COVID-19 Outbreak and Presymptomatic Transmission in Pilgrim Travelers Who Returned to Korea from Israel

Travel-related respiratory symptoms and infections in travellers (2000-22): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) are common in travellers due to the year-round or seasonal presence of respiratory pathogen and exposure to crowded environments during the itinerary. No study has systematically examined the burden of RTI infections among travellers. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the prevalence of RTIs and symptoms suggestive of RTIs among travellers according to risk groups and/or geographic region, and to describe the spectrum of RTIs.

METHODS

The systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022311261). We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, Science Direct and preprint servers MedRxiv, BioRxiv, SSRN and IEEE Xplore on 1 February 2022. Studies reporting RTIs or symptoms suggestive of RTIs in international travellers after 1 January 2000 were eligible. Data appraisal and extraction were performed by two authors, and proportional meta-analyses were used to obtain estimates of the prevalence of respiratory symptoms and RTIs in travellers and predefined risk groups.

FINDINGS

A total of 429 articles on travellers' illness were included. Included studies reported 86 841 symptoms suggestive of RTIs and 807 632 confirmed RTIs. Seventy-eight percent of reported respiratory symptoms and 60% of RTIs with available location data were acquired at mass gatherings events. Cough was the most common symptom suggestive of respiratory infections, and the upper respiratory tract was the most common site for RTIs in travellers. The prevalence of RTIs and respiratory symptoms suggestive of RTIs were 10% [8%; 14%] and 37% [27%; 48%], respectively, among travellers. Reporting of RTIs in travellers denoted by publication output was found to correlate with global waves of new respiratory infections.

INTERPRETATION

This study demonstrates a high burden of RTIs among travellers and indicates that travellers' RTIs reflect respiratory infection outbreaks. These findings have important implications for understanding and managing RTIs among travellers.

Occurrence and transmission potential of asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: Update of a living systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Debate about the level of asymptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection continues. The amount of evidence is increasing and study designs have changed over time. We updated a living systematic review to address 3 questions: (1) Among people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? (2) What is the infectiousness of asymptomatic and presymptomatic, compared with symptomatic, SARS-CoV-2 infection? (3) What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a population is accounted for by people who are asymptomatic or presymptomatic?

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The protocol was first published on 1 April 2020 and last updated on 18 June 2021. We searched PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv, and medRxiv, aggregated in a database of SARS-CoV-2 literature, most recently on 6 July 2021. Studies of people with PCR-diagnosed SARS-CoV-2, which documented symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up, or mathematical modelling studies were included. Studies restricted to people already diagnosed, of single individuals or families, or without sufficient follow-up were excluded. One reviewer extracted data and a second verified the extraction, with disagreement resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Risk of bias in empirical studies was assessed with a bespoke checklist and modelling studies with a published checklist. All data syntheses were done using random effects models. Review question (1): We included 130 studies. Heterogeneity was high so we did not estimate a mean proportion of asymptomatic infections overall (interquartile range (IQR) 14% to 50%, prediction interval 2% to 90%), or in 84 studies based on screening of defined populations (IQR 20% to 65%, prediction interval 4% to 94%). In 46 studies based on contact or outbreak investigations, the summary proportion asymptomatic was 19% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15% to 25%, prediction interval 2% to 70%). (2) The secondary attack rate in contacts of people with asymptomatic infection compared with symptomatic infection was 0.32 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.64, prediction interval 0.11 to 0.95, 8 studies). (3) In 13 modelling studies fit to data, the proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 transmission from presymptomatic individuals was higher than from asymptomatic individuals. Limitations of the evidence include high heterogeneity and high risks of selection and information bias in studies that were not designed to measure persistently asymptomatic infection, and limited information about variants of concern or in people who have been vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on studies published up to July 2021, most SARS-CoV-2 infections were not persistently asymptomatic, and asymptomatic infections were less infectious than symptomatic infections. Summary estimates from meta-analysis may be misleading when variability between studies is extreme and prediction intervals should be presented. Future studies should determine the asymptomatic proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections caused by variants of concern and in people with immunity following vaccination or previous infection. Without prospective longitudinal studies with methods that minimise selection and measurement biases, further updates with the study types included in this living systematic review are unlikely to be able to provide a reliable summary estimate of the proportion of asymptomatic infections caused by SARS-CoV-2.

REVIEW PROTOCOL

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/9ewys/).

Global Percentage of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections Among the Tested Population and Individuals With Confirmed COVID-19 Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Asymptomatic infections are potential sources of transmission for COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the percentage of asymptomatic infections among individuals undergoing testing (tested population) and those with confirmed COVID-19 (confirmed population).

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, and ScienceDirect were searched on February 4, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, case series studies, and case series on transmission reporting the number of asymptomatic infections among the tested and confirmed COVID-19 populations that were published in Chinese or English were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled percentage and its 95% CI. Three researchers performed the data extraction independently.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The percentage of asymptomatic infections among the tested and confirmed populations.

