High Detection Rates of Enteropathogens in Asymptomatic Children Attending Day Care

BACKGROUND: Gastroenteritis morbidity is high among children under the age of four, especially amongst those who attend day care. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of a range of enteropathogens in the intestinal flora of children attending day care and to relate their occurrence with characteristics of the sampled child and the sampling season. METHODS: We performed three years of enteropathogen surveillance in a network of 29 child day care centers in the Netherlands. The centers were instructed to take one fecal sample from ten randomly chosen children each month, regardless of gastrointestinal symptoms at time of sampling. All samples were analyzed for the molecular detection of 16 enteropathogenic bacteria, parasites and viruses by real-time multiplex PCR. RESULTS: Enteropathogens were detected in 78.0% of the 5197 fecal samples. Of the total, 95.4% of samples were obtained from children who had no gastroenteritis symptoms at time of sampling. Bacterial enteropathogens were detected most often (most prevalent EPEC, 19.9%), followed by parasitic enteropathogens (most prevalent: D. fragilis, 22.1%) and viral enteropathogens (most prevalent: norovirus, 9.5%). 4.6% of samples related to children that experienced symptoms of gastroenteritis at time of sampling. Only rotavirus and norovirus were significantly associated with gastroenteritis among day care attendees. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that asymptomatic infections with enteropathogens in day care attendees are not a rare event and that gastroenteritis caused by infections with these enteropathogens is only one expression of their presence

Early childhood infections and body mass index in adolescence

BACKGROUND: The incidence of childhood overweight and obesity is rising. It is hypothesized that infections in early childhood are associated with being overweight. This study investigated the association between the number of symptomatic infections or antibiotic prescriptions in the first 3 years of life and body mass index (BMI) in adolescence. SUBJECTS: The current study is part of the Prevention and Incidence of Asthma and Mite Allergy population-based birth cohort study. Weight and height were measured by trained research staff at ages 12 and 16 years. The 3015 active participants at age 18 years were asked for informed consent for general practitioner (GP) data collection and 1519 gave written informed consent. Studied exposures include (1) GP-diagnosed infections, (2) antibiotic prescriptions, and (3) parent-reported infections in the first 3 years of life. Generalized estimating equation analysis was used to determine the association between each of these exposures and BMI z-score. RESULTS: Exposure data and BMI measurement in adolescence were available for 622 participants. The frequencies of GP-diagnosed infections and antibiotic prescriptions were not associated with BMI z-score in adolescence with estimates being 0.14 (95% CI -0.09-0.37) and 0.10 (95% CI -0.14-0.34) for the highest exposure categories, respectively. Having ≥6 parent-reported infections up to age 3 years was associated with a 0.23 (95% CI 0.01-0.44) higher BMI z-score compared to <2 parent-reported infections. CONCLUSIONS: For all infectious disease measures an increase in BMI z-score for the highest childhood exposure to infectious disease was observed, although only statistically significant for parent-reported infections. These results do not show an evident link with infection severity, but suggest a possible cumulative effect of repeated symptomatic infections on overweight development

Real-world comparison of the effects of etanercept and adalimumab on well-being in non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a propensity score matched cohort study

Background: Etanercept (ETN) and adalimumab (ADA) are considered equally efective biologicals in the treat‑ ment of arthritis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) but no studies have compared their impact on patient-reported well-being. The objective of this study was to determine whether ETN and ADA have a diferential efect on patientreported well-being in non-systemic JIA using real-world data. Methods: Biological-naive patients without a history of uveitis were selected from the international Pharmachild registry. Patients starting ETN were matched to patients starting ADA based on propensity score and outcomes were collected at time of therapy initiation and 3–12 months afterwards. Primary outcome at follow-up was the improve‑ ment in Juvenile Arthritis Multidimensional Assessment Report (JAMAR) visual analogue scale (VAS) well-being score from baseline. Secondary outcomes at follow-up were decrease in active joint count, adverse events and uveitis events. Outcomes were analyzed using linear and logistic mixed efects models. Results: Out of 158 eligible patients, 45 ETN starters and 45 ADA starters could be propensity score matched result‑ ing in similar VAS well-being scores at baseline. At follow-up, the median improvement in VAS well-being was 2 (inter‑ quartile range (IQR): 0.0 – 4.0) and scores were signifcantly better (P=0.01) for ETN starters (median 0.0, IQR: 0.0 – 1.0) compared to ADA starters (median 1.0, IQR: 0.0 – 3.5). The estimated mean diference in VAS well-being improvement from baseline for ETN versus ADA was 0.89 (95% CI: -0.01 – 1.78; P=0.06). The estimated mean diference in active joint count decrease was -0.36 (95% CI: -1.02 – 0.30; P=0.28) and odds ratio for adverse events was 0.48 (95% CI: 0.16 –1.44; P=0.19). One uveitis event was observed in the ETN group. Conclusions: Both ETN and ADA improve well-being in non-systemic JIA. Our data might indicate a trend towards a slightly stronger efect for ETN, but larger studies are needed to confrm this given the lack of statistical signifcance

