Mark Jit
Mark Jit
Scroll
Chair and Professor of the Department of Global and Environmental Health
-
Professional overview
-
Mark Jit is the inaugural chair and a professor in the Department of Global and Environmental Health. He was formerly head of the Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology & Dynamics and co-director of the Global Health Economics Centre (GHECO) at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). He holds honorary appointments at LSHTM as well as the University of Hong Kong (HKU) and the National University of Singapore (NUS).
Dr. Jit’s research focuses on epidemiological and economic modeling of vaccines to support evidence-based public health decision making. He has published papers covering a range of vaccine-preventable or potentially vaccine-preventable diseases including COVID-19, measles, HPV, pneumococcus, rotavirus, influenza, Group B Streptococcus, dengue, EV71 and RSV as well as methodological papers advancing the ways vaccines are evaluated. This work has influenced many of the major changes to immunization policy in countries around the world. Dr. Jit has served on a number of expert advisory committees in the UK as well as for international organizations such as the World Health Organization. He also organises or contributes to academic and professional courses on vaccine modeling, economics and decision science around the world.
Dr. Jit received his BSc and PhD in Mathematics from University College London, specializing in mathematical biology, and a Master of Public Health degree from King’s College London.
Visit Dr. Jit's Google Scholar's page to learn more about his research portfolio.
-
Education
-
BSc, Mathematics, University College LondonPhD, Mathematics, University College LondonMPH, Public Health, King's College London
-
Honors and awards
-
Clarivate Highly Cited Researcher (20222023)Fellow of the Academy of Medical Sciences (2023)Training Fund Award, Health Protection Agency (2007)Andrew Rosen Prize, University College London (1999)Institute of Mathematics and its Applications Award (1998)Departmental Research Studentship, University College London (1998)Student Union Commendation, University College London (1997)Fillon Prize, University College London (1996)Pathfinder Award, University College London (1995)
-
Publications
Publications
Cost-effectiveness of bivalent versus monovalent vaccines against hand, foot and mouth disease
AbstractLiu, D., Leung, K., Jit, M., Yu, H., Yang, J., Liao, Q., Liu, F., Zheng, Y., & Wu, J. T. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Clinical Microbiology and InfectionVolume
26Issue
3Page(s)
373-380AbstractObjectives: Enterovirus 71 (EV71) and coxsackievirus A16 (CA16) were responsible for 43.3% (235 123/543 243) and 24.8% (134 607/543 243) of all laboratory-confirmed hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) cases during 2010–2015 in China. Three monovalent EV71 vaccines have been licensed in China while bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccines are under development. A comparative cost-effectiveness analysis of bivalent EV71/CA16 versus monovalent EV71 vaccination would be useful for informing the additional value of bivalent HFMD vaccines in China. Methods: We used a static model parameterized with the national HFMD surveillance data during 2010–2013, virological HFMD surveillance records from all 31 provinces in mainland China during 2010–2013 and caregiver survey data of costs and health quality of life during 2012–2013. We estimated the threshold vaccine cost (TVC), defined as the maximum additional cost that could be paid for a cost-effective bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccine over a monovalent EV71 vaccine, as the outcome. The base case analysis was performed from a societal perspective. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying assumptions governing HFMD risk, costs, discounting and vaccine efficacy. Results: In the base case, choosing the bivalent EV71/CA16 over monovalent EV71 vaccination would be cost-effective only if the additional cost of the bivalent EV71/CA16 compared with the monovalent EV71 vaccine is less than €4.7 (95% CI 4.2–5.2). Compared with the TVC in the base case, TVC increased by up to €8.9 if all the test-negative cases were CA16-HFMD; decreased by €1.1 with an annual discount rate of 6% and exclusion of the productivity loss; and increased by €0.14 and €0.3 with every 1% increase in bivalent vaccine efficacy against CA16-HFMD and differential vaccine efficacy against EV71-HFMD, respectively. Conclusions: Bivalent EV71/CA16 vaccines can be cost-effective compared with monovalent EV71 vaccines, if suitably priced. Our study provides further evidence for determining the optimal use of HFMD vaccines in routine paediatric vaccination programme in China.Cost-effectiveness of introducing national seasonal influenza vaccination for adults aged 60 years and above in mainland China: A modelling analysis
AbstractYang, J., Atkins, K. E., Feng, L., Baguelin, M., Wu, P., Yan, H., Lau, E. H., Wu, J. T., Liu, Y., Cowling, B. J., Jit, M., & Yu, H. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: China has an aging population with an increasing number of adults aged ≥ 60 years. Influenza causes a heavy disease burden in older adults, but can be alleviated by vaccination. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a potential government-funded seasonal influenza vaccination program in older adults in China. Methods: We characterized the health and economic impact of a fully funded influenza vaccination program for older adults using China-specific influenza disease burden, and related cost data, etc. Using a decision tree model, we calculated the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of vaccination from the societal perspective, at a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to GDP per capita (US$8840). Moreover, we estimated the threshold vaccination costs, under which the fully funded vaccination program is cost-effective using GDP per capita as the willingness-to-pay threshold. Results: Compared to current self-paid vaccination, a fully funded vaccination program is expected to prevent 19,812 (95% uncertainty interval, 7150-35,783) influenza-like-illness outpatient consultations per year, 9418 (3386-17,068) severe acute respiratory infection hospitalizations per year, and 8800 (5300-11,667) respiratory excess deaths due to influenza per year, and gain 70,212 (42,106-93,635) QALYs per year. Nationally, the incremental costs per QALY gained of the vaccination program is US$4832 (3460-8307), with a 98% probability of being cost-effective. The threshold vaccination cost is US$10.19 (6.08-13.65). However, variations exist between geographical regions, with Northeast and Central China having lower probabilities of cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: Our results support the implementation of a government fully funded older adult vaccination program in China. The regional analysis provides results across settings that may be relevant to other countries with similar disease burden and economic status, especially for low- and middle-income countries where such analysis is limited.Early dynamics of transmission and control of COVID-19: a mathematical modelling study
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Infectious DiseasesVolume
20Issue
5Page(s)
553-558AbstractBackground: An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to 95 333 confirmed cases as of March 5, 2020. Understanding the early transmission dynamics of the infection and evaluating the effectiveness of control measures is crucial for assessing the potential for sustained transmission to occur in new areas. Combining a mathematical model of severe SARS-CoV-2 transmission with four datasets from within and outside Wuhan, we estimated how transmission in Wuhan varied between December, 2019, and February, 2020. We used these estimates to assess the potential for sustained human-to-human transmission to occur in locations outside Wuhan if cases were introduced. Methods: We combined a stochastic transmission model with data on cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan and international cases that originated in Wuhan to estimate how transmission had varied over time during January, 2020, and February, 2020. Based on these estimates, we then calculated the probability that newly introduced cases might generate outbreaks in other areas. To estimate the early dynamics of transmission in Wuhan, we fitted a stochastic transmission dynamic model to multiple publicly available datasets on cases in Wuhan and internationally exported cases from Wuhan. The four datasets we