Comparative Analysis of Dengue and Zika Outbreaks Reveals Differences by Setting and Virus.
Comparative Analysis of Dengue and Zika Outbreaks Reveals Differences by Setting and Virus.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pntd.0005173
复制
发表时间：
2016-12
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Edmunds WJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Funk S;Kucharski AJ;Camacho A;Eggo RM;Yakob L;Murray LM;Edmunds WJ
太平洋岛屿密克罗尼西亚在过去十年中经历了几次蚊媒疾病的爆发。在小岛屿暴发时，易感人群通常是明确界定的，病原体没有共同传播。正因为如此，分析此类疫情可能有助于了解相关病原体的传播动态，特别是对于尚未充分研究的病原体，如寨卡病毒。在这里，我们使用传播动力学的数学模型，并充分利用疾病和疫情之间的共同点，比较了密克罗尼西亚两个不同岛屿环境中登革热和寨卡病毒的三次爆发，即雅普主岛和费斯岛。我们发现，在相同的环境中考虑寨卡病毒和登革热的估计繁殖数量是相似的，但相反，同一疾病的繁殖数量可能因环境而异。在雅普主岛，我们估计登革热疫情的繁殖数量为8.0-16（95%可信区间（CI）），寨卡疫情为4.8-14（95% CI），而对于Fais的登革热疫情，我们的估计为28-102（95% CI）。我们进一步发现，报告的寨卡病例比例（95%CI 1.4%-1.9%）小于登革热病例比例（95%CI：47%-61%）。我们在广泛的敏感性分析中证实了这些结果。他们认为，登革热传播模型对于估计寨卡病毒传播的预测动态可能是有用的，但在将发现从一种环境外推到另一种环境时必须小心。登革热和寨卡病毒是由同一种蚊子传播的相关病毒。虽然登革热已被很好地描述并长期影响世界各地的人们，但寨卡病毒只是最近才在人群中爆发。为了调查寨卡病毒的预期行为是否与登革热相似，我们比较了太平洋岛屿人群中的三次疫情：两次登革热疫情和一次寨卡疫情。岛屿疫情是了解感染传播的有用实验室，因为它们通常是短暂的、明确的事件，而在其他地方，当不同的病毒同时传播时，很难确定疫情的性质。在我们对密克罗尼西亚疫情的调查中，我们发现登革热和寨卡病毒在雅普主岛引起的疫情中确实表现相似。另一方面，在较小的费斯岛上爆发的登革热与雅普岛上爆发的登革热不同，因为传播似乎更为强烈。我们的结论是，在同一环境下考虑登革热疫情确实是寨卡疫情的一个很好的模型，但在比较不同环境下的疫情时必须小心。
The pacific islands of Micronesia have experienced several outbreaks of mosquito-borne diseases over the past decade. In outbreaks on small islands, the susceptible population is usually well defined, and there is no co-circulation of pathogens. Because of this, analysing such outbreaks can be useful for understanding the transmission dynamics of the pathogens involved, and particularly so for yet understudied pathogens such as Zika virus. Here, we compared three outbreaks of dengue and Zika virus in two different island settings in Micronesia, the Yap Main Islands and Fais, using a mathematical model of transmission dynamics and making full use of commonalities in disease and setting between the outbreaks. We found that the estimated reproduction numbers for Zika and dengue were similar when considered in the same setting, but that, conversely, reproduction number for the same disease can vary considerably by setting. On the Yap Main Islands, we estimated a reproduction number of 8.0–16 (95% Credible Interval (CI)) for the dengue outbreak and 4.8–14 (95% CI) for the Zika outbreak, whereas for the dengue outbreak on Fais our estimate was 28–102 (95% CI). We further found that the proportion of cases of Zika reported was smaller (95% CI 1.4%–1.9%) than that of dengue (95% CI: 47%–61%). We confirmed these results in extensive sensitivity analysis. They suggest that models for dengue transmission can be useful for estimating the predicted dynamics of Zika transmission, but care must be taken when extrapolating findings from one setting to another. Dengue and Zika are related viruses that are transmitted by the same species of mosquitoes. While dengue is well described and has affected people around the world for a long time, Zika has only recently caused outbreaks in human populations. To investigate whether the expected behaviour of Zika is similar to that of dengue, we compared three outbreaks in island populations of the pacific: two dengue outbreaks and one Zika outbreak. Island outbreaks are useful laboratories for understanding the spread of infections because they are usually short, well-identified episodes, whereas elsewhere it can be difficult to identify the properties of outbreaks when different viruses spread at the same time. In our investigation of the outbreaks in Micronesia we found that dengue and Zika virus did indeed behave similar in outbreaks they caused on the Yap Main Islands. A dengue outbreak on the smaller island of Fais, on the other hand, was different from the dengue outbreak on Yap in that transmission seems to have been much more intense. We conclude that dengue outbreaks are indeed a good model for Zika outbreaks when considered in the same setting, but that one must be careful when comparing outbreaks in different settings.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
30.5
作者：
Dejnirattisai W;Supasa P;Wongwiwat W;Rouvinski A;Barba-Spaeth G;Duangchinda T;Sakuntabhai A;Cao-Lormeau VM;Malasit P;Rey FA;Mongkolsapaya J;Screaton GR
通讯作者：
Screaton GR
影响因子：
5
作者：
Endy, TP;Chunsuttiwat, S;Ennis, FA
通讯作者：
Ennis, FA
DOI：
10.4269/ajtmh.1988.38.172
发表时间：
1988-01-01
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
BURKE, DS;NISALAK, A;SCOTT, RM
通讯作者：
SCOTT, RM
影响因子：
7.3
作者：
Carrington LB;Simmons CP
通讯作者：
Simmons CP
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Adams, Ben;Boots, Michael
通讯作者：
Boots, Michael