RESULTS

Ninety-five unique eligible studies were included, covering 29 776 306 individuals undergoing testing. The pooled percentage of asymptomatic infections among the tested population was 0.25% (95% CI, 0.23%-0.27%), which was higher in nursing home residents or staff (4.52% [95% CI, 4.15%-4.89%]), air or cruise travelers (2.02% [95% CI, 1.66%-2.38%]), and pregnant women (2.34% [95% CI, 1.89%-2.78%]). The pooled percentage of asymptomatic infections among the confirmed population was 40.50% (95% CI, 33.50%-47.50%), which was higher in pregnant women (54.11% [95% CI, 39.16%-69.05%]), air or cruise travelers (52.91% [95% CI, 36.08%-69.73%]), and nursing home residents or staff (47.53% [95% CI, 36.36%-58.70%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis of the percentage of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections among populations tested for and with confirmed COVID-19, the pooled percentage of asymptomatic infections was 0.25% among the tested population and 40.50% among the confirmed population. The high percentage of asymptomatic infections highlights the potential transmission risk of asymptomatic infections in communities.

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 associated with aircraft travel: a systematic review

RATIONALE FOR THE REVIEW

Air travel may be associated with viruses spread via infected passengers and potentially through in-flight transmission. Given the novelty of the Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, transmission associated with air travel is based on transmission dynamics of other respiratory viruses. Our objective was to provide a rapid summary and evaluation of relevant data on SARS-CoV-2 transmission aboard aircraft, report policy implications and to highlight research gaps requiring urgent attention.

METHODS

We searched four electronic databases (1 February 2020-27 January 2021) and included studies on SARS-CoV-2 transmission aboard aircraft. We assessed study quality based on five criteria and reported important findings.

KEY FINDINGS

We included 18 studies on in-flight SARS-CoV-2 transmission (130 unique flights) and 2 studies on wastewater from aircraft. The quality of evidence from most published studies was low. Two wastewater studies reported PCR-positive samples with high cycle threshold values (33-39). Index case definition was heterogeneous across studies. The proportion of contacts traced ranged from 0.68 to 100%. Authors traced 2800/19 729 passengers, 140/180 crew members and 8/8 medical staff. Altogether, 273 index cases were reported, with 64 secondary cases. Three studies, each investigating one flight, reported no secondary cases. Secondary attack rate among studies following up >80% of passengers and crew (including data on 10 flights) varied between 0 and 8.2%. The studies reported on the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic and symptomatic individuals. Two studies performed viral cultures with 10 positive results. Genomic sequencing and phylogenetic analysis were performed in individuals from four flights.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted during aircraft travel, but published data do not permit any conclusive assessment of likelihood and extent. The variation in design and methodology restricts the comparison of findings across studies. Standardized guidelines for conducting and reporting future studies of transmission on aircraft should be developed.

Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Quantification of asymptomatic infections is fundamental for effective public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Discrepancies regarding the extent of asymptomaticity have arisen from inconsistent terminology as well as conflation of index and secondary cases which biases toward lower asymptomaticity. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and World Health Organization Global Research Database on COVID-19 between January 1, 2020 and April 2, 2021 to identify studies that reported silent infections at the time of testing, whether presymptomatic or asymptomatic. Index cases were removed to minimize representational bias that would result in overestimation of symptomaticity. By analyzing over 350 studies, we estimate that the percentage of infections that never developed clinical symptoms, and thus were truly asymptomatic, was 35.1% (95% CI: 30.7 to 39.9%). At the time of testing, 42.8% (95% prediction interval: 5.2 to 91.1%) of cases exhibited no symptoms, a group comprising both asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections. Asymptomaticity was significantly lower among the elderly, at 19.7% (95% CI: 12.7 to 29.4%) compared with children at 46.7% (95% CI: 32.0 to 62.0%). We also found that cases with comorbidities had significantly lower asymptomaticity compared to cases with no underlying medical conditions. Without proactive policies to detect asymptomatic infections, such as rapid contact tracing, prolonged efforts for pandemic control may be needed even in the presence of vaccination.

Correlation of Population SARS-CoV-2 Cycle Threshold Values to Local Disease Dynamics: Exploratory Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Despite the limitations in the use of cycle threshold (CT) values for individual patient care, population distributions of CT values may be useful indicators of local outbreaks.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct an exploratory analysis of potential correlations between the population distribution of cycle threshold (CT) values and COVID-19 dynamics, which were operationalized as percent positivity, transmission rate (Rt), and COVID-19 hospitalization count.

METHODS

In total, 148,410 specimens collected between September 15, 2020, and January 11, 2021, from the greater El Paso area were processed in the Dascena COVID-19 Laboratory. The daily median CT value, daily Rt, daily count of COVID-19 hospitalizations, daily change in percent positivity, and rolling averages of these features were plotted over time. Two-way scatterplots and linear regression were used to evaluate possible associations between daily median CT values and outbreak measures. Cross-correlation plots were used to determine whether a time delay existed between changes in daily median CT values and measures of community disease dynamics.

RESULTS

Daily median CT values negatively correlated with the daily Rt values (P<.001), the daily COVID-19 hospitalization counts (with a 33-day time delay; P<.001), and the daily changes in percent positivity among testing samples (P<.001). Despite visual trends suggesting time delays in the plots for median CT values and outbreak measures, a statistically significant delay was only detected between changes in median CT values and COVID-19 hospitalization counts (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds to the literature by analyzing samples collected from an entire geographical area and contextualizing the results with other research investigating population CT values.