Search

Since May 2022, Monkeypox, a zoonotic Orthopox DNA virus was reported in more than 102 countries indicating expansion of its geographic range. We analyzed the complete genomes sequences of Monkeypox cases from Kerala (n=5 travelled from UAE) and Delhi (n=5 no travel history), India confirmed during July to August 2022. All the retrieved MPXV sequences from India covering 90 to 99% genome belong to A.2 lineage of clade IIb. The A.2 MPXV lineage divided in three sub clusters; first cluster Kerala n=5, Delhi n=2 aligned with the USA-2022 ON674051.1; while second of Delhi n=3 aligned with USA-2022 ON675438.1 and third consists of the UK, USA and Thailand. Recent update in MPXV lineage designated all the five sequences from Kerala as A.2.1. In addition to known 16 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) along with 13 APOBEC3 cytosine deaminase activity determined specific lineage defining mutations in A.2 lineage, 25 additional APOBEC3 mutations were found in 10 reported sequences. The study emphasizes need of enhancing genomic surveillance to understand the mutation and its linkage.

Background & objectives: In the present scenario, the most common sample for diagnosis of COVID-19 by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is nasal and throat swab (NTS). Other sampling options such as gargle lavage have found limited application in clinical use mostly because of unavailability of an appropriate gargling liquid. This study was conducted to assess the stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in normal saline at 4°C that can serve as a gargling liquid as well as a transport medium. The study also looked at the agreement between NTS and gargle lavage/saliva for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. Methods: In 29 consecutive real-time RT-PCR (rRT-PCR) positive COVID-19 patients, paired NTS, gargle and saliva samples were taken. Samples were processed by rRT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. To assess the SARS-CoV-2 RNA stability in normal saline, gargle lavage specimens were divided into two aliquots; one subset of the specimen was run within 4-6 h along with the routine samples (NTS and saliva) and the other subset was stored at 4°C and processed after 24-30 h. Agreement between cycle threshold (Ct) values from both the runs was compared using Bland–Altman (BA) analysis. Results: The positivity rates of rRT-PCR in NTS, saliva and gargle lavage samples were 82.7 (24/29), 79.3 (23/29) and 86.2 per cent (25/29), respectively. BA plot showed a good agreement between the Ct values of fresh and stored gargle samples, stipulating that there were no significant differences in the approximate viral load levels between the fresh and stored gargle lavage samples (bias: E gene −0.64, N gene −0.51, ORF gene −0.19). Interpretation & conclusions: Our study results show stability of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the gargle samples collected using normal saline up to 24-30 h. Gargle lavage and saliva specimen collection are cost-effective and acceptable methods of sampling for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by rRT-PCR. These simplified, inexpensive and acceptable methods of specimen collection would reduce the cost and workload on healthcare workers for sample collection.

Background & objectives: Chloroquine (CQN) administered as nasal drops has the potential to achieve much greater local tissue levels than with oral/systemic administration. This trial was undertaken to study the efficacy and safety profile of topical nasal administration of CQN drops in reducing viral load and preventing clinical progression in early COVID-19 infection. Methods: This randomized clinical trial was done with a sample size of 60. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) confirmed asymptomatic patients or those with mild COVID-19 illness [National Early Warning Score (NEWS) ≤4] were included. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 manner. Control arm (standard supportive treatment, n=30) was compared with intervention arm (n=30) of standard treatment plus CQN eye drops (0.03%) repurposed as nasal drops administered six times daily (0.5 ml/dose) for 10 days. Outcome measures were adverse events and adherence; clinical progression and outcomes were measured by NEWS; sequential RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were also noted on days 0, 3, 7 and 10. Results: Nasal CQN was associated with local irritation in seven and non-compliance in one of 30 patients. Eleven patients were excluded due to enrolment error (2 – recovered; 9 – false-positive referral), and 49 patients were analyzed as per modified intention-to-treat analysis. Clinical recovery was noted as similar with 100 per cent asymptomatic by day seven in both arms. Virological outcomes also indicated similarly improving Ct values in both arms, and similar proportion of patients transitioning to non-infectivity by day 10 (controls - 19/25; nasal CQN - 15/24). Nine false-positive patients with enrolment error and day 0 RT-PCR negative were initially uninfected but had continuing COVID-19 exposure and treatment as per randomization. Patients receiving nasal CQN (n=5) demonstrated stable Ct values from day 0 to 10, while patients with no nasal CQN (n=4) demonstrated significant dip in Ct value indicating to infection (Ct