fitted to were: daily number of new internationally exported cases (or lack thereof), by date of onset, as of Jan 26, 2020; daily number of new cases in Wuhan with no market exposure, by date of onset, between Dec 1, 2019, and Jan 1, 2020; daily number of new cases in China, by date of onset, between Dec 29, 2019, and Jan 23, 2020; and proportion of infected passengers on evacuation flights between Jan 29, 2020, and Feb 4, 2020. We used an additional two datasets for comparison with model outputs: daily number of new exported cases from Wuhan (or lack thereof) in countries with high connectivity to Wuhan (ie, top 20 most at-risk countries), by date of confirmation, as of Feb 10, 2020; and data on new confirmed cases reported in Wuhan between Jan 16, 2020, and Feb 11, 2020. Findings: We estimated that the median daily reproduction number (Rt) in Wuhan declined from 2·35 (95% CI 1·15–4·77) 1 week before travel restrictions were introduced on Jan 23, 2020, to 1·05 (0·41–2·39) 1 week after. Based on our estimates of Rt, assuming SARS-like variation, we calculated that in locations with similar transmission potential to Wuhan in early January, once there are at least four independently introduced cases, there is a more than 50% chance the infection will establish within that population. Interpretation: Our results show that COVID-19 transmission probably declined in Wuhan during late January, 2020, coinciding with the introduction of travel control measures. As more cases arrive in international locations with similar transmission potential to Wuhan before these control measures, it is likely many chains of transmission will fail to establish initially, but might lead to new outbreaks eventually. Funding: Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and National Institute for Health Research.Effect of pediatric influenza vaccination on antibiotic resistance, England and Wales
AbstractChae, C., Davies, N. G., Jit, M., & Atkins, K. E. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Emerging Infectious DiseasesVolume
26Issue
1Page(s)
138-142AbstractVaccines against viral infections have been proposed to reduce prescribing of antibiotics and thereby help control resistant bacterial infections. However, by combining published data sources, we predict that pediatric live attenuated influenza vaccination in England and Wales will not substantially reduce antibiotic consumption or adverse health outcomes associated with antibiotic resistance.Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Infectious DiseasesVolume
20Issue
10Page(s)
1151-1160AbstractBackground: The isolation of symptomatic cases and tracing of contacts has been used as an early COVID-19 containment measure in many countries, with additional physical distancing measures also introduced as outbreaks have grown. To maintain control of infection while also reducing disruption to populations, there is a need to understand what combination of measures—including novel digital tracing approaches and less intensive physical distancing—might be required to reduce transmission. We aimed to estimate the reduction in transmission under different control measures across settings and how many contacts would be quarantined per day in different strategies for a given level of symptomatic case incidence. Methods: For this mathematical modelling study, we used a model of individual-level transmission stratified by setting (household, work, school, or other) based on BBC Pandemic data from 40 162 UK participants. We simulated the effect of a range of different testing, isolation, tracing, and physical distancing scenarios. Under optimistic but plausible assumptions, we estimated reduction in the effective reproduction number and the number of contacts that would be newly quarantined each day under different strategies. Results: We estimated that combined isolation and tracing strategies would reduce transmission more than mass testing or self-isolation alone: mean transmission reduction of 2% for mass random testing of 5% of the population each week, 29% for self-isolation alone of symptomatic cases within the household, 35% for self-isolation alone outside the household, 37% for self-isolation plus household quarantine, 64% for self-isolation and household quarantine with the addition of manual contact tracing of all contacts, 57% with the addition of manual tracing of acquaintances only, and 47% with the addition of app-based tracing only. If limits were placed on gatherings outside of home, school, or work, then manual contact tracing of acquaintances alone could have an effect on transmission reduction similar to that of detailed contact tracing. In a scenario where 1000 new symptomatic cases that met the definition to trigger contact tracing occurred per day, we estimated that, in most contact tracing strategies, 15 000–41 000 contacts would be newly quarantined each day. Interpretation: Consistent with previous modelling studies and country-specific COVID-19 responses to date, our analysis estimated that a high proportion of cases would need to self-isolate and a high proportion of their contacts to be successfully traced to ensure an effective reproduction number lower than 1 in the absence of other measures. If combined with moderate physical distancing measures, self-isolation and contact tracing would be more likely to achieve control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission. Funding: Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, European Commission, Royal Society, Medical Research Council.Effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 cases, deaths, and demand for hospital services in the UK: a modelling study
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Public HealthVolume
5Issue
7Page(s)
e375-e385AbstractBackground: Non-pharmaceutical interventions have been implemented to reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the UK. Projecting the size of an unmitigated epidemic and the potential effect of different control measures has been crucial to support evidence-based policy making during the early stages of the epidemic. This study assesses the potential impact of different control measures for mitigating the burden of COVID-19 in the UK. Methods: We used a stochastic age-structured transmission model to explore a range of intervention scenarios, tracking 66·4 million people aggregated to 186 county-level administrative units in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The four base interventions modelled were school closures, physical distancing, shielding of people aged 70 years or older, and self-isolation of symptomatic cases. We also modelled the combination of these interventions, as well as a programme of intensive interventions with phased lockdown-type restrictions that substantially limited contacts outside of the home for repeated periods. We simulated different triggers for the introduction of interventions, and estimated the impact of varying adherence to interventions across counties. For each scenario, we projected estimated new cases over time, patients requiring inpatient and critical care (ie, admission to the intensive care units [ICU]) treatment, and deaths, and compared the effect of each intervention on the basic reproduction number, R0. Findings: We projected a median unmitigated burden of 23 million (95% prediction interval 13–30) clinical cases and 350 000 deaths (170 000–480 000) due to COVID-19 in the UK by December, 2021. We found that the four base interventions were each likely to decrease R0, but not sufficiently to prevent ICU demand from exceeding health service capacity. The combined intervention was more effective at reducing R0, but only lockdown periods were sufficient to bring R0 near or below 1; the most stringent lockdown scenario resulted in a projected 120 000 cases (46 000–700 000) and 50 000 deaths (9300–160 000). Intensive interventions with lockdown periods would need to be in place for a large proportion of the coming year to prevent health-care demand exceeding availability. Interpretation: The characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 mean that extreme measures are probably required to bring the epidemic under control and to prevent very large numbers of deaths and an excess of demand on hospital beds, especially those in ICUs. Funding: Medical Research Council.Effects of updated demography, disability weights, and cervical cancer burden on estimates of human papillomavirus vaccination impact at the global, regional, and national levels: a PRIME modelling study
AbstractAbbas, K. M., Van Zandvoort, K., Brisson, M., & Jit, M. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Global HealthVolume
8Issue
