《MedRixv,2月13日,Serial interval of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections》

  • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
  • 编译者: zhangmin
  • 发布时间:2020-02-14
  • Serial interval of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections

    Hiroshi Nishiura, Natalie M Linton, Andrei R. Akhmetzhanov

    doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.03.20019497

    Abstract

    We estimated the serial interval of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections from 26 infector-infectee pairs. Accounting for right truncation, the median serial interval was estimated at 2.6 days and is shorter than estimates of the median incubation period, suggesting that a substantial proportion of secondary transmission occurs before illness onset.

    *注,本文为预印本论文手稿,是未经同行评审的初步报告,其观点仅供科研同行交流,并不是结论性内容,请使用者谨慎使用.

  • 原文来源:https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.03.20019497v1
相关报告
  • 《MedRxiv,2月17日,Serial interval of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections》

    • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
    • 编译者:xuwenwhlib
    • 发布时间:2020-02-18
    • Serial interval of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infections Hiroshi Nishiura, Natalie M Linton, Andrei R. Akhmetzhanov doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.03.20019497 Abstract Objective: To estimate the serial interval of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) from information on 28 infector-infectee pairs. Methods: We collected dates of illness onset for primary cases (infectors) and secondary cases (infectees) from published research articles and case investigation reports. We subjectively ranked the credibility of the data and performed analyses on both the full dataset (n=28) and a subset of pairs with highest certainty in reporting (n=18). In addition, we adjusting for right truncation of the data as the epidemic is still in its growth phase. Results: Accounting for right truncation and analyzing all pairs, we estimated the median serial interval at 4.0 days (95% credible interval [CrI]: 3.1, 4.9). Limiting our data to only the most certain pairs, the median serial interval was estimated at 4.6 days (95% CrI: 3.5, 5.9). Conclusions: The serial interval of COVID-19 is shorter than its median incubation period. This suggests that a substantial proportion of secondary transmission may occur prior to illness onset. The COVID-19 serial interval is also shorter than the serial interval of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), indicating that calculations made using the SARS serial interval may introduce bias. *注,本文为预印本论文手稿,是未经同行评审的初步报告,其观点仅供科研同行交流,并不是结论性内容,请使用者谨慎使用.
  • 《MedRixv,2月13日,Clinical diagnosis of 8274 samples with 2019-novel coronavirus in Wuhan》

    • 来源专题:COVID-19科研动态监测
    • 编译者:zhangmin
    • 发布时间:2020-02-14
    • Clinical diagnosis of 8274 samples with 2019-novel coronavirus in Wuhan Ming Wang, Qing Wu, Wanzhou Xu, Bin Qiao, Jingwei Wang, Hongyun Zheng, Shupeng Jiang, Junchi Mei, Zegang Wu, Yayun Deng, Fangyuan Zhou, Wei Wu, Yan Zhang, Zhihua Lv, Jingtao Huang, Xiaoqian Guo, Lina Feng, Zunen Xia, Di Li, Zhiliang Xu, Tiangang Liu, Pingan Zhang, Yongqing Tong, Yan Li doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022327 Abstract Background 2019-Novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreaks create challenges for hospital laboratories because thousands of samples must be evaluated each day. Sample types, interpretation methods, and corresponding laboratory standards must be established. The possibility of other infections should be assessed to provide a basis for clinical classification, isolation, and treatment. Accordingly, in the present study, we evaluated the testing methods for 2019-nCoV and co-infections. Methods We used a fluorescence-based quantitative PCR kit urgently distributed by the Chinese CDC to detect 8274 close contacts in the Wuhan region against two loci on the 2019-nCoV genome. We also analyzed 613 patients with fever who underwent multiple tests for 13 respiratory pathogens; 316 subjects were also tested for 2019-nCoV. Findings Among the 8274 subjects, 2745 (33.2%) had 2019-nCoV infection; 5277 (63.8%) subjects showed negative results in the 2019-nCoV nucleic acid test (non-019-nCoV); and 252 cases (3.0%) because only one target was positive, the diagnosis was not definitive. Sixteen patients who originally had only one positive target were re-examined a few days later; 14 patients (87.5%) were finally defined as 2019-nCoV-positive, and 2 (12.5%) were finally defined as negative. The positive rates of nCoV-NP and nCovORF1ab were 34.7% and 34.7%, respectively. nCoV-NP-positive only and nCovORF1ab-positive cases accounted for 1.5% and 1.5%, respectively. In the 316 patients with multiple respiratory pathogens, 104 were positive for 2019-nCov and 6/104 had co-infection with coronavirus (3/104), influenza A virus (2/104), rhinovirus (2/104), and influenza A H3N2 (1/104); the remaining 212 patients had influenza A virus (11/202), influenza A H3N2 (11/202), rhinovirus (10/202), respiratory syncytial virus (7/202), influenza B virus (6/202), metapneumovirus (4/202), and coronavirus (2/202). Interpretation: Clinical testing methods for 2019-nCoV require improvement. Importantly, 5.8% of 2019-nCoV infected and 18.4% of non-2019-nCoV-infected patients had other pathogen infections. It is important to treat combined infections and perform rapid screening to avoid cross-contamination of patients. A test that quickly and simultaneously screens as many pathogens as possible is needed. *注,本文为预印本论文手稿,是未经同行评审的初步报告,其观点仅供科研同行交流,并不是结论性内容,请使用者谨慎使用.