Background There are limited data on incidence, risk factors and etiology of acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) among older adults in low- and middle-income countries. Methods We established a cohort of community dwelling older adults ≥60 years and conducted weekly follow-up for acute respiratory infections (ARI) during 2015-2017. Nurses assessed ARI cases for LRTI, collecting combined nasal/throat swabs from all LRTI cases and an equal number of age- and sex-matched asymptomatic neighbourhood controls. Swabs were tested for influenza viruses, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), human metapneumovirus (hMPV), and parainfluenza viruses (PIV) using polymerase chain reaction. LRTI and virus-specific LRTI incidence was calculated per 1000 person-years. We estimated adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) for risk factors using Poisson regression and calculated etiologic fractions (EF) using adjusted odds ratios for detection of viral pathogens in LRTI cases vs controls. Results We followed 1403 older adults for 2441 person-years. LRTI and LRTI-associated hospitalization incidences were 248.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 229.3-268.8) and 12.7 (95% CI = 8.9-18.1) per 1000 person-years. Persons with pre-existing chronic bronchitis as compared to those without (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 4.7, 95% CI = 3.9-5.6); aged 65-74 years (IRR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.3-2.0) and ≥75 years (IRR = 1.8, 95% CI = 1.4-2.4) as compared to 60-64 years; and persons in poorest wealth quintile (IRR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.1-1.8); as compared to those in wealthiest quintile were at higher risk for LRTI. Virus was detected in 10.1% of LRTI cases, most commonly influenza (3.8%) and RSV (3.0%). EF for RSV and influenza virus was 83.9% and 83.6%, respectively. Conclusion In this rural cohort of older adults, the incidence of LRTI was substantial. Chronic bronchitis was an important risk factor; influenza virus and RSV were major viral pathogens.

Background Influenza is a cause of febrile acute respiratory infection (FARI) in India; however, few influenza vaccine trials have been conducted in India. We assessed absolute and relative efficacy of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) and inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) among children aged 2 to 10 years in rural India through a randomized, triple-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted over 2 years. Methods and findings In June 2015, children were randomly allocated to LAIV, IIV, intranasal placebo, or inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) in a 2:2:1:1 ratio. In June 2016, vaccination was repeated per original allocation. Overall, 3,041 children received LAIV (n = 1,015), IIV (n = 1,010), nasal placebo (n = 507), or IPV (n = 509). Mean age of children was 6.5 years with 20% aged 9 to 10 years. Through weekly home visits, nasal and throat swabs were collected from children with FARI and tested for influenza virus by polymerase chain reaction. The primary outcome was laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated FARI; vaccine efficacy (VE) was calculated using modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis by Cox proportional hazards model (PH) for each year. In Year 1, VE was 40.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 25.2 to 51.9) for LAIV and 59.0% (95% CI 47.8 to 67.9) for IIV compared with controls; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was −46.2% (95% CI −88.9 to −13.1). In Year 2, VE was 51.9% (95% CI 42.0 to 60.1) for LAIV and 49.9% (95% CI 39.2 to 58.7) for IIV; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was 4.2% (95% CI −19.9 to 23.5). No serious adverse vaccine-attributable events were reported. Study limitations include differing dosage requirements for children between nasal and injectable vaccines (single dose of LAIV versus 2 doses of IIV) in Year 1 and the fact that immunogenicity studies were not conducted. Conclusions In this study, we found that LAIV and IIV vaccines were safe and moderately efficacious against influenza virus infection among Indian children. Trial registration Clinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2015/06/005902., Anand Krishnan and co-workers study the efficacy and safety of influenza vaccines for children in India., Author summary Why was this study done? In recent years, 2 community-based trials of the single-dose Russian-backbone live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have been published, with contrasting results. In Senegal, LAIV vaccine efficacy (VE) was demonstrated to be 0.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) −26.4 to 20.9), and in Bangladesh, LAIV VE was demonstrated to be 41.0% (95% CI 28.0 to 51.6) against all influenza virus strains. In addition, observational studies for VE of LAIV such as in the United States and Europe have also shown mixed results. While the World Health Organization (WHO) continues to recommend LAIV use in children, conflicting data on LAIV have led countries to review and reconsider national preferential recommendations for LAIV use in children. Given these gaps in evidence and the potential for indigenously produced LAIV to be used for prevention of influenza virus infection in Indian children, we evaluated the absolute efficacy of LAIV and inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and relative efficacy of LAIV versus IIV among children aged 2 to 10 years in rural India. What did the researchers do and find? We conducted a 2-year, triple (participant–observer–analyst) blind, community-based vaccine trial. We randomly assigned 3,041 children aged 2 to 10 years to receive age appropriate doses of LAIV, IIV, or a control vaccine. In Year 1, VE was 40.0% (95% CI 25.2 to 51.9) for LAIV and 59.0% (95% CI 47.8 to 67.9) for IIV compared with controls; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was −46.2% (95% CI −88.9 to −13.1). In Year 2, VE was 51.9% (95% CI 42.0 to 60.1) for LAIV and 49.9% (95% CI 39.2 to 58.7) for IIV; relative efficacy of LAIV compared with IIV was 4.2% (95% CI −19.9 to 23.5). We found that LAIV and IIV were safe and moderately efficacious against laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection. In Year 1, LAIV, as a single dose in a vaccine-naïve population, was significantly less efficacious than IIV, whereas in Year 2, VE for LAIV and IIV was similar. This was the first randomized controlled trial to our knowledge in a developing country setting that compared LAIV efficacy with IIV and provided VE by age group and influenza type/subtype across seasons spanning 2 consecutive years. Importantly, during both years, LAIV and IIV were protective against influenza A(H3N2) viruses. However, LAIV had limited efficacy against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 for both years. What do these findings mean? Influenza vaccination is an important tool for preparedness and response against seasonal epidemics and pandemics. However, decisions on specific vaccine introductions into national immunization platforms depend on multiple factors including effectiveness, presence of existing immunization platforms and cold chain infrastructure, cost, and local production of the vaccines. Availability of indigenous, safe, and moderately efficacious influenza vaccines, including LAIV, should initiate discussion on the optimal use of vaccines for the national strategy for influenza prevention and control in India.