4Page(s)
e536-e544AbstractBackground: The Papillomavirus Rapid Interface for Modelling and Economics (PRIME) has been used around the world to assess the health impact and cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in girls. We updated PRIME with new data and methods for demography, disability weights, and cervical cancer burden, and generated revised estimates of the health impact of HPV vaccination at the global, regional, and national levels for 177 countries. Methods: PRIME was updated with population demography of the UN World Population Prospects (UNWPP) 2019 revision, disability weights of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study, and cervical cancer burden from the Global Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence (GLOBOCAN) 2018 database. We estimated the lifetime health benefits for bivalent or quadrivalent and nonavalent vaccination of 9-year-old and 12-year-old girls at 90% coverage during 2020–29 in 177 countries. Health impact was presented in terms of cervical cancer cases, deaths, or disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted per 1000 vaccinated girls in comparison with the counterfactual scenario of no vaccination, and the number of girls needed to be vaccinated to prevent a single case, death, or DALY. Findings: In estimating the health impact of HPV vaccination of 9-year-old girls, the combined updates to demography, disability weights, cervical cancer burden estimates resulted in a 26% increase in the estimated number of cases averted, a 51% increase in deaths averted, and a 72% increase in DALYs averted per 1000 vaccinated girls for both the bivalent or quadrivalent and nonavalent vaccines, compared with previous estimates. With the updated model, the bivalent or quadrivalent HPV vaccine was estimated to avert 15 cases, 12 deaths, and 243 DALYs per 1000 vaccinated girls, and the nonavalent HPV vaccine was estimated to avert 19 cases, 14 deaths, and 306 DALYs per 1000 vaccinated girls. The health benefits of vaccination of 12-year-old girls were estimated to be similar but slightly decreased in comparison with vaccination of 9-year-old girls. Interpretation: HPV vaccination provides greater health benefits and is more cost-effective than was previously estimated. The demography update, which incorporates population aging, has the largest effect on the health impact estimates. The WHO African region is expected to gain the greatest health benefits and should be prioritised for HPV vaccination. Funding: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Estimating number of cases and spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) using critical care admissions, United Kingdom, February to March 2020
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
EurosurveillanceVolume
25Issue
18Page(s)
1-5AbstractAn exponential growth model was fitted to critical care admissions from two surveillance databases to determine likely coronavirus disease (COVID-19) case numbers, critical care admissions and epidemic growth in the United Kingdom before the national lockdown. We estimate, on 23 March, a median of 114,000 (95% credible interval (CrI): 78,000–173,000) new cases and 258 (95% CrI: 220–319) new critical care reports, with 527,000 (95% CrI: 362,000–797,000) cumulative cases since 16 February.Estimating the overdispersion in COVID-19 transmission using outbreak sizes outside China
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
Wellcome Open ResearchVolume
5AbstractBackground: A novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak has now spread to a number of countries worldwide. While sustained transmission chains of human-to-human transmission suggest high basic reproduction number R 0, variation in the number of secondary transmissions (often characterised by so-called superspreading events) may be large as some countries have observed fewer local transmissions than others. Methods: We quantified individual-level variation in COVID-19 transmission by applying a mathematical model to observed outbreak sizes in affected countries. We extracted the number of imported and local cases in the affected countries from the World Health Organization situation report and applied a branching process model where the number of secondary transmissions was assumed to follow a negative-binomial distribution. Results: Our model suggested a high degree of individual-level variation in the transmission of COVID-19. Within the current consensus range of R 0 (2-3), the overdispersion parameter k of a negative-binomial distribution was estimated to be around 0.1 (median estimate 0.1; 95% CrI: 0.05-0.2 for R0 = 2.5), suggesting that 80% of secondary transmissions may have been caused by a small fraction of infectious individuals (~10%). A joint estimation yielded likely ranges for R 0 and k (95% CrIs: R 0 1.4-12; k 0.04-0.2); however, the upper bound of R 0 was not well informed by the model and data, which did not notably differ from that of the prior distribution. Conclusions: Our finding of a highly-overdispersed offspring distribution highlights a potential benefit to focusing intervention efforts on superspreading. As most infected individuals do not contribute to the expansion of an epidemic, the effective reproduction number could be drastically reduced by preventing relatively rare superspreading events.Feasibility of controlling COVID-19 outbreaks by isolation of cases and contacts
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Global HealthVolume
8Issue
4Page(s)
e488-e496AbstractBackground: Isolation of cases and contact tracing is used to control outbreaks of infectious diseases, and has been used for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether this strategy will achieve control depends on characteristics of both the pathogen and the response. Here we use a mathematical model to assess if isolation and contact tracing are able to control onwards transmission from imported cases of COVID-19. Methods: We developed a stochastic transmission model, parameterised to the COVID-19 outbreak. We used the model to quantify the potential effectiveness of contact tracing and isolation of cases at controlling a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-like pathogen. We considered scenarios that varied in the number of initial cases, the basic reproduction number (R0), the delay from symptom onset to isolation, the probability that contacts were traced, the proportion of transmission that occurred before symptom onset, and the proportion of subclinical infections. We assumed isolation prevented all further transmission in the model. Outbreaks were deemed controlled if transmission ended within 12 weeks or before 5000 cases in total. We measured the success of controlling outbreaks using isolation and contact tracing, and quantified the weekly maximum number of cases traced to measure feasibility of public health effort. Findings: Simulated outbreaks starting with five initial cases, an R0 of 1·5, and 0% transmission before symptom onset could be controlled even with low contact tracing probability; however, the probability of controlling an outbreak decreased with the number of initial cases, when R0 was 2·5 or 3·5 and with more transmission before symptom onset. Across different initial numbers of cases, the majority of scenarios with an R0 of 1·5 were controllable with less than 50% of contacts successfully traced. To control the majority of outbreaks, for R0 of 2·5 more than 70% of contacts had to be traced, and for an R0 of 3·5 more than 90% of contacts had to be traced. The delay between symptom onset and isolation had the largest role in determining whether an outbreak was controllable when R0 was 1·5. For R0 values of 2·5 or 3·5, if there were 40 initial cases, contact tracing and isolation were only potentially feasible when less than 1% of transmission occurred before symptom onset. Interpretation: In most scenarios, highly effective contact tracing and case isolation is enough to control a new outbreak of COVID-19 within 3 months. The probability of control decreases with long delays from symptom onset to isolation, fewer cases ascertained by contact tracing, and increasing transmission before symptoms. This model can be modified to reflect updated transmission characteristics and more specific definitions of outbreak control to assess the potential success of local response efforts. Funding: Wellcome Trust, Global Challenges Research Fund, and Health Data Research UK.Global, regional, and national estimates of the population at increased risk of severe COVID-19 due to underlying health conditions in 2020: a modelling study
