| 1. |
- Thornhill, John P, et al.
(author)
-
Human monkeypox virus infection in women and non-binary individuals during the 2022 outbreaks: a global case series.
- 2022
-
In: Lancet (London, England). - 1474-547X. ; 400:10367, s. 1953-1965
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Between May and November, 2022, global outbreaks of human monkeypox virus infection have been reported in more than 78000 people worldwide, predominantly in men who have sex with men. We describe the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of monkeypox virus infection in cisgender (cis) and transgender (trans) women and non-binary individuals assigned female sex at birth to improve identification and understanding of risk factors.International collaborators in geographical locations with high numbers of diagnoses of monkeypox virus infection were approached and invited to contribute data on women and non-binary individuals with confirmed monkeypox virus infection. Contributing centres completed deidentified structured case-report spreadsheets, adapted and developed by participating clinicians, to include variables of interest relevant to women and non-binary individuals assigned female at birth. We describe the epidemiology and clinical course observed in the reported infections.Collaborators reported data for a total of 136 individuals with monkeypox virus infection who presented between May 11 and Oct 4, 2022, across 15 countries. Overall median age was 34 years (IQR 28-40; range 19-84). The cohort comprised 62 trans women, 69 cis women, and five non-binary individuals (who were, because of small numbers, grouped with cis women to form a category of people assigned female at birth for the purpose of comparison). 121 (89%) of 136 individuals reported sex with men. 37 (27%) of all individuals were living with HIV, with a higher proportion among trans women (31 [50%] of 62) than among cis women and non-binary individuals (six [8%] of 74). Sexual transmission was suspected in 55 (89%) trans women (with the remainder having an unknown route of transmission) and 45 (61%) cis women and non-binary individuals; non-sexual routes of transmission (including household and occupational exposures) were reported only in cis women and non-binary individuals. 25 (34%) of 74 cis women and non-binary individuals submitted to the case series were initially misdiagnosed. Overall, among individuals with available data, rash was described in 124 (93%) of 134 individuals and described as anogenital in 95 (74%) of 129 and as vesiculopustular in 105 (87%) of 121. Median number of lesions was ten (IQR 5-24; range 1-200). Mucosal lesions involving the vagina, anus, or oropharynx or eye occurred in 65 (55%) of 119 individuals with available data. Vaginal and anal sex were associated with lesions at those sites. Monkeypox virus DNA was detected by PCR from vaginal swab samples in all 14 samples tested. 17 (13%) individuals were hospitalised, predominantly for bacterial superinfection of lesions and pain management. 33 (24%) individuals were treated with tecovirimat and six (4%) received post-exposure vaccinations. No deaths were reported.The clinical features of monkeypox in women and non-binary individuals were similar to those described in men, including the presence of anal and genital lesions with prominent mucosal involvement. Anatomically, anogenital lesions were reflective of sexual practices: vulvovaginal lesions predominated in cis women and non-binary individuals and anorectal features predominated in trans women. The prevalence of HIV co-infection in the cohort was high.None.
|
|
| 2. |
- Buitrago-Garcia, Diana, et al.
(author)
-
Occurrence and transmission potential of asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections : Update of a living systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2022
-
In: PLoS Medicine. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1549-1277 .- 1549-1676. ; 19:5
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- 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.
|
|