Quarantine of health care workers (HCWs) exposed to COVID-19-confirmed cases is a well-known strategy for limiting the transmission of infection. However, during a pandemic situation in a resource-constraint setting, we require an evidence-based guideline for quarantining HCWs. We developed an algorithm for exposure-based risk stratification and quarantine of HCWs. We did contact tracing and risk stratification of 3853 HCWs, of whom 560 (14.5%) were categorized as high-risk contacts. High-risk contacts were quarantined for 14 days and underwent testing for COVID-19, while low-risk contacts continued their work with adherence to physical distancing, hand hygiene, appropriate use of personal protective equipment, and self-monitoring of symptoms. Overall, 118 (3.1%) contacts tested positive for COVID-19. The positivity rate among high-risk contacts was 7.1% (95% confidence interval = 5.2-9.6). Our strategy of risk stratification prevented 3215 HCWs from being quarantined and thus saved 45 010 person-days of health workforce in the institution.

BackgroundQuarantine of healthcare workers (HCWs) exposed to COVID -19 confirmed cases is a well-known strategy for limiting the transmission of infection. However, there is need of evidence-based guidelines for quarantine of HCWs in COVID -19.MethodsWe describe our experience of contact tracing and risk stratification of 3853 HCWs who were exposed to confirmed COVID-19 cases in a tertiary health care institution in India. We developed an algorithm, on the basis of risk stratification, to rationalize quarantine among HCWs. Risk stratification was based on the duration of exposure, distance from the patient, and appropriateness of personal protection equipment (PPE) usage. Only high-risk contacts were quarantined for 14 days. They underwent testing for COVID-19 after five days of exposure, while low-risk contacts continued their work with adherence to physical distancing, hand hygiene, and appropriate use of PPE. The low-risk contacts were encouraged to monitor for symptoms and report for COVID-19 screening if fever, cough, or shortness of breath occurred. We followed up all contacts for 14 days from the last exposure and observed for symptoms of COVID-19 and test positivity.Results and interpretationOut of total 3853 contacts, 560 (14.5%) were categorized as high-risk contacts, and 40 of them were detected positive for COVID-19, with a test positivity rate of 7.1% (95% CI = 5.2 – 9.6). Overall, 118 (3.1%) of all contacts tested positive. Our strategy prevented 3215 HCWs from being quarantined and saved 45,010 person-days of health workforce until June 8, 2020, in the institution.We conclude that exposure-based risk stratification and quarantine of HCWs is a viable strategy to prevent unnecessary quarantine, in a healthcare institution.SummaryWhat is already known about this subject?Quarantine of HCWs is a well-known strategy for community and HCWs to prevent the transmission of COVID-19.Though success stories of prompt contact tracing and quarantine to control COVID-19 are available from countries like South Korea, Singapore, and Hong Kong, there is a scarcity of evidence that could guide targeted quarantine of HCWs exposed to COVID -19 in India.What does this study add?Only 14.5% HCWs exposed to COVID-19 cases were stratified “high risk” contacts, and the most common reason for high-risk contacts was non-formal workplace interactions such as having meals together.The overall test positivity rate among the high-risk contacts was 7.1%, while it was higher in symptomatic high-risk contacts as compared to those who were asymptomatic (10.2% vs. 6.3%).How might this impact on clinical practice?Contact tracing and risk stratification can be used to minimize unnecessary quarantine of COVID-19 exposed health care workers and prevent the depletion of healthcare workers amidst the pandemic to continue the healthcare services optimally.