AbstractClark, A., Jit, M., Warren-Gash, C., Guthrie, B., Wang, H. H., Mercer, S. W., Sanderson, C., McKee, M., Troeger, C., Ong, K. L., Checchi, F., Perel, P., Joseph, S., Gibbs, H. P., Banerjee, A., Eggo, R. M., Nightingale, E. S., O’Reilly, K., Jombart, T., … Jarvis, C. I. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Global HealthVolume
8Issue
8Page(s)
e1003-e1017AbstractBackground: The risk of severe COVID-19 if an individual becomes infected is known to be higher in older individuals and those with underlying health conditions. Understanding the number of individuals at increased risk of severe COVID-19 and how this varies between countries should inform the design of possible strategies to shield or vaccinate those at highest risk. Methods: We estimated the number of individuals at increased risk of severe disease (defined as those with at least one condition listed as “at increased risk of severe COVID-19” in current guidelines) by age (5-year age groups), sex, and country for 188 countries using prevalence data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2017 and UN population estimates for 2020. The list of underlying conditions relevant to COVID-19 was determined by mapping the conditions listed in GBD 2017 to those listed in guidelines published by WHO and public health agencies in the UK and the USA. We analysed data from two large multimorbidity studies to determine appropriate adjustment factors for clustering and multimorbidity. To help interpretation of the degree of risk among those at increased risk, we also estimated the number of individuals at high risk (defined as those that would require hospital admission if infected) using age-specific infection–hospitalisation ratios for COVID-19 estimated for mainland China and making adjustments to reflect country-specific differences in the prevalence of underlying conditions and frailty. We assumed males were twice at likely as females to be at high risk. We also calculated the number of individuals without an underlying condition that could be considered at increased risk because of their age, using minimum ages from 50 to 70 years. We generated uncertainty intervals (UIs) for our estimates by running low and high scenarios using the lower and upper 95% confidence limits for country population size, disease prevalences, multimorbidity fractions, and infection–hospitalisation ratios, and plausible low and high estimates for the degree of clustering, informed by multimorbidity studies. Findings: We estimated that 1·7 billion (UI 1·0–2·4) people, comprising 22% (UI 15–28) of the global population, have at least one underlying condition that puts them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 if infected (ranging from <5% of those younger than 20 years to >66% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated that 349 million (186–787) people (4% [3–9] of the global population) are at high risk of severe COVID-19 and would require hospital admission if infected (ranging from <1% of those younger than 20 years to approximately 20% of those aged 70 years or older). We estimated 6% (3–12) of males to be at high risk compared with 3% (2–7) of females. The share of the population at increased risk was highest in countries with older populations, African countries with high HIV/AIDS prevalence, and small island nations with high diabetes prevalence. Estimates of the number of individuals at increased risk were most sensitive to the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic respiratory disease. Interpretation: About one in five individuals worldwide could be at increased risk of severe COVID-19, should they become infected, due to underlying health conditions, but this risk varies considerably by age. Our estimates are uncertain, and focus on underlying conditions rather than other risk factors such as ethnicity, socioeconomic deprivation, and obesity, but provide a starting point for considering the number of individuals that might need to be shielded or vaccinated as the global pandemic unfolds. Funding: UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Health Data Research UK, Medical Research Council, and National Institute for Health Research.Health and economic burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease and the cost-effectiveness of potential interventions against RSV among children under 5 years in 72 Gavi-eligible countries
AbstractLi, X., Willem, L., Antillon, M., Bilcke, J., Jit, M., & Beutels, P. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) frequently causes acute lower respiratory infection in children under 5, representing a high burden in Gavi-eligible countries (mostly low-income and lower-middle-income). Since multiple RSV interventions, including vaccines and monoclonal antibody (mAb) candidates, are under development, we aim to evaluate the key drivers of the cost-effectiveness of maternal vaccination and infant mAb for 72 Gavi countries. Methods: A static Multi-Country Model Application for RSV Cost-Effectiveness poLicy (MCMARCEL) was developed to follow RSV-related events monthly from birth until 5 years of age. MCMARCEL was parameterised using country- A nd age-specific demographic, epidemiological, and cost data. The interventions' level and duration of effectiveness were guided by the World Health Organization's preferred product characteristics and other literature. Maternal vaccination and mAb were assumed to require single-dose administration at prices assumed to align with other Gavi-subsidised technologies. The effectiveness and the prices of the interventions were simultaneously varied in extensive scenario analyses. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) were the primary health outcomes for cost-effectiveness, integrated with probabilistic sensitivity analyses and Expected Value of Partially Perfect Information analysis. Results: The RSV-associated disease burden among children in these 72 countries is estimated at an average of 20.8 million cases, 1.8 million hospital admissions, 40 thousand deaths, 1.2 million discounted DALYs, and US$611 million discounted direct costs. Strategy 'mAb' is more effective due to its assumed longer duration of protection versus maternal vaccination, but it was also assumed to be more expensive. Given all parameterised uncertainty, the optimal strategy of choice tends to change for increasing willingness to pay (WTP) values per DALY averted from the current situation to maternal vaccination (at WTP > US$1000) to mAB (at WTP > US$3500). The age-specific proportions of cases that are hospitalised and/or die cause most of the uncertainty in the choice of optimal strategy. Results are broadly similar across countries. Conclusions: Both the maternal and mAb strategies need to be competitively priced to be judged as relatively cost-effective. Information on the level and duration of protection is crucial, but also more and better disease burden evidence-especially on RSV-attributable hospitalisation and death rates-is needed to support policy choices when novel RSV products become available.Imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin, with and without human papillomavirus vaccine, for anogenital warts: The hipvac factorial RCT
AbstractGilsono, R., Nugento, D., Bennetto, K., Doréo, C. J., Murrayo, M. L., Meadowso, J., Haddowo, L. J., Laceyo, C., Sandmanno, F., Jito, M., Soldano, K., Tetlowo, M., Caverlyo, E., Nathano, M., & Copaso, A. J. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Health Technology AssessmentVolume
24Issue
47Page(s)
1-116AbstractBackground: The comparative efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, of imiquimod or podophyllotoxin cream, either alone or in combination with the quadrivalent HPV vaccine (Gardasil®, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) in the treatment and prevention of recurrence of anogenital warts is not known. Objective: The objective was to compare the efficacy of imiquimod and podophyllotoxin creams to treat anogenital warts and to assess whether or not the addition of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine increases wart clearance or prevention of recurrence. Design: A randomised, controlled, multicentre, partially blinded factorial trial. Participants were randomised equally to four groups, combining either topical treatment with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by gender, a history of previous warts and human immunodeficiency virus status. There was an accompanying economic evaluation, conducted from the provider perspective over the trial duration. Setting: The setting was 22 sexual health clinics in England and Wales. Participants: Participants were patients with a first or repeat episode of anogenital warts who had not been treated in the previous 3 months and had not previously received quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine. Interventions: Participants were randomised to 5% imiquimod cream (Aldara®; Meda Pharmaceuticals, Takeley, UK) for up to 16 weeks or 0.15% podophyllotoxin cream (Warticon®; GlaxoSmithKlein plc, Brentford, UK) for 4 weeks, which was extended to up to 16 weeks if warts persisted. Participants were simultaneously randomised to quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine (Gardasil) or saline control at 0, 8 and 24 weeks. Cryotherapy was permitted after week 4 at the discretion of the investigator. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were a combined primary outcome of wart clearance at week 16 and remaining wart free at week 48. Efficacy analysis was by logistic regression with multiple imputation for missing follow-up values; economic evaluation considered the costs per quality-adjusted life-year. Results: A total of 503 participants were enrolled and attended at least one follow-up visit. The mean age was 31 years, 66% of participants were male (24% of males were men who have sex with men), 50% had a previous history of warts and 2% were living with human immunodeficiency virus. For the primary outcome, the adjusted odds ratio for imiquimod cream versus podophyllotoxin cream was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.23), and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo, the adjusted odds ratio was 1.46 (95% confidence interval 0.97 to 2.20). For the components of the primary outcome, the adjusted odds ratio for wart free at week 16 for imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin was 0.77 (95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.14) and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo was 1.30 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.91). The adjusted odds ratio for remaining wart free at 48 weeks (in those who were wart free at week 16) for imiquimod versus podophyllotoxin was 0.98 (95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.78) and for quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine versus placebo was 1.39 (95% confidence interval 0.73 to 2.63). Podophyllotoxin plus quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine had inconclusive cost-effectiveness compared with podophyllotoxin alone. Limitations: Hepatitis A vaccine as control was replaced by a saline placebo in a non-identical syringe, administered by someone outside the research team, for logistical reasons. Sample size was reduced from 1000 to 500 because of slow recruitment and other delays. Conclusions: A benefit of the vaccine was not demonstrated in this trial. The odds of clearance at week 16 and remaining clear at week 48 were 46% higher with vaccine, and consistent effects were seen for both wart clearance and recurrence separately, but these differences were not statistically significant. Imiquimod and podophyllotoxin creams had similar efficacy for wart clearance, but with a wide confidence interval. The trial results do not support earlier evidence of a lower recurrence with use of imiquimod than with use of podophyllotoxin. Podophyllotoxin without quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine is the most cost-effective strategy at the current vaccine list price. A further larger trial is needed to definitively investigate the effect of the vaccine; studies of the immune response in vaccine recipients are needed to investigate the mechanism of action.Impact of HPV vaccination and cervical screening on cervical cancer elimination: a comparative modelling analysis in 78 low-income and lower-middle-income countries
AbstractBrisson, M., Kim, J. J., Canfell, K., Drolet, M., Gingras, G., Burger, E. A., Martin, D., Simms, K. T., Bénard, Élodie, Boily, M. C., Sy, S., Regan, C., Keane, A., Caruana, M., Nguyen, D. T., Smith, M. A., Laprise, J. F., Jit, M., Alary, M., … Hutubessy, R. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
The LancetVolume
395Issue
10224Page(s)
575-590AbstractBackground: The WHO Director-General has issued a call for action to eliminate cervical cancer as a public health problem. To help inform global efforts, we modelled potential human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and cervical screening scenarios in low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) to examine the feasibility and timing of elimination at different thresholds, and to estimate the number of cervical cancer cases averted on the path to elimination. Methods: The WHO Cervical Cancer Elimination Modelling Consortium (CCEMC), which consists of three independent transmission-dynamic models identified by WHO according to predefined criteria, projected reductions in cervical cancer incidence over time in 78 LMICs for three standardised base-case scenarios: girls-only vaccination; girls-only vaccination and once-lifetime screening; and girls-only vaccination and twice-lifetime screening. Girls were vaccinated at age 9 years (with a catch-up to age 14 years), assuming 90% coverage and 100% lifetime protection against HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58. Cervical screening involved HPV testing once or twice per lifetime at ages 35 years and 45 years, with uptake increasing from 45% (2023) to 90% (2045 onwards). The elimination thresholds examined were an average age-standardised cervical cancer incidence of four or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years and ten or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, and an 85% or greater reduction in incidence. Sensitivity analyses were done, varying vaccination and screening strategies and assumptions. We summarised results using the median (range) of model predictions. Findings: Girls-only HPV vaccination was predicted to reduce the median age-standardised cervical cancer incidence in LMICs from 19·8 (range 19·4–19·8) to 2·1 (2·0–2·6) cases per 100 000 women-years over the next century (89·4% [86·2–90·1] reduction), and to avert 61·0 million (60·5–63·0) cases during this period. Adding twice-lifetime screening reduced the incidence to 0·7 (0·6–1·6) cases per 100 000 women-years (96·7% [91·3–96·7] reduction) and averted an extra 12·1 million (9·5–13·7) cases. Girls-only vaccination was predicted to result in elimination in 60% (58–65) of LMICs based on the threshold of four or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, in 99% (89–100) of LMICs based on the threshold of ten or fewer cases per 100 000 women-years, and in 87% (37–99) of LMICs based on the 85% or greater reduction threshold. When adding twice-lifetime screening, 100% (71–100) of LMICs reached elimination for all three thresholds. In regions in which all countries can achieve cervical cancer elimination with girls-only vaccination, elimination could occur between 2059 and 2102, depending on the threshold and region. Introducing twice-lifetime screening accelerated elimination by 11–31 years. Long-term vaccine protection was required for elimination. Interpretation: Predictions were consistent across our three models and suggest that high HPV vaccination coverage of girls can lead to cervical cancer elimination in most LMICs by the end of the century. Screening with high uptake will expedite reductions and will be necessary to eliminate cervical cancer in countries with the highest burden. Funding: WHO, UNDP, UN Population Fund, UNICEF–WHO–World Bank Special Program of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Canadian Institute of Health Research, Fonds de recherche du Québec–Santé, Compute Canada, National Health and Medical Research Council Australia Centre for Research Excellence in Cervical Cancer Control.Infant Hospitalizations and Fatalities Averted by the Maternal Pertussis Vaccination Program in England, 2012-2017: Post-implementation Economic Evaluation
AbstractSandmann, F., Jit, M., Andrews, N., Buckley, H. L., Campbell, H., Ribeiro, S., Sile, B., Stowe, J., Tessier, E., Ramsay, M., Choi, Y. H., & Amirthalingam, G. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Clinical Infectious DiseasesVolume
71Issue
8Page(s)
1984-1987AbstractIn October 2012, a maternal pertussis vaccination program was implemented in England following an increased incidence and mortality in infants. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the program by comparing pertussis-related infant hospitalizations and deaths in 2012-2017 with nonvaccination scenarios. Despite considerable uncertainties, findings support the cost-effectiveness of the program.Mapping the cryptic spread of the 2015–2016 global Zika virus epidemic
