infections and resulted in fewer false positives with less cost per identified infection compared to combined antigen plus PCR testing. 
    more » « less