Search for: All records

Infectious diseases may cause some long-term damage to their host, leading to elevated mortality even after recovery. Mortality due to complications from so-called ‘long COVID’ is a stark illustration of this potential, but the impacts of such post-infection mortality (PIM) on epidemic dynamics are not known. Using an epidemiological model that incorporates PIM, we examine the importance of this effect. We find that in contrast to mortality during infection, PIM can induce epidemic cycling. The effect is due to interference between elevated mortality and reinfection through the previously infected susceptible pool. In particular, robust immunity (via decreased susceptibility to reinfection) reduces the likelihood of cycling; on the other hand, disease-induced mortality can interact with weak PIM to generate periodicity. In the absence of PIM, we prove that the unique endemic equilibrium is stable and therefore our key result is that PIM is an overlooked phenomenon that is likely to be destabilizing. Overall, given potentially widespread effects, our findings highlight the importance of characterizing heterogeneity in susceptibility (via both PIM and robustness of host immunity) for accurate epidemiological predictions. In particular, for diseases without robust immunity, such as SARS-CoV-2, PIM may underlie complex epidemiological dynamics especially in the context of seasonal forcing.

 

As the SARS-CoV-2 trajectory continues, the longer-term immuno-epidemiology of COVID-19, the dynamics of Long COVID, and the impact of escape variants are important outstanding questions. We examine these remaining uncertainties with a simple modelling framework that accounts for multiple (antigenic) exposures via infection or vaccination. If immunity (to infection or Long COVID) accumulates rapidly with the valency of exposure, we find that infection levels and the burden of Long COVID are markedly reduced in the medium term. More pessimistic assumptions on host adaptive immune responses illustrate that the longer-term burden of COVID-19 may be elevated for years to come. However, we also find that these outcomes could be mitigated by the eventual introduction of a vaccine eliciting robust (i.e. durable, transmission-blocking and/or ‘evolution-proof’) immunity. Overall, our work stresses the wide range of future scenarios that still remain, the importance of collecting real-world epidemiological data to identify likely outcomes, and the crucial need for the development of a highly effective transmission-blocking, durable and broadly protective vaccine.

 

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. 

Behavioral responses influence the trajectories of epidemics. During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) reduced pathogen transmission and mortality worldwide. However, despite the global pandemic threat, there was substantial cross-country variation in the adoption of protective behaviors that is not explained by disease prevalence alone. In particular, many countries show a pattern of slow initial mask adoption followed by sharp transitions to high acceptance rates. These patterns are characteristic of behaviors that depend on social norms or peer influence. We develop a game-theoretic model of mask wearing where the utility of wearing a mask depends on the perceived risk of infection, social norms, and mandates from formal institutions. In this model, increasing pathogen transmission or policy stringency can trigger social tipping points in collective mask wearing. We show that complex social dynamics can emerge from simple individual interactions and that sociocultural variables and local policies are important for recovering cross-country variation in the speed and breadth of mask adoption. These results have implications for public health policy and data collection. 

Inferring the relative strength (i.e. the ratio of reproduction numbers) and relative speed (i.e. the difference between growth rates) of new SARS-CoV-2 variants is critical to predicting and controlling the course of the current pandemic. Analyses of new variants have primarily focused on characterizing changes in the proportion of new variants, implicitly or explicitly assuming that the relative speed remains fixed over the course of an invasion. We use a generation-interval-based framework to challenge this assumption and illustrate how relative strength and speed change over time under two idealized interventions: a constant-strength intervention like idealized vaccination or social distancing, which reduces transmission rates by a constant proportion, and a constant-speed intervention like idealized contact tracing, which isolates infected individuals at a constant rate. In general, constant-strength interventions change the relative speed of a new variant, while constant-speed interventions change its relative strength. Differences in the generation-interval distributions between variants can exaggerate these changes and modify the effectiveness of interventions. Finally, neglecting differences in generation-interval distributions can bias estimates of relative strength. 