AbstractSun, H., Dickens, B. L., Jit, M., Cook, A. R., & Carrasco, L. R. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: Zika virus (ZIKV) emerged as a global epidemic in 2015–2016 from Latin America with its true geographical extent remaining unclear due to widely presumed underreporting. The identification of locations with potential and unknown spread of ZIKV is a key yet understudied component for outbreak preparedness. Here, we aim to identify locations at a high risk of cryptic ZIKV spread during 2015–2016 to further the understanding of the global ZIKV epidemiology, which is critical for the mitigation of the risk of future epidemics. Methods: We developed an importation simulation model to estimate the weekly number of ZIKV infections imported in each susceptible spatial unit (i.e. location that did not report any autochthonous Zika cases during 2015–2016), integrating epidemiological, demographic, and travel data as model inputs. Thereafter, a global risk model was applied to estimate the weekly ZIKV transmissibility during 2015–2016 for each location. Finally, we assessed the risk of onward ZIKV spread following importation in each susceptible spatial unit to identify locations with a high potential for cryptic ZIKV spread during 2015–2016. Results: We have found 24 susceptible spatial units that were likely to have experienced cryptic ZIKV spread during 2015–2016, of which 10 continue to have a high risk estimate within a highly conservative scenario, namely, Luanda in Angola, Banten in Indonesia, Maharashtra in India, Lagos in Nigeria, Taiwan and Guangdong in China, Dakar in Senegal, Maputo in Mozambique, Kinshasa in Congo DRC, and Pool in Congo. Notably, among the 24 susceptible spatial units identified, some have reported their first ZIKV outbreaks since 2017, thus adding to the credibility of our results (derived using 2015–2016 data only). Conclusion: Our study has provided valuable insights into the potentially high-risk locations for cryptic ZIKV circulation during the 2015–2016 pandemic and has also laid a foundation for future studies that attempt to further narrow this key knowledge gap. Our modelling framework can be adapted to identify areas with likely unknown spread of other emerging vector-borne diseases, which has important implications for public health readiness especially in resource-limited settings.Meeting Report: WHO Workshop on modelling global mortality and aetiology estimates of enteric pathogens in children under five. Cape Town, 28–29th November 2018
AbstractPrudden, H. J., Hasso-Agopsowicz, M., Black, R. E., Troeger, C., Reiner, R. C., Breiman, R. F., Jit, M., Kang, G., Lamberti, L., Lanata, C. F., Lopman, B. A., Ndifon, W., Pitzer, V. E., Platts-Mills, J. A., Riddle, M. S., Smith, P. G., Hutubessy, R., & Giersing, B. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
VaccineVolume
38Issue
31Page(s)
4792-4800AbstractInvestment in vaccine product development should be guided by up-to-date and transparent global burden of disease estimates, which are also fundamental to policy recommendation and vaccine introduction decisions. For low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), vaccine prioritization is primarily driven by the number of deaths caused by different pathogens. Enteric diseases are known to be a major cause of death in LMICs. The two main modelling groups providing mortality estimates for enteric diseases are the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington, Seattle and the Maternal Child Epidemiology Estimation (MCEE) group, led by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Whilst previous global diarrhoea mortality estimates for under five-year-olds from these two groups were closely aligned, more recent estimates for 2016 have diverged, particularly with respect to numbers of deaths attributable to different enteric pathogens. This has impacted prioritization and investment decisions for vaccines in the development pipeline. The mission of the Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) at the World Health Organisation (WHO) is to accelerate product development of vaccines and technologies that are urgently needed and ensure they are appropriately targeted for use in LMICs. At their 2018 meeting, PDVAC recommended the formation of an independent working group of subject matter experts to explore the reasons for the difference between the IHME and MCEE estimates, and to assess the respective strengths and limitations of the estimation approaches adopted, including a review of the data on which the estimates are based. Here, we report on the proceedings and recommendations from a consultation with the working group of experts, the IHME and MCEE modelling groups, and other key stakeholders. We briefly review the methodological approaches of both groups and provide a series of proposals for investigating the drivers for the differences in enteric disease burden estimates.Optimizing Benefits of Testing Key Workers for Infection with SARS-CoV-2: A Mathematical Modeling Analysis
AbstractSandmann, F. G., White, P. J., Ramsay, M., & Jit, M. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Clinical Infectious DiseasesVolume
71Issue
12Page(s)
3196-3203AbstractBackground: Internationally, key workers such as healthcare staff are advised to stay at home if they or household members experience coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-like symptoms. This potentially isolates/quarantines many staff without SARS-CoV-2, while not preventing transmission from staff with asymptomatic infection. We explored the impact of testing staff on absence durations from work and transmission risks to others. Methods: We used a decision-analytic model for 1000 key workers to compare the baseline strategy of (S0) no RT-PCR testing of workers to testing workers (S1) with COVID-19-like symptoms in isolation, (S2) without COVID-19-like symptoms but in household quarantine, and (S3) all staff. We explored confirmatory re-testing scenarios of repeating all initial tests, initially positive tests, initially negative tests, or no re-testing. We varied all parameters, including the infection rate (0.1-20%), proportion asymptomatic (10-80%), sensitivity (60-95%), and specificity (90-100%). Results: Testing all staff (S3) changes the risk of workplace transmission by-56.9 to +1.0 workers/1000 tests (with reductions throughout at RT-PCR sensitivity ≥65%), and absences by-0.5 to +3.6 days/test but at heightened testing needs of 989.6-1995.9 tests/1000 workers. Testing workers in household quarantine (S2) reduces absences the most by 3.0-6.9 days/test (at 47.0-210.4 tests/1000 workers), while increasing risk of workplace transmission by 0.02-49.5 infected workers/1000 tests (which can be minimized when re-testing initially negative tests). Conclusions: Based on optimizing absence durations or transmission risk, our modeling suggests testing staff in household quarantine or all staff, depending on infection levels and testing capacities.Quantifying the economic cost of antibiotic resistance and the impact of related interventions: Rapid methodological review, conceptual framework and recommendations for future studies
AbstractJit, M., Ng, D. H. L., Luangasanatip, N., Sandmann, F., Atkins, K. E., Robotham, J. V., & Pouwels, K. B. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: Antibiotic resistance (ABR) poses a major threat to health and economic wellbeing worldwide. Reducing ABR will require government interventions to incentivise antibiotic development, prudent antibiotic use, infection control and deployment of partial substitutes such as rapid diagnostics and vaccines. The scale of such interventions needs to be calibrated to accurate and comprehensive estimates of the economic cost of ABR. Methods: A conceptual framework for estimating costs attributable to ABR was developed based on previous literature highlighting methodological shortcomings in the field and additional deductive epidemiological and economic reasoning. The framework was supplemented by a rapid methodological review. Results: The review identified 110 articles quantifying ABR costs. Most were based in high-income countries only (91/110), set in hospitals (95/110), used a healthcare provider or payer perspective (97/110), and used matched cohort approaches to compare costs of patients with antibiotic-resistant infections and antibiotic-susceptible infections (or no infection) (87/110). Better use of methods to correct biases and confounding when making this comparison is needed. Findings also need to be extended beyond their limitations in (1) time (projecting present costs into the future), (2) perspective (from the healthcare sector to entire societies and economies), (3) scope (from individuals to communities and ecosystems), and (4) space (from single sites to countries and the world). Analyses of the impact of interventions need to be extended to examine the impact of the intervention on ABR, rather than considering ABR as an exogeneous factor. Conclusions: Quantifying the economic cost of resistance will require greater rigour and innovation in the use of existing methods to design studies that accurately collect relevant outcomes and further research into new techniques for capturing broader economic outcomes.Quantifying the impact of physical distance measures on the transmission of COVID-19 in the UK