Model-based evaluation of school- and non-school-related measures to control the COVID-19 pandemic

Background: In autumn 2020, many countries, including the Netherlands, are experiencing a second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health policymakers are struggling with choosing the right mix of measures to keep the COVID-19 case numbers under control, but still allow a minimum of social and economic activity. The priority to keep schools open is high, but the role of school-based contacts in the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 is incompletely understood. We used a transmission model to estimate the impact of school contacts on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and to assess the effects of school-based measures, including school closure, on controlling the pandemic at different time points during the pandemic. Methods and Findings: The age-structured model was fitted to age-specific seroprevalence and hospital admission data from the Netherlands during spring 2020. Compared to adults older than 60 years, the estimated susceptibility was 23% (95%CrI 20-28%) for children aged 0 to 20 years and 61% (95%CrI 50%-72%) for the age group of 20 to 60 years. The time points considered in the analyses were (i) August 2020 when the effective reproduction number (R_e) was estimated to be 1.31 (95%CrI 1.15-2.07), schools just opened after the summer holidays and measures were reinforced with the aim to reduce R_e to a value below 1, and (ii) November 2020 when measures had reduced R_e to 1.00 (95%CrI 0.94-1.33). In this period schools remained open. Our model predicts that keeping schools closed after the summer holidays, in the absence of other measures, would have reduced R_e by 10% (from 1.31 to 1.18 (95%CrI 1.04-1.83)) and thus would not have prevented the second wave in autumn 2020. Reducing non-school-based contacts in August 2020 to the level observed during the first wave of the pandemic would have reduced R_e to 0.83 (95%CrI 0.75-1.10). Yet, this reduction was not achieved and the observed R_e in November was 1.00. Our model predicts that closing schools in November 2020 could reduce R_e from the observed value of 1.00 to 0.84 (95%CrI 0.81-0.90), with unchanged non-school based contacts. Reductions in R_e due to closing schools in November 2020 were 8% for 10 to 20 years old children, 5% for 5 to 10 years old children and negligible for 0 to 5 years old children. Conclusions: The impact of measures reducing school-based contacts, including school closure, depends on the remaining opportunities to reduce non-school-based contacts. If opportunities to reduce R_e with non-school-based measures are exhausted or undesired and R_e is still close to 1, the additional benefit of school-based measures may be considerable, particularly among the older school children.</jats:p

Ventilation and thermal conditions in secondary schools in the Netherlands: Effects of COVID-19 pandemic control and prevention measures

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of ventilation was widely stressed and new protocols of ventilation were implemented in school buildings worldwide. In the Netherlands, schools were recommended to keep the windows and doors open, and after a national lockdown more stringent measures such as reduction of occupancy were introduced. In this study, the actual effects of such measures on ventilation and thermal conditions were investigated in 31 classrooms of 11 Dutch secondary schools, by monitoring the indoor and outdoor CO 2 concentration and air temperature, both before and after the lockdown. Ventilation rates were calculated using the steady-state method. Pre-lockdown, with an average occupancy of 17 students, in 42% of the classrooms the CO 2 concentration exceeded the upper limit of the Dutch national guidelines (800 ppm above outdoors), while 13% had a ventilation rate per person (VR p) lower than the minimum requirement (6 l/s/p). Post-lockdown, the indoor CO 2 concentration decreased significantly while for ventilation rates significant increase was only found in VR p, mainly caused by the decrease in occupancy (average 10 students). The total ventilation rate per classrooms, mainly induced by opening windows and doors, did not change significantly. Meanwhile, according to the Dutch national guidelines, thermal conditions in the classrooms were not satisfying, both pre- and post-lockdown. While opening windows and doors cannot achieve the required indoor environmental quality at all times, reducing occupancy might not be feasible for immediate implementation. Hence, more controllable and flexible ways for improving indoor air quality and thermal comfort in classrooms are needed