Pathogens evolve different life-history strategies, which depend in part on differences in their host populations. A central feature of hosts is their population structure (e.g. spatial). Additionally, hosts themselves can exhibit different degrees of symptoms when newly infected; this latency is a key life-history property of pathogens. With an evolutionary-epidemiological model, we examine the role of population structure on the evolutionary dynamics of latency. We focus on specific power-law-like formulations for transmission and progression from the first infectious stage as a function of latency, assuming that the across-group to within-group transmission ratio increases if hosts are less symptomatic. We find that simple population heterogeneity can lead to local evolutionarily stable strategies (ESSs) at zero and infinite latency in situations where a unique ESS exists in the corresponding homogeneous case. Furthermore, there can exist more than one interior evolutionarily singular strategy. We find that this diversity of outcomes is due to the (possibly slight) advantage of across-group transmission for pathogens that produce fewer symptoms in a first infectious stage. Thus, our work reveals that allowing individuals without symptoms to travel can have important unintended evolutionary effects and is thus fundamentally problematic in view of the evolutionary dynamics of latency. 

SARS-CoV-2 is an international public health emergency; high transmissibility and morbidity and mortality can result in the virus overwhelming health systems. Combinations of social distancing, and test, trace, and isolate strategies can reduce the number of new infections per infected individual below 1, thus driving declines in case numbers, but may be both challenging and costly. These interventions must also be maintained until development and (now likely) mass deployment of a vaccine (or therapeutics), since otherwise, many susceptible individuals are still at risk of infection. We use a simple analytical model to explore how low levels of infection, combined with vaccination, determine the trajectory to community immunity. Understanding the repercussions of the biological characteristics of the viral life cycle in this scenario is of considerable importance. We provide a simple description of this process by modelling the scenario where the effective reproduction number R eff is maintained at 1. Since the additional complexity imposed by the strength and duration of transmission-blocking immunity is not yet clear, we use our framework to probe the impact of these uncertainties. Through intuitive analytical relations, we explore how the necessary magnitude of vaccination rates and mitigation efforts depends crucially on the durations of natural and vaccinal immunity. We also show that our framework can encompass seasonality or preexisting immunity due to epidemic dynamics prior to strong mitigation measures. Taken together, our simple conceptual model illustrates the importance of individual and vaccinal immunity for community immunity, and that the quantification of individuals immunized against SARS-CoV-2 is paramount. 

Pathogens have evolved a variety of life-history strategies. An important strategy consists of successful transmission by an infected host before the appearance of symptoms, that is, while the host is still partially or fully asymptomatic. During this initial stage of infection, it is possible for another pathogen to superinfect an already infected host and replace the previously infecting pathogen. Here, we study the effect of superinfection during the first stage of an infection on the evolutionary dynamics of the degree to which the host is asymptomatic (host latency) in that same stage. We find that superinfection can lead to major differences in evolutionary behaviour. Most strikingly, the duration of immunity following infection can significantly influence pathogen evolutionary dynamics, whereas without superinfection the outcomes are independent of host immunity. For example, changes in host immunity can drive evolutionary transitions from a fully symptomatic to a fully asymptomatic first infection stage. Additionally, if superinfection relative to susceptible infection is strong enough, evolution can lead to a unique strategy of latency that corresponds to a local fitness minimum, and is therefore invasible by nearby mutants. Thus, this strategy is a branching point, and can lead to coexistence of pathogens with different latencies. Furthermore, in this new framework with superinfection, we also find that there can exist two interior singular strategies. Overall, new evolutionary outcomes can cascade from superinfection. 

Despite vast improvements in global vaccination coverage during the last decade, there is a growing trend in vaccine hesitancy and/or refusal globally. This has implications for the acceptance and coverage of a potential vaccine against COVID-19. In the United States, the number of children exempt from vaccination for “philosophical belief-based” non-medical reasons increased in 12 of the 18 states that allowed this policy from 2009 to 2017 ( 1 ). Meanwhile, the overuse and misuse of antibiotics, especially in young children, have led to increasing rates of drug resistance that threaten our ability to treat infectious diseases. Vaccine hesitancy and antibiotic overuse exist side-by-side in the same population of young children, and it is unclear why one modality (antibiotics) is universally seen as safe and effective, while the other (vaccines) is seen as potentially hazardous by some. In this review, we consider the drivers shaping the use of vaccines and antibiotics in the context of three factors: individual incentives, risk perceptions, and social norms and group dynamics. We illustrate how these factors contribute to the societal and individual costs of vaccine underuse and antimicrobial overuse. Ultimately, we seek to understand these factors that are at the nexus of infectious disease epidemiology and social science to inform policy-making.