AbstractJarvis, C. I., Van Zandvoort, K., Gimma, A., Prem, K., Auzenbergs, M., O’Reilly, K., Medley, G., Emery, J. C., Houben, R. M., Davies, N., Nightingale, E. S., Flasche, S., Jombart, T., Hellewell, J., Abbott, S., Munday, J. D., Bosse, N. I., Funk, S., Sun, F., … Edmunds, W. J. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: To mitigate and slow the spread of COVID-19, many countries have adopted unprecedented physical distancing policies, including the UK. We evaluate whether these measures might be sufficient to control the epidemic by estimating their impact on the reproduction number (R 0, the average number of secondary cases generated per case). Methods: We asked a representative sample of UK adults about their contact patterns on the previous day. The questionnaire was conducted online via email recruitment and documents the age and location of contacts and a measure of their intimacy (whether physical contact was made or not). In addition, we asked about adherence to different physical distancing measures. The first surveys were sent on Tuesday, 24 March, 1 day after a "lockdown" was implemented across the UK. We compared measured contact patterns during the "lockdown" to patterns of social contact made during a non-epidemic period. By comparing these, we estimated the change in reproduction number as a consequence of the physical distancing measures imposed. We used a meta-analysis of published estimates to inform our estimates of the reproduction number before interventions were put in place. Results: We found a 74% reduction in the average daily number of contacts observed per participant (from 10.8 to 2.8). This would be sufficient to reduce R 0 from 2.6 prior to lockdown to 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.89) after the lockdown, based on all types of contact and 0.37 (95% CI = 0.22-0.53) for physical (skin to skin) contacts only. Conclusions: The physical distancing measures adopted by the UK public have substantially reduced contact levels and will likely lead to a substantial impact and a decline in cases in the coming weeks. However, this projected decline in incidence will not occur immediately as there are significant delays between infection, the onset of symptomatic disease, and hospitalisation, as well as further delays to these events being reported. Tracking behavioural change can give a more rapid assessment of the impact of physical distancing measures than routine epidemiological surveillance.Reconstructing the early global dynamics of under-ascertained COVID-19 cases and infections
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: Asymptomatic or subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infections are often unreported, which means that confirmed case counts may not accurately reflect underlying epidemic dynamics. Understanding the level of ascertainment (the ratio of confirmed symptomatic cases to the true number of symptomatic individuals) and undetected epidemic progression is crucial to informing COVID-19 response planning, including the introduction and relaxation of control measures. Estimating case ascertainment over time allows for accurate estimates of specific outcomes such as seroprevalence, which is essential for planning control measures. Methods: Using reported data on COVID-19 cases and fatalities globally, we estimated the proportion of symptomatic cases (i.e. any person with any of fever ≥ 37.5 °C, cough, shortness of breath, sudden onset of anosmia, ageusia or dysgeusia illness) that were reported in 210 countries and territories, given those countries had experienced more than ten deaths. We used published estimates of the baseline case fatality ratio (CFR), which was adjusted for delays and under-ascertainment, then calculated the ratio of this baseline CFR to an estimated local delay-adjusted CFR to estimate the level of under-ascertainment in a particular location. We then fit a Bayesian Gaussian process model to estimate the temporal pattern of under-ascertainment. Results: Based on reported cases and deaths, we estimated that, during March 2020, the median percentage of symptomatic cases detected across the 84 countries which experienced more than ten deaths ranged from 2.4% (Bangladesh) to 100% (Chile). Across the ten countries with the highest number of total confirmed cases as of 6 July 2020, we estimated that the peak number of symptomatic cases ranged from 1.4 times (Chile) to 18 times (France) larger than reported. Comparing our model with national and regional seroprevalence data where available, we find that our estimates are consistent with observed values. Finally, we estimated seroprevalence for each country. As of 7 June, our seroprevalence estimates range from 0% (many countries) to 13% (95% CrI 5.6–24%) (Belgium). Conclusions: We found substantial under-ascertainment of symptomatic cases, particularly at the peak of the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, in many countries. Reported case counts will therefore likely underestimate the rate of outbreak growth initially and underestimate the decline in the later stages of an epidemic. Although there was considerable under-reporting in many locations, our estimates were consistent with emerging serological data, suggesting that the proportion of each country’s population infected with SARS-CoV-2 worldwide is generally low.Response strategies for COVID-19 epidemics in African settings: a mathematical modelling study
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
BMC MedicineVolume
18Issue
1AbstractBackground: The health impact of COVID-19 may differ in African settings as compared to countries in Europe or China due to demographic, epidemiological, environmental and socio-economic factors. We evaluated strategies to reduce SARS-CoV-2 burden in African countries, so as to support decisions that balance minimising mortality, protecting health services and safeguarding livelihoods. Methods: We used a Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered mathematical model, stratified by age, to predict the evolution of COVID-19 epidemics in three countries representing a range of age distributions in Africa (from oldest to youngest average age: Mauritius, Nigeria and Niger), under various effectiveness assumptions for combinations of different non-pharmaceutical interventions: self-isolation of symptomatic people, physical distancing and ‘shielding’ (physical isolation) of the high-risk population. We adapted model parameters to better represent uncertainty about what might be expected in African populations, in particular by shifting the distribution of severity risk towards younger ages and increasing the case-fatality ratio. We also present sensitivity analyses for key model parameters subject to uncertainty. Results: We predicted median symptomatic attack rates over the first 12 months of 23% (Niger) to 42% (Mauritius), peaking at 2–4 months, if epidemics were unmitigated. Self-isolation while symptomatic had a maximum impact of about 30% on reducing severe cases, while the impact of physical distancing varied widely depending on percent contact reduction and R0. The effect of shielding high-risk people, e.g. by rehousing them in physical isolation, was sensitive mainly to residual contact with low-risk people, and to a lesser extent to contact among shielded individuals. Mitigation strategies incorporating self-isolation of symptomatic individuals, moderate physical distancing and high uptake of shielding reduced predicted peak bed demand and mortality by around 50%. Lockdowns delayed epidemics by about 3 months. Estimates were sensitive to differences in age-specific social mixing patterns, as published in the literature, and assumptions on transmissibility, infectiousness of asymptomatic cases and risk of severe disease or death by age. Conclusions: In African settings, as elsewhere, current evidence suggests large COVID-19 epidemics are expected. However, African countries have fewer means to suppress transmission and manage cases. We found that self-isolation of symptomatic persons and general physical distancing are unlikely to avert very large epidemics, unless distancing takes the form of stringent lockdown measures. However, both interventions help to mitigate the epidemic. Shielding of high-risk individuals can reduce health service demand and, even more markedly, mortality if it features high uptake and low contact of shielded and unshielded people, with no increase in contact among shielded people. Strategies combining self-isolation, moderate physical distancing and shielding could achieve substantial reductions in mortality in African countries. Temporary lockdowns, where socioeconomically acceptable, can help gain crucial time for planning and expanding health service capacity.Routine childhood immunisation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa: a benefit–risk analysis of health benefits versus excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
