Stefanie Böhm

Bio: Stefanie Böhm is an academic researcher from Robert Koch Institute. The author has contributed to research in topics: Vaccination & Seroconversion. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 7 publications receiving 318 citations. Previous affiliations of Stefanie Böhm include European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

Investigation of a COVID-19 outbreak in Germany resulting from a single travel-associated primary case: a case series.

Abstract: Summary Background In December, 2019, the newly identified severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China, causing COVID-19, a respiratory disease presenting with fever, cough, and often pneumonia. WHO has set the strategic objective to interrupt spread of SARS-CoV-2 worldwide. An outbreak in Bavaria, Germany, starting at the end of January, 2020, provided the opportunity to study transmission events, incubation period, and secondary attack rates. Methods A case was defined as a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by RT-PCR. Case interviews were done to describe timing of onset and nature of symptoms and to identify and classify contacts as high risk (had cumulative face-to-face contact with a confirmed case for ≥15 min, direct contact with secretions or body fluids of a patient with confirmed COVID-19, or, in the case of health-care workers, had worked within 2 m of a patient with confirmed COVID-19 without personal protective equipment) or low risk (all other contacts). High-risk contacts were ordered to stay at home in quarantine for 14 days and were actively followed up and monitored for symptoms, and low-risk contacts were tested upon self-reporting of symptoms. We defined fever and cough as specific symptoms, and defined a prodromal phase as the presence of non-specific symptoms for at least 1 day before the onset of specific symptoms. Whole genome sequencing was used to confirm epidemiological links and clarify transmission events where contact histories were ambiguous; integration with epidemiological data enabled precise reconstruction of exposure events and incubation periods. Secondary attack rates were calculated as the number of cases divided by the number of contacts, using Fisher's exact test for the 95% CIs. Findings Patient 0 was a Chinese resident who visited Germany for professional reasons. 16 subsequent cases, often with mild and non-specific symptoms, emerged in four transmission generations. Signature mutations in the viral genome occurred upon foundation of generation 2, as well as in one case pertaining to generation 4. The median incubation period was 4·0 days (IQR 2·3–4·3) and the median serial interval was 4·0 days (3·0–5·0). Transmission events were likely to have occurred presymptomatically for one case (possibly five more), at the day of symptom onset for four cases (possibly five more), and the remainder after the day of symptom onset or unknown. One or two cases resulted from contact with a case during the prodromal phase. Secondary attack rates were 75·0% (95% CI 19·0–99·0; three of four people) among members of a household cluster in common isolation, 10·0% (1·2–32·0; two of 20) among household contacts only together until isolation of the patient, and 5·1% (2·6–8·9; 11 of 217) among non-household, high-risk contacts. Interpretation Although patients in our study presented with predominately mild, non-specific symptoms, infectiousness before or on the day of symptom onset was substantial. Additionally, the incubation period was often very short and false-negative tests occurred. These results suggest that although the outbreak was controlled, successful long-term and global containment of COVID-19 could be difficult to achieve. Funding All authors are employed and all expenses covered by governmental, federal state, or other publicly funded institutions.

Influenza and pertussis vaccination during pregnancy – attitudes, practices and barriers in gynaecological practices in Germany

Abstract: In Germany, antenatal influenza vaccination is recommended since 2010, but uptake remains low. Several countries recently introduced antenatal pertussis vaccination, which is currently under consideration in Germany. We conducted a survey among gynaecologists on attitudes, practices and barriers regarding influenza and pertussis vaccination during pregnancy. Gynaecologists were invited to complete a pre-tested, 24-item questionnaire published in the German Professional Association of Gynaecologists’ journal in September 2017 within 2 months. Associations between variables were examined using Chi-Squared, Fischer’s Exact or t-tests. Variables associated with gynaecologists’ self-reported implementation of vaccination in pregnant women were identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Of 867 participants (response 11%), 91.4 and 59.4% reported currently vaccinating pregnant women against influenza and pertussis, respectively. Gynaecologists who reported obtaining annual influenza vaccination and actively informing their patients about these vaccinations were significantly more likely to vaccinate pregnant women against influenza (96.5% vs. 65.7 and 95.1% vs. 62.2%) and pertussis (63.1% vs. 44.3 and 82.4% vs. 12.9%). Performing influenza vaccination was least likely among gynaecologists who perceived logistical difficulties as a vaccination barrier (35.9%), while pertussis vaccination was least likely if the lacking official recommendation (32.0%), logistical difficulties (27.1%), safety concerns (17.5%) and limited vaccine effectiveness (11.1%) were perceived as barriers. Of participants not yet vaccinating pregnant women against pertussis, 86.5% reported they would follow an official recommendation. Including vaccination recommendations in the maternity record (95.2%) and informing the public (88.7%) and health care professionals (86.6%) were considered the most suitable measures to achieve high pertussis vaccination coverage. The large proportion reporting performance of influenza vaccination during pregnancy and high acceptance of a potential recommendation for pertussis vaccination reflected positive attitudes towards vaccination among participants. However, factors associated with failure to vaccinate may be more prevalent among non-participants. Results suggest that gynaecologists’ confidence in vaccination is crucial for implementing vaccination in pregnancy. Thus, doubts on vaccine effectiveness and safety should be allayed among gynaecologists and pregnant women via various communication channels, and solutions for logistical barriers sought. Including antenatal vaccination recommendations in the maternity record would serve as an important reminder for both groups.