A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, crossover trial to investigate the effect of a wearable device in addition to a daily symptom diary for the remote early detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections (COVID-RED): a structured summary of a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Objectives It is currently thought that most—but not all—individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 develop symptoms, but that the infectious period starts on average two days before the first overt symptoms appear. It is estimated that pre- and asymptomatic individuals are responsible for more than half of all transmissions. By detecting infected individuals before they have overt symptoms, wearable devices could potentially and significantly reduce the proportion of transmissions by pre-symptomatic individuals. Using laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (detected via serology tests [to determine if there are antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 in the blood] or SARS-CoV-2 infection tests such as polymerase chain reaction [PCR] or antigen tests) as the gold standard, we will determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the following two algorithms to detect first time SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection: the algorithm using Ava bracelet data when coupled with self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data (Wearable + Symptom Data Algo; experimental condition) the algorithm using self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data alone (Symptom Only Algo; control condition) In addition, we will determine which of the two algorithms has superior performance characteristics for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection as confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 virus testing. Trial design The trial is a randomized, single-blinded, two-period, two-sequence crossover trial. All subjects will participate in an initial Learning Phase (varying from 2 weeks to 3 months depending on enrolment date), followed by two contiguous 3-month test phases, Period 1 and Period 2. Each subject will undergo the experimental condition (the Wearable + Symptom Data Algo) in one of these periods and the control condition (Symptom Only Algo) in the other period. The order will be randomly assigned, resulting in subjects being allocated 1:1 to either Sequence 1 (experimental condition first) or Sequence 2 (control condition first). Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence. Participants The trial will be conducted in the Netherlands. A target of 20,000 subjects will be enrolled. Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence. This results in approximately 6,500 normal-risk individuals and 3,500 high-risk individuals per sequence. Subjects will be recruited from previously studied cohorts as well as via public campaigns and social media. All data for this study will be collected remotely through the Ava COVID-RED app, the Ava bracelet, surveys in the COVID-RED web portal, and self-sampling serology and PCR kits. During recruitment, subjects will be invited to visit the COVID-RED web portal ( www.covid-red.eu ). After successfully completing the enrolment questionnaire, meeting eligibility criteria and indicating interest in joining the study, subjects will receive the subject information sheet and informed consent form. Subjects can enrol in COVID-RED if they comply with the following inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria: Resident of the Netherlands At least 18 years old Informed consent provided (electronic) Willing to adhere to the study procedures described in the protocol Must have a smartphone that runs at least Android 8.0 or iOS 13.0 operating systems and is active for the duration of the study (in the case of a change of mobile number, study team should be notified) Be able to read, understand and write Dutch Exclusion criteria: Previous positive SARS-CoV-2 test result (confirmed either through PCR/antigen or antibody tests; self-reported) Previously received a vaccine developed specifically for COVID-19 or in possession of an appointment for vaccination in the near future (self-reported) Current suspected (e.g., waiting for test result) COVID-19 infection or symptoms of a COVID-19 infection (self-reported) Participating in any other COVID-19 clinical drug, vaccine, or medical device trial (self-reported) Electronic implanted device (such as a pacemaker; self-reported) Pregnant at time of informed consent (self-reported) Suffering from cholinergic urticaria (per the Ava bracelet’s User Manual; self-reported) Staff involved in the management or conduct of this study Intervention and comparator All subjects will be instructed to complete the Daily Symptom Diary in the Ava COVID-RED app daily, wear their Ava bracelet each night and synchronise it with the app each day for the entire period of study participation. Provided with wearable sensor and/or self-reported symptom data within the last 24 hours, the Ava COVID-RED app’s underlying algorithms will provide subjects with a real-time indicator of their overall health and well-being. Subjects will see one of three messages, notifying them that: no seeming deviations in symptoms and/or physiological parameters have been detected; some changes in symptoms and/or physiological parameters have been detected and they should self-isolate; or alerting them that deviations in their symptoms and/or physiological parameters could be suggestive of a potential COVID-19 infection and to seek additional testing. We will assess intraperson performance of the algorithms in the experimental condition (Wearable + Symptom Data Algo) and control conditions (Symptom Only Algo). Main outcomes The trial will evaluate the use and performance of the Ava COVID-RED app and Ava bracelet, which uses sensors to measure breathing rate, pulse rate, skin temperature, and heart rate variability for the purpose of early and asymptomatic detection and monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 in general and high-risk populations. Using laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections (detected via serology tests, PCR tests and/or antigen tests) as the gold standard, we will determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for each of the following two algorithms to detect first-time SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection: the algorithm using Ava Bracelet data when coupled with the self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data, and the algorithm using self-reported Daily Symptom Diary data alone. In addition, we will determine which of the two algorithms has superior performance characteristics for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection including early or asymptomatic infection as confirmed by SARS-CoV-2 virus testing. The protocol contains an additional seventeen secondary outcomes which address infection incidence rates, health resource utilization, symptoms reported by SARS-CoV-2 infected participants, and the rate of breakthrough and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections among individuals vaccinated against COVID-19. PCR or antigen testing will occur when the subject receives a notification from the algorithm to seek additional testing. Subjects will be advised to get tested via the national testing programme, and report the testing result in the Ava COVID-RED app and a survey. If they cannot obtain a test via the national testing programme, they will receive a nasal swab self-sampling kit at home, and the sample will be tested by PCR in a trial-affiliated laboratory. In addition, all subjects will be asked to take a capillary blood sample at home at baseline (Month 0), and at the end of the Learning Phase (Month 3), Period 1 (Month 6) and Period 2 (Month 9). These samples will be used for SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody testing in a trial-affiliated laboratory, differentiating between antibodies resulting from a natural infection and antibodies resulting from COVID-19 vaccination (as vaccination will gradually be rolled out during the trial period). Baseline samples will only be analysed if the sample collected at the end of the Learning Phase is positive, and samples collected at the end of Period 1 will only be analysed if the sample collected at the end of Period 2 is positive. When subjects obtain a positive PCR/antigen or serology test result during the study, they will continue to be in the study but will be moved into a so-called “COVID-positive” mode in the Ava COVID-RED app. This means that they will no longer receive recommendations from the algorithms but can still contribute and track symptom and bracelet data. The primary analysis of the main objective will be executed using data collected in Period 2 (Month 6 through 9). Within this period, serology tests (before and after Period 2) and PCR/antigen tests (taken based on recommendations by the algorithms) will be used to determine if a subject was infected with SARS-CoV-2 or not. Within this same time period, it will be determined if the algorithms gave any recommendations for testing. The agreement between these quantities will be used to evaluate the performance of the algorithms and how these compare between the study conditions. Randomisation All eligible subjects will be randomized using a stratified block randomization approach with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to one of two sequences (experimental condition followed by control condition or control condition followed by experimental condition). Based on demographics, medical history and/or profession, each subject will be stratified at baseline into a high-risk and normal-risk group within each sequence, resulting in equal numbers of high-risk and normal-risk individuals between the sequences. Blinding (masking) In this study, subjects will be blinded as to study condition and randomization sequence. Relevant study staff and the device manufacturer will be aware of the assigned sequence. The subject will wear the Ava bracelet and complete the Daily Symptom Diary in the Ava COVID-RED app for the full duration of the study, and they will not know if the feedback they receive about their potential infection status will only be based on data they entered in the Daily Symptom Diary within the Ava COVID-RED app or based on both the data from the Daily Symptom Diary and the Ava bracelet. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) 20,000 subjects will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to either Sequence 1 (experimental condition followed by control condition) or Sequence 2 (control condition followed by experimental condition), taking into account their risk level. This results in approximately 6,500 normal-risk and 3,500 high-risk individuals per sequence. Trial Status Protocol version: 1.2, dated January 22nd, 2021 Start of recruitment: February 22nd, 2021 End of recruitment (estimated): April 2021 End of follow-up (estimated): December 2021 Trial registration The trial has been registered at the Netherlands Trial Register on the 18th of February, 2021 with number NL9320 ( https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9320 ) Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest in expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol

