Plague Circulation and Population Genetics of the Reservoir Rattus rattus: The Influence of Topographic Relief on the Distribution of the Disease within the Madagascan Focus.

International audienceBACKGROUND: Landscape may affect the distribution of infectious diseases by influencing the population density and dispersal of hosts and vectors. Plague (Yersinia pestis infection) is a highly virulent, re-emerging disease, the ecology of which has been scarcely studied in Africa. Human seroprevalence data for the major plague focus of Madagascar suggest that plague spreads heterogeneously across the landscape as a function of the relief. Plague is primarily a disease of rodents. We therefore investigated the relationship between disease distribution and the population genetic structure of the black rat, Rattus rattus, the main reservoir of plague in Madagascar. METHODOLOGYPRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We conducted a comparative study of plague seroprevalence and genetic structure (15 microsatellite markers) in rat populations from four geographic areas differing in topology, each covering about 150-200 km(2) within the Madagascan plague focus. The seroprevalence levels in the rat populations mimicked those previously reported for humans. As expected, rat populations clearly displayed a more marked genetic structure with increasing relief. However, the relationship between seroprevalence data and genetic structure differs between areas, suggesting that plague distribution is not related everywhere to the effective dispersal of rats. CONCLUSIONSSIGNIFICANCE: Genetic diversity estimates suggested that plague epizootics had only a weak impact on rat population sizes. In the highlands of Madagascar, plague dissemination cannot be accounted for solely by the effective dispersal of the reservoir. Human social activities may also be involved in spreading the disease in rat and human populations

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Source terms for benchmarking models of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via aerosols and droplets.

There is ongoing and rapid advancement in approaches to modelling the fate of exhaled particles in different environments relevant to disease transmission. It is important that models are verified by comparison with each other using a common set of input parameters to ensure that model differences can be interpreted in terms of model physics rather than unspecified differences in model input parameters. In this paper, we define parameters necessary for such benchmarking of models of airborne particles exhaled by humans and transported in the environment during breathing and speaking

Tracing the origin of the panda's thumb

© 2015, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. We investigate the relative development of the carnivoran radial sesamoids to untangle the evolution of this iconic structure. In the pandas (both giant and red), this `false thumb¿ is known to perform a grasping role during bamboo feeding in both the red and giant pandas. An original locomotor role has been inferred for ailurids, but this remains to be ascertained for ursids. A large sample of radial sesamoids of Indarctos arctoides from the Miocene of Batallones-3 (Spain) indicates that this early ailuropodine bear displayed a relatively hypertrophied radial sesamoid, with a configuration more similar to that of the red panda and other carnivorans than to that of giant pandas. This false thumb is the first evidence of this feature in the Ursidae, which can be linked to a more herbivorous diet. Moreover, in the two extant pandas, the false thumb should not be interpreted as an anatomical convergence, but as an exaptive convergence regarding its use during the bamboo feeding, which changes the evolutionary view of this singular structure.This study was supported by the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (CGL2011-25754, CGL2011-28681 and RYC–2009–04533 to D.M.A.). A.V. is a researcher in formation in the CSIC program JAE-PRE_CP2011 (CSIC program‘ Junta para la ampliación de estudios’), co-funded by the European Social Fund and has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement no. 226506 (SYNTHESYS; SE-TAF-3637),Peer Reviewe