PurposeWe describe here a multicentric community-dwelling cohort of older adults (>60 years of age) established to estimate incidence, study risk factors, healthcare utilisation and economic burden associated with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in India.ParticipantsThe four sites of this cohort are in northern (Ballabgarh), southern (Chennai), eastern (Kolkata) and western (Pune) parts of India. We enrolled 5336 participants across 4220 households and began surveillance in July 2018 for viral respiratory infections with additional participants enrolled annually. Trained field workers collected data about individual-level and household-level risk factors at enrolment and quarterly assessed frailty and grip strength. Trained nurses surveilled weekly to identify acute respiratory infections (ARI) and clinically assessed individuals to diagnose acute lower respiratory infection (ALRI) as per protocol. Nasal and oropharyngeal swabs are collected from all ALRI cases and one-fifth of the other ARI cases for laboratory testing. Cost data of the episode are collected using the WHO approach for estimating the economic burden of seasonal influenza. Handheld tablets with Open Data Kit platform were used for data collection.Findings to dateThe attrition of 352 participants due to migration and deaths was offset by enrolling 680 new entrants in the second year. All four sites reported negligible influenza vaccination uptake (0.1%–0.4%), low health insurance coverage (0.4%–22%) and high tobacco use (19%–52%). Ballabgarh had the highest proportion (54.4%) of households in the richest wealth quintile, but reported high solid fuel use (92%). Frailty levels were highest in Kolkata (11.3%) and lowest in Pune (6.8%). The Chennai cohort had highest self-reported morbidity (90.1%).Future plansThe findings of this cohort will be used to inform prioritisation of strategies for influenza and RSV control for older adults in India. We also plan to conduct epidemiological studies of SARS-CoV-2 using this platform.

Influenza surveillance was carried out in a subset of patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) presenting at an Employee Health Clinic (EHS) at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi (urban) and pediatric out patients department of civil hospital at Ballabhgarh (peri-urban), under the Comprehensive Rural Health Services Project (CRHSP) of AIIMS, in Delhi region from January 2007 to December 2010. Of the 3264 samples tested, 541 (17%) were positive for influenza viruses, of which 221 (41%) were pandemic Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 168 (31%) were seasonal influenza A, and 152 (28%) were influenza B. While the Influenza viruses were detected year-round, their types/subtypes varied remarkably. While there was an equal distribution of seasonal A(H1N1) and influenza B in 2007, predominance of influenza B was observed in 2008. At the beginning of 2009, circulation of influenza A(H3N2) viruses was observed, followed later by emergence of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 with co-circulation of influenza B viruses. Influenza B was dominant subtype in early 2010, with second wave of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 in August-September, 2010. With the exception of pandemic H1N1 emergence in 2009, the peaks of influenza activity coincided primarily with monsoon season, followed by minor peak in winter at both urban and rural sites. Age group analysis of influenza positivity revealed that the percent positivity of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza virus was highest in >5–18 years age groups (OR 2.5; CI = 1.2–5.0; p = 0.009) when compared to seasonal influenza. Phylogenetic analysis of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 from urban and rural sites did not reveal any major divergence from other Indian strains or viruses circulating worldwide. Continued surveillance globally will help define regional differences in influenza seasonality, as well as, to determine optimal periods to implement influenza vaccination programs among priority populations.