Dynamics of Borrelia burgdorferi-Specific Antibodies: Seroconversion and Seroreversion between Two Population-Based, Cross-Sectional Surveys among Adults in Germany

Abstract: Lyme borreliosis (LB) caused by Borrelia burgdorferi spp. is the most common human tick-borne disease in Europe. Although seroprevalence studies are conducted in several countries, rates of seroconversion and seroreversion are lacking, and they are essential to determine the risk of infection. Seropositivity was determined using a two-step approach—first, a serological screening assay, and in the event of a positive or equivocal result, a confirmatory immunoblot assay. Seroconversion and seroreversion rates were assessed from blood samples taken from participants included in two nation-wide population-based surveys. Moreover, the impact of antigen reactivity on seroreversion rates was assessed. The seroprevalence of antibodies reacting against B. burgdorferi spp. in the German population was 8.5% (95% CI 7.5–9.6) in 1997–99 and 9.3% (95% CI 8.3–10.4) in 2008–2011. Seroprevalence increased with age, up to 20% among 70–79 year-olds. The age-standardized seroprevalence remained the same. The yearly seroconversion rate was 0.45% (95% CI: 0.37–0.54), and the yearly seroreversion rate was 1.47% (95% CI: 1.24–2.17). Lower levels of antibodies were associated with seroreversion. Participants with a strong response against antigen p83 had the lowest odds on seroreversion. Given the yearly seroreversion rate of 1.47% and a seroprevalence up to 20% in the oldest age groups, at least 20% of the German population becomes infected with B. burgdorferi in their lifetime. The slight increase in seroprevalence between the two serosurveys was caused by an aging population.

Epidemiological Surveillance of Lyme Borreliosis in Bavaria, Germany, 2013–2020

Abstract: Lyme borreliosis (LB) is the most common tick-borne disease in Germany. Mandatory notification of acute LB manifestations (erythema migrans (EM), neuroborreliosis (NB), and Lyme arthritis (LA)) was implemented in Bavaria on 1 March 2013. We aimed to describe the epidemiological situation and to identify LB risk areas and populations. Therefore, we analyzed LB cases notified from March 2013 to December 2020 and calculated incidence (cases/100,000 inhabitants) by time, place, and person. Overall, 35,458 cases were reported during the study period (EM: 96.7%; NB: 1.7%; LA: 1.8%). The average incidence was 34.3/100,000, but annual incidence varied substantially (2015: 23.2; 2020: 47.4). Marked regional differences at the district level were observed (annual average incidence range: 4-154/100,000). The Bavarian Forest and parts of Franconia were identified as high-risk regions. Additionally, high risk for LB was found in 5-9-year-old males and in 60-69-year-old females. The first group also had the highest risk of a severe disease course. We were able to identify areas and populations in Bavaria with an increased LB risk, thereby providing a basis for targeted measures to prevent LB. Since LB vaccination is currently not available, such measures should comprise (i) avoiding tick bites, (ii) removing ticks rapidly after a bite, and (iii) treating LB early/adequately.

Epidemiology and transmission characteristics of early COVID-19 cases, 20 January-19 March 2020, in Bavaria, Germany.

