Transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infections in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China, January-February 2022

Xin, Hualei; Wang, Zhe; Feng, Shi Ting; Sun, Zheng; Yu, Li; Cowling, Benjamin J.; Kong, Qingxin; Wu, Peng

doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2022.10.033

Cited by 22 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Italy estimates were from the initial period of the epidemic (May-June 2022), whereas our study was for July-August 2022. Serial interval changes can be very rapid (10). We also found a serial interval of 7.0 days for rash onset.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Serial Interval and Incubation Period Estimates of Monkeypox Virus Infection in 12 Jurisdictions, United States, May–August 2022

Madewell¹,

Charniga²,

Masters³

et al. 2023

Emerg. Infect. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Serial Interval and Incubation Period Estimates of Monkeypox Virus Infection in 12 Jurisdictions, United States, May–August 2022

Madewell¹,

Charniga²,

Masters³

et al. 2023

Emerg. Infect. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The short half-life of SA58 in nasal mucosa suggests that the effect of SA58 was transient after administration and should be administered as early as possible to cover the incubation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Since the incubation period of the Omicron variant was reported to be as short as three days, 19 our selection of study participants within 72 hours of contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected individual is appropriate. The duration of case monitoring is less than three days for most of study participants in the study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PEP has been routinely recommended for several viral infections, including influenza virus, 1 rabies virus, 2 human immunodeficiency virus, 3 hepatitis B virus 4 and varicella-zoster virus, 5 especially for those who have higher risks of severe outcomes or mortality following infection. 6 Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID- 19) is a contagious condition caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) that firstly emerged in December 2019. 7 The on-going COVID-19 pandemic has led to high morbidity and mortality worldwide, 8 resulting in 648 million laboratory-confirmed cases and 6•64 million deaths globally as of December 15, 2022.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-Exposure Prophylaxis with SA58 (anti-COVID-19 monoclonal antibody) Nasal Spray for the prevention of symptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019 in healthy adult workers: A randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study

Song¹,

Zeng

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND This study has assessed a new Anti-COVID-19 Monoclonal Antibody Nasal Spray (SA58) for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) against symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS We conducted an efficacy study in adults aged 18 years and older within three days of exposure to a SARS-CoV-2 infected individual. Recruited participants were randomized in a ratio of 3:1 to receive SA58 or placebo. Primary endpoints were laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 within study period. FINDINGS A total of 1,222 participants were randomized and dosed (SA58, n=901; placebo, n=321). Median of follow-up was 2.25 days and 2.79 days for SA58 and placebo, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 221 of 901 (25%) and 72 of 321 (22%) participants with SA58 and placebo, respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.49). All adverse events were mild in severity. Laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 developed in 7 of 824 participants (0.22 per 100 person-days) in the SA58 group vs 14 of 299 (1.17 per 100 person-days) in the placebo group, resulting in an estimated efficacy of 80.82% (95%CI 52.41%-92.27%). There were 32 SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positives (1.04 per 100 person-days) in the SA58 group vs 32 (2.80 per 100 person-days) in the placebo group, resulting in an estimated efficacy of 61.83% (95%CI 37.50%-76.69%). A total of 21 RT-PCR positive samples were sequenced. 21 lineages of SARS-CoV-2 variants were identified, and all were the Omicron variant BF.7. INTERPRETATION SA58 Nasal Spray showed favorable efficacy and safety in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection or symptomatic COVID-19 in healthy adult workers who had exposure to SARS-CoV-2 within 72 hours.

show abstract

“…N is the total population size, and N = 1412600000 [12]; L E , L I and L R represent the latent, infectious, and immunity periods, respectively;. L E = 3.8 days [13], L I = 5 days [14]. β is the transmission rate of SARS-CoV-2 transmission rate, and was estimated by the least-squares method based on the number of daily COVID-19 cases in China between 16 November 2022 and 14 February 2023 in accordance with the WHO [6].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing and magnitude of the next wave of COVID-19 in China: lessons from 189 countries and territories

Niu

Zhao

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of the fading immunity to COVID-19 and continuous evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variants, the next epidemic wave of COVID-19 is inevitable. The Omicron variant has been the cause of several waves of the COVID-19 epidemics in the majority of countries. Thus, lessons from other countries may provide guidance regarding the timing and magnitude of the next COVID-19 wave of the pandemic in China. In this study, the COVID-19 surveillance data from 189 countries that experienced two or more waves of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant were analysed. The median peak timing between the first and second/third waves of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was 164/243 days. The peaks of the second and third waves were much lower than that of the first wave. The median relative peaks of the second and third compared with the first waves were 14.5% and 11.2%, respectively. The time window between the peak timings of the first and second waves showed no significant rank correlation with the five socioeconomic factors included in this study. However, the relative peak of the second wave increased significantly with gross domestic product per capita (P<0.001), urbanisation rate (P=0.003), population density (P=0.007), and proportion of older adults >65 years (P<0.001), although decreased significantly with the proportion of 0-14 teenagers (P<0.001). In summary, the historical situations and progression of COVID-19 outbreaks in other countries may inform the risk assessment of incoming outbreaks in mainland China; however, the timing and magnitude of the next COVID-19 wave may also be influenced by several unknown factors, including rapid viral evaluation of SARS-CoV-2

show abstract

Transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infections in Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China, January-February 2022

Cited by 22 publications

References 10 publications

Serial Interval and Incubation Period Estimates of Monkeypox Virus Infection in 12 Jurisdictions, United States, May–August 2022

Serial Interval and Incubation Period Estimates of Monkeypox Virus Infection in 12 Jurisdictions, United States, May–August 2022

Post-Exposure Prophylaxis with SA58 (anti-COVID-19 monoclonal antibody) Nasal Spray for the prevention of symptomatic Coronavirus Disease 2019 in healthy adult workers: A randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study

Timing and magnitude of the next wave of COVID-19 in China: lessons from 189 countries and territories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About