VACCELERATE Site Network: Real-time definition of clinical study capacity in Europe

Background: The inconsistent European vaccine trial landscape rendered the continent of limited interest for vaccine developers. The VACCELERATE consortium created a network of capable clinical trial sites throughout Europe. VACCELERATE identifies and provides access to state-of-the-art vaccine trial sites to accelerate clinical development of vaccines. Methods: Login details for the VACCELERATE Site Network (vaccelerate.eu/site-network/) questionnaire can be obtained after sending an email to. Interested sites provide basic information, such as contact details, affiliation with infectious disease networks, main area of expertise, previous vaccine trial experience, site infrastructure and preferred vaccine trial settings. In addition, sites can recommend other clinical researchers for registration in the network. If directly requested by a sponsor or sponsor representative, the VACCELERATE Site Network pre-selects vaccine trial sites and shares basic study characteristics provided by the sponsor. Interested sites provide feedback with short surveys and feasibility questionnaires developed by VACCELERATE and are connected with the sponsor to initiate the site selection process. Results: As of April 2023, 481 sites from 39 European countries have registered in the VACCELERATE Site Network. Of these, 137 (28.5 %) sites have previous experience conducting phase I trials, 259 (53.8 %) with phase II, 340 (70.7 %) with phase III, and 205 (42.6 %) with phase IV trials, respectively. Infectious diseases were reported as main area of expertise by 274 sites (57.0 %), followed by any kind of immunosuppression by 141 (29.3 %) sites. Numbers are super additive as sites may report clinical trial experience in several indications. Two hundred and thirty-one (47.0 %) sites have the expertise and capacity to enrol paediatric populations and 391 (79.6 %) adult populations. Since its launch in October 2020, the VACCELERATE Site Network has been used 21 times for academic and industry trials, mostly interventional studies, focusing on different pathogens such as fungi, monkeypox virus, Orthomyxoviridae/influenza viruses, SARS-CoV-2, or Streptococcus pneumoniae/pneumococcus. Conclusions: The VACCELERATE Site Network enables a constantly updated Europe-wide mapping of experienced clinical sites interested in executing vaccine trials. The network is already in use as a rapid-turnaround single contact point for the identification of vaccine trials sites in Europe.The VACCELERATE Site Network has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation pro gramme (grant agreement No 101037867) and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bil dung und Forschung [BMBF]) (grant agreement No BMBF01KX2040).S

SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in secondary school settings in the Netherlands during fall 2020: silent circulation

BACKGROUND: In fall 2020 when schools in the Netherlands operated under a limited set of COVID-19 measures, we conducted outbreaks studies in four secondary schools to gain insight in the level of school transmission and the role of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via air and surfaces. METHODS: Outbreak studies were performed between 11 November and 15 December 2020 when the wild-type variant of SARS-CoV-2 was dominant. Clusters of SARS-CoV-2 infections within schools were identified through a prospective school surveillance study. All school contacts of cluster cases, irrespective of symptoms, were invited for PCR testing twice within 48 h and 4-7 days later. Combined NTS and saliva samples were collected at each time point along with data on recent exposure and symptoms. Surface and active air samples were collected in the school environment. All samples were PCR-tested and sequenced when possible. RESULTS: Out of 263 sampled school contacts, 24 tested SARS-CoV-2 positive (secondary attack rate 9.1%), of which 62% remained asymptomatic and 42% had a weakly positive test result. Phylogenetic analysis on 12 subjects from 2 schools indicated a cluster of 8 and 2 secondary cases, respectively, but also other distinct strains within outbreaks. Of 51 collected air and 53 surface samples, none were SARS-CoV-2 positive. CONCLUSION: Our study confirmed within school SARS-CoV-2 transmission and substantial silent circulation, but also multiple introductions in some cases. Absence of air or surface contamination suggests environmental contamination is not widespread during school outbreaks