Abstract: Severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) led to a significant disease burden and disruptions in health systems. We describe the epidemiology and transmission characteristics of early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in Bavaria, Germany. Cases were reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, reported from 20 January-19 March 2020. The incubation period was estimated using travel history and date of symptom onset. To estimate the serial interval, we identified pairs of index and secondary cases. By 19 March, 3546 cases were reported. A large proportion was exposed abroad (38%), causing further local transmission. Median incubation period of 256 cases with exposure abroad was 3.8 days (95%CI: 3.5-4.2). For 95% of infected individuals, symptom onset occurred within 10.3 days (95%CI: 9.1-11.8) after exposure. The median serial interval, using 53 pairs, was 3.5 days (95%CI: 3.0-4.2; mean: 3.9, s.d.: 2.2). Travellers returning to Germany had an important influence on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Bavaria in early 2020. Especially in times of low incidence, public health agencies should identify holiday destinations, and areas with ongoing local transmission, to monitor potential importation of SARS-CoV-2 infections. Travellers returning from areas with ongoing community transmission should be advised to quarantine to prevent re-introductions of COVID-19.

Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019.

Abstract: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an acute infection of the respiratory tract that emerged in late 20191,2. Initial outbreaks in China involved 13.8% of cases with severe courses, and 6.1% of cases with critical courses3. This severe presentation may result from the virus using a virus receptor that is expressed predominantly in the lung2,4; the same receptor tropism is thought to have determined the pathogenicity—but also aided in the control—of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 20035. However, there are reports of cases of COVID-19 in which the patient shows mild upper respiratory tract symptoms, which suggests the potential for pre- or oligosymptomatic transmission6–8. There is an urgent need for information on virus replication, immunity and infectivity in specific sites of the body. Here we report a detailed virological analysis of nine cases of COVID-19 that provides proof of active virus replication in tissues of the upper respiratory tract. Pharyngeal virus shedding was very high during the first week of symptoms, with a peak at 7.11 × 108 RNA copies per throat swab on day 4. Infectious virus was readily isolated from samples derived from the throat or lung, but not from stool samples—in spite of high concentrations of virus RNA. Blood and urine samples never yielded virus. Active replication in the throat was confirmed by the presence of viral replicative RNA intermediates in the throat samples. We consistently detected sequence-distinct virus populations in throat and lung samples from one patient, proving independent replication. The shedding of viral RNA from sputum outlasted the end of symptoms. Seroconversion occurred after 7 days in 50% of patients (and by day 14 in all patients), but was not followed by a rapid decline in viral load. COVID-19 can present as a mild illness of the upper respiratory tract. The confirmation of active virus replication in the upper respiratory tract has implications for the containment of COVID-19. Detailed virological analysis of nine cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) provides proof of active replication of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in tissues of the upper respiratory tract.

Coronavirus biology and replication: implications for SARS-CoV-2.

Abstract: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and its unprecedented global societal and economic disruptive impact has marked the third zoonotic introduction of a highly pathogenic coronavirus into the human population. Although the previous coronavirus SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV epidemics raised awareness of the need for clinically available therapeutic or preventive interventions, to date, no treatments with proven efficacy are available. The development of effective intervention strategies relies on the knowledge of molecular and cellular mechanisms of coronavirus infections, which highlights the significance of studying virus-host interactions at the molecular level to identify targets for antiviral intervention and to elucidate critical viral and host determinants that are decisive for the development of severe disease. In this Review, we summarize the first discoveries that shape our current understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infection throughout the intracellular viral life cycle and relate that to our knowledge of coronavirus biology. The elucidation of similarities and differences between SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses will support future preparedness and strategies to combat coronavirus infections.

Occurrence and transmission potential of asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: A living systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract: BACKGROUND There is disagreement about the level of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We conducted a living systematic review and meta-analysis to address three questions: (1) Amongst people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? (2) Amongst people with SARS-CoV-2 infection who are asymptomatic when diagnosed, what proportion will develop symptoms later? (3) What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is accounted for by people who are either asymptomatic throughout infection or presymptomatic? METHODS AND FINDINGS We searched PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv, and medRxiv using a database of SARS-CoV-2 literature that is updated daily, on 25 March 2020, 20 April 2020, and 10 June 2020. Studies of people with SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed by reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR) that documented follow-up and symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up or modelling studies were included. 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 an adapted checklist for case series, and the relevance and credibility of modelling studies were assessed using a published checklist. We included a total of 94 studies. The overall estimate of the proportion of people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 and remain asymptomatic throughout infection was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 17-25) with a prediction interval of 3%-67% in 79 studies that addressed this review question. There was some evidence that biases in the selection of participants influence the estimate. In seven studies of defined populations screened for SARS-CoV-2 and then followed, 31% (95% CI 26%-37%, prediction interval 24%-38%) remained asymptomatic. The proportion of people that is presymptomatic could not be summarised, owing to heterogeneity. The secondary attack rate was lower in contacts of people with asymptomatic infection than those with symptomatