| Literature DB >> 33067302 |
Irina Chis Ster1, Alejandro Rodriguez2, Natalia Cristina Romero2, Andrea Lopez2, Martha Chico2, Joel Montgomery3, Philip Cooper4,2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There are few population-based estimates for prevalence of past exposure to dengue and chikungunya viruses despite common epidemiological features. Here, we have developed a novel statistical method to study patterns of age-dependent prevalence of immunity in a population following exposures to two viruses which share similar epidemiological features including mode of transmission and induction of long-lasting immunity. This statistical technique accounted for sociodemographic characteristics associated with individuals and households. SETTINGS: The data consist of a representative sample from an ongoing longitudinal birth cohort set-up in a tropical district in coastal Ecuador (Esmeraldas). PARTICIPANTS: We collected data and blood samples from 319 individuals belonging to 152 households following epidemics of the infections in 2015 in Latin America. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Plasma was tested for the presence of specific IgG antibodies to dengue and chikungunya viruses by commercial ELISA and defined a bivariate binary outcome indicating individuals' past exposure status to dengue and chikungunya (ie, presence/absence of IgG antibodies to dengue or chikungunya or both).Entities:
Keywords: epidemiology; public health; statistics & research methods
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33067302 PMCID: PMC7569951 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040735
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Geographic distribution of the household locations of the background population (ECUAVIDA) and the serological sample.
Characteristics of 319 individuals from 151 households in the region of the district of Quininde, Esmeraldas Province
| Characteristic | N (%) |
| Individual characteristics | N=319 |
| Sex | |
| Male | 117 (37) |
| Female | 202 (63) |
| Age (years) | |
| 0–5 | 7 (2) |
| 6–10 | 140 (44) |
| 11–15 | 4 (1) |
| 16–20 | 3 (1) |
| 21–25 | 12 (4) |
| 26–30 | 45 (14) |
| 31–35 | 37 (12) |
| 36–40 | 41 (13) |
| 41–45 | 15 (5) |
| 46–50 | 9 (3) |
| >50 | 6 (2) |
| Dengue seropositive | |
| No | 74 (32.2) |
| Yes | 245 (76.8) |
| Chikungunya seropositive | |
| No | 174 (54.5) |
| Yes | 145 (45.5) |
| Household characteristics | N=151 |
| Area of residence | |
| Rural | 47 (32) |
| Urban | 104 (68) |
| Socioeconomic status | |
| Low and medium | 106 (70) |
| High | 45 (30) |
| Household dispersal (metres) | |
| <50 | 13 (8.6) |
| 51–250 | 63 (41.7) |
| 251–500 | 34 (22.5) |
| 501–1000 | 12 (8) |
| >1000 | 29 (19) |
Parameter estimates derived after fitting simultaneous logistic models with increasing number of explanatory variables
| Model | Dengue conditioned on chikungunya | Chikungunya conditioned on dengue | ||||||||||
| Mean | SD | Median | P025 | P975 | P(OR<=1)/P(OR>1) | Mean | SD | Median | P025 | P975 | P(OR<=1)/P(OR>1) | |
| First models | ||||||||||||
| Age (power)* | 7.671 | 3.123 | 7.023 | 3.616 | 15.450 | 0.357 | 0.097 | 0.346 | 0.202 | 0.579 | ||
| Second models | ||||||||||||
| Female versus male | 0.728 | 0.373 | 0.650 | 0.248 | 1.665 | 2.971 | 1.587 | 2.614 | 1.030 | 7.004 | ||
| Rural versus urban | 1.490 | 1.431 | 1.099 | 0.260 | 5.020 | 0.441/0.559 | 0.252 | 0.337 | 0.159 | 0.023 | 1.040 | |
| Crowding | 1.217 | 0.744 | 1.042 | 0.348 | 3.118 | 0.476/0.524 | 0.916 | 0.759 | 0.718 | 0.179 | 2.808 | 0.679/0.321 |
| Low versus high | 3.302 | 2.472 | 2.671 | 0.828 | 9.518 | 0.916 | 0.858 | 0.675 | 0.142 | 3.148 | 0.684/0.316 | |
| Household dispersal | 0.825 | 0.314 | 0.772 | 0.380 | 1.585 | 0.771/0.229 | 0.711 | 0.384 | 0.628 | 0.225 | 1.685 | |
| Final models | ||||||||||||
| Age (power) | 9.980 | 4.623 | 8.955 | 4.290 | 21.760 | 0.263 | 0.085 | 0.251 | 0.132 | 0.460 | ||
| Female versus male | 0.651 | 0.347 | 0.577 | 0.210 | 1.528 | 3.804 | 2.356 | 3.238 | 1.152 | 9.831 | ||
| Rural versus urban | 0.218 | 0.479 | 0.099 | 0.008 | 1.167 | |||||||
| Low versus high | 3.028 | 1.992 | 2.536 | 0.827 | 8.085 | |||||||
| Household dispersal | 0.794 | 0.561 | 0.657 | 0.186 | 2.202 | 0.76/0.24 | ||||||
*First models have age only as predictor. Second models show effects of each of age, sex, area of residence, socioeconomic status, household overcrowding and household dispersal on the OR of past exposure versus no exposure to the viruses. Final models included all variables for which the effect in the simpler models, measured as (P(OR>1) or P(OR<1)), was greater than 0.80 or less than 0.20 (shown in bold). Age-dependence is parameterised according to a power law (ie, age power) and the corresponding estimate represented the power of the agepower component.
Figure 2Predicted age-dependent seroprevalence for dengue and chikungunya. Dashed lines represent the 95% credible intervals and the bars represent the observe proportions of seropositive participants. CHIKV, chikungunya virus; DENV, dengue virus.
Figure 3Predicted age-dependent prevalence for exposure categories to dengue and chikungunya in the sample population plotted against observed proportions (in 5-year age groupings). Dashed lines represent 95% credible intervals (CrIs).