France has been heavily affected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and went into lockdown on 17 March 2020. Using models applied to hospital and death data, we estimate the impact of the lockdown and current population immunity. We find that 2.9% of infected individuals are hospitalized and 0.5% of those infected die (95% credible interval: 0.3 to 0.9%), ranging from 0.001% in those under 20 years of age to 8.3% in those 80 years of age or older. Across all ages, men are more likely to be hospitalized, enter intensive care, and die than women. The lockdown reduced the reproductive number from 2.90 to 0.67 (77% reduction). By 11 May 2020, when interventions are scheduled to be eased, we project that 3.5 million people (range: 2.1 million to 6.0 million), or 5.3% of the population (range: 3.3 to 9.3%), will have been infected. Population immunity appears to be insufficient to avoid a second wave if all control measures are released at the end of the lockdown.

BackgroundEmpirical social contact patterns are essential to understand the spread of infectious diseases. To date, no such data existed for France. Although infectious diseases are frequently seasonal, the temporal variation of contact patterns has not been documented hitherto.MethodsCOMES-F is the first French large-scale population survey, carried out over 3 different periods (February-March, April, April-May) with some participants common to the first and the last period. Participants described their contacts for 2 consecutive days, and reported separately on professional contacts when typically over 20 per day.Results2033 participants reported 38 881 contacts (weighted median [first quartile-third quartile]: 8[5–14] per day), and 54 378 contacts with supplementary professional contacts (9[5–17]). Contrary to age, gender, household size, holidays, weekend and occupation, period of the year had little influence on the number of contacts or the mixing patterns. Contact patterns were highly assortative with age, irrespective of the location of the contact, and gender, with women having 8% more contacts than men. Although most contacts occurred at home and at school, the inclusion of professional contacts modified the structure of the mixing patterns. Holidays and weekends reduced dramatically the number of contacts, and as proxies for school closure, reduced R0 by 33% and 28%, respectively. Thus, school closures could have an important impact on the spread of close contact infections in France.ConclusionsDespite no clear evidence for temporal variation, trends suggest that more studies are needed. Age and gender were found important determinants of the mixing patterns. Gender differences in mixing patterns might help explain gender differences in the epidemiology of infectious diseases.

End of April 2020, French clinicians observed an increase in cases presenting with paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS). Nationwide surveillance was set up and demonstrated temporospatial association with the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic for 156 reported cases as at 17 May: 108 were classified as confirmed (n = 79), probable (n = 16) or possible (n = 13) post-COVID-19 PIMS cases. A continuum of clinical features from Kawasaki-like disease to myocarditis was observed, requiring intensive care in 67% of cases.

Background On 7 February 2020, French Health authorities were informed of a confirmed case of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in an Englishman infected in Singapore who had recently stayed in a chalet in the French Alps. We conducted an investigation to identify secondary cases and interrupt transmission. Methods We defined as a confirmed case a person linked to the chalet with a positive reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction sample for SARS-CoV-2. Results The index case stayed 4 days in the chalet with 10 English tourists and a family of 5 French residents; SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 5 individuals in France, 6 in England (including the index case), and 1 in Spain (overall attack rate in the chalet: 75%). One pediatric case, with picornavirus and influenza A coinfection, visited 3 different schools while symptomatic. One case was asymptomatic, with similar viral load as that of a symptomatic case. Seven days after the first cases were diagnosed, 1 tertiary case was detected in a symptomatic patient with from the chalet a positive endotracheal aspirate; all previous and concurrent nasopharyngeal specimens were negative. Additionally, 172 contacts were monitored; all contacts tested for SARS-CoV-2 (N = 73) were negative. Conclusions The occurrence in this cluster of 1 asymptomatic case with similar viral load as a symptomatic patient suggests transmission potential of asymptomatic individuals. The fact that an infected child did not transmit the disease despite close interactions within schools suggests potential different transmission dynamics in children. Finally, the dissociation between upper and lower respiratory tract results underscores the need for close monitoring of the clinical evolution of suspected cases of coronavirus disease 2019.