The Lancet Global HealthVolume
8Issue
10Page(s)
e1264-e1272AbstractBackground: National immunisation programmes globally are at risk of suspension due to the severe health system constraints and physical distancing measures in place to mitigate the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to compare the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa with the risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection through visiting routine vaccination service delivery points. Methods: We considered a high-impact scenario and a low-impact scenario to approximate the child deaths that could be caused by immunisation coverage reductions during COVID-19 outbreaks. In the high-impact scenario, we used previously reported country-specific child mortality impact estimates of childhood immunisation for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b, Streptococcus pneumoniae, rotavirus, measles, meningitis A, rubella, and yellow fever to approximate the future deaths averted before 5 years of age by routine childhood vaccination during a 6-month COVID-19 risk period without catch-up campaigns. In the low-impact scenario, we approximated the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation on only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks during the COVID-19 risk period. We assumed that contact-reducing interventions flattened the outbreak curve during the COVID-19 risk period, that 60% of the population will have been infected by the end of that period, that children can be infected by either vaccinators or during transport, and that upon child infection the whole household will be infected. Country-specific household age structure estimates and age-dependent infection-fatality rates were applied to calculate the number of deaths attributable to the vaccination clinic visits. We present benefit–risk ratios for routine childhood immunisation, with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Findings: In the high-impact scenario, for every one excess COVID-19 death attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infections acquired during routine vaccination clinic visits, 84 (95% UI 14–267) deaths in children could be prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa. The benefit–risk ratio for the vaccinated children is 85 000 (4900–546 000), for their siblings (<20 years) is 75 000 (4400–483 000), for their parents or adult carers (aged 20–60 years) is 769 (148–2700), and for older adults (>60 years) is 96 (14–307). In the low-impact scenario that approximates the health benefits to only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks, the benefit–risk ratio to the households of vaccinated children is 3 (0–10); if the risk to only the vaccinated children is considered, the benefit–risk ratio is 3000 (182–21 000). Interpretation: The deaths prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa outweigh the excess risk of COVID-19 deaths associated with vaccination clinic visits, especially for the vaccinated children. Routine childhood immunisation should be sustained in Africa as much as possible, while considering other factors such as logistical constraints, staff shortages, and reallocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Funding: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.Shaping meeting to explore the value of a coordinated work plan for epidemic and pandemic influenza vaccine preparedness
Failed generating bibliography.AbstractPublication year
2020Journal title
VaccineVolume
38Issue
16Page(s)
3179-3183AbstractIn March 2019, a group of global health leaders with expertise in influenza, vaccinology and pandemic preparedness was convened for a meeting titled “Shaping Meeting to explore the value of a coordinated work plan for epidemic and pandemic influenza vaccine preparedness.” Influenza epidemics occur annually in every country in the world, resulting in significant global burden of illness and deaths. While every country is effected, most deaths and severe disease occur in low- and lower middle-income countries (LIC and LMIC). Influenza immunization programs that limit the burden of disease, deaths, and reduce economic impact are a fundamental public health intervention for seasonal epidemics. In addition, they provide the experience, systems and infrastructure for the timely and efficient use of vaccines and other medical countermeasures critical for effective pandemic responses. Pandemic influenza response activities, including vaccination efforts, will be most effective if used and practiced regularly. Consequently, countries with seasonal influenza prevention and control programs should be better prepared for, and have more effective pandemic responses than countries without such programs. A decade after the 2009 pandemic, despite ongoing prevention efforts, most LICs and LMICs still lack access to robust seasonal influenza immunization programs. Given this current state, meeting participants concluded that there is critical need to advance the expansion and strengthening of seasonal influenza immunization programs in LICs and LMICs not only to reduce the economic and public health effects of annual influenza epidemics, but also to increase preparedness to mitigate the threat of future pandemics and improve global heath security. Many government and private sectors, in a whole of government approach, need to be working together to support and advance countries' epidemic and pandemic influenza capacities preparedness objectives. Accomplishment of these objectives can be achieved with a coordinated work plan developed and guided by an alliance of international stakeholders, to include, among others, government, and nongovernment organization representation, civil society representatives, vaccine manufacturers, international organizations, and health security and influenza experts.Systematic Review on the Acute Cost-of-illness of Sepsis and Meningitis in Neonates and Infants
AbstractSalman, O., Procter, S. R., McGregor, C., Paul, P., Hutubessy, R., Lawn, J. E., & Jit, M. (n.d.).Publication year
2020Journal title
Pediatric Infectious Disease JournalVolume
39Issue
1Page(s)
35-40AbstractBackground: Sepsis and meningitis in neonates and infants are a source of substantial morbidity, mortality and economic loss. The objective of this review is to estimate the acute costs associated with treating sepsis, meningitis and meningococcal septicemia, in neonates and infants, worldwide. Methods: The electronic databases Medline, Embase and EconLit were searched and exported on November 24, 2018. Studies that reported an average hospitalization cost for confirmed cases of sepsis, meningitis or meningococcal septicemia were eligible for our review. Descriptive data were extracted and reported costs were inflated and converted. A narrative synthesis of the costs was conducted. Results: Our review identified 20 studies reporting costs of sepsis, meningitis and/or meningococcal septicemia. Costs ranged from $55 to $129,632 for sepsis and from $222 to $33,635 for meningitis (in 2017 US dollars). One study estimated the cost of meningococcal septicemia to be $56,286. All reported costs were estimated from the perspective of the healthcare provider or payer. Most studies were from the United States, which also had the highest costs. Only a few studies were identified for low- and middle-income countries, which reported lower costs than high-income countries for both sepsis and meningitis. Conclusions: Sepsis and meningitis in neonates and infants are associated with substantial costs to the healthcare system and showed a marked difference across global income groups. However, more research is needed to inform costs in low- and middle-income settings and to understand the economic costs borne by families and wider society.