Elvina Viennet1, Gina Mincham2, Francesca D Frentiu3, Cassie C Jansen4, Brian L Montgomery5, David Harley6, Robert L P Flower1, Craig R Williams2, Helen M Faddy1. 1. Research and Development, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia. 2. Centre for Population Health Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. 3. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation & School of Biomedical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, Queensland, Australia. 4. Metro North Public Health Unit, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Windsor, Queensland, Australia. 5. Metro South Public Health Unit, Metro South Hospital and Health Service, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 6. Research School of Population Health, The Australian National University, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Zika virus could be transmitted in the state of Queensland, Australia, in parts of the state where the mosquito vectors are established. METHODS: We assessed the epidemic potential of Zika in Queensland from January 2015 to August 2016, and estimate the epidemic potential from September to December 2016, by calculating the temperature-dependent relative vectorial capacity (rVc), based on empirical and estimated parameters. RESULTS: Through 2015, we estimated a rVc of 0.119, 0.152, 0.170, and 0.175, respectively in the major cities of Brisbane, Rockhampton, Cairns, and Townsville. From January to August 2016, the epidemic potential trend was similar to 2015, however the highest epidemic potential was in Cairns. During September to November 2016, the epidemic potential is consistently the highest in Cairns, followed by Townsville, Rockhampton and Brisbane. Then, from November to December 2016, Townsville has the highest estimated epidemic potential. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate using a vectorial capacity model that ZIKV could have been locally transmitted in Queensland, Australia during 2015 and 2016. ZIKV remains a threat to Australia for the upcoming summer, during the Brazilian Carnival season, when the abundance of vectors is relatively high. Understanding the epidemic potential of local ZIKV transmission will allow better management of threats to blood safety and assessment of public health risk.
INTRODUCTION:Zika virus could be transmitted in the state of Queensland, Australia, in parts of the state where the mosquito vectors are established. METHODS: We assessed the epidemic potential of Zika in Queensland from January 2015 to August 2016, and estimate the epidemic potential from September to December 2016, by calculating the temperature-dependent relative vectorial capacity (rVc), based on empirical and estimated parameters. RESULTS: Through 2015, we estimated a rVc of 0.119, 0.152, 0.170, and 0.175, respectively in the major cities of Brisbane, Rockhampton, Cairns, and Townsville. From January to August 2016, the epidemic potential trend was similar to 2015, however the highest epidemic potential was in Cairns. During September to November 2016, the epidemic potential is consistently the highest in Cairns, followed by Townsville, Rockhampton and Brisbane. Then, from November to December 2016, Townsville has the highest estimated epidemic potential. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate using a vectorial capacity model that ZIKV could have been locally transmitted in Queensland, Australia during 2015 and 2016. ZIKV remains a threat to Australia for the upcoming summer, during the Brazilian Carnival season, when the abundance of vectors is relatively high. Understanding the epidemic potential of local ZIKV transmission will allow better management of threats to blood safety and assessment of public health risk.
Authors: Iara J F Motta; Bryan R Spencer; Suely G Cordeiro da Silva; Monica B Arruda; Jane A Dobbin; Yung B M Gonzaga; Ingrid P Arcuri; Rita C B S Tavares; Elias H Atta; Regina F M Fernandes; Deise A Costa; Liane J Ribeiro; Fabio Limonte; Luiza M Higa; Carolina M Voloch; Rodrigo M Brindeiro; Amilcar Tanuri; Orlando C Ferreira Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-08-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jernej Mlakar; Misa Korva; Nataša Tul; Mara Popović; Mateja Poljšak-Prijatelj; Jerica Mraz; Marko Kolenc; Katarina Resman Rus; Tina Vesnaver Vipotnik; Vesna Fabjan Vodušek; Alenka Vizjak; Jože Pižem; Miroslav Petrovec; Tatjana Avšič Županc Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Louis Lambrechts; Krijn P Paaijmans; Thanyalak Fansiri; Lauren B Carrington; Laura D Kramer; Matthew B Thomas; Thomas W Scott Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-04-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Adam J Kucharski; Sebastian Funk; Rosalind M Eggo; Henri-Pierre Mallet; W John Edmunds; Eric J Nilles Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2016-05-17
Authors: Morgan P Kain; Eloise B Skinner; Tejas S Athni; Ana L Ramirez; Erin A Mordecai; Andrew F van den Hurk Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2022-10-04
Authors: Pei-Ying Kobres; Jean-Paul Chretien; Michael A Johansson; Jeffrey J Morgan; Pai-Yei Whung; Harshini Mukundan; Sara Y Del Valle; Brett M Forshey; Talia M Quandelacy; Matthew Biggerstaff; Cecile Viboud; Simon Pollett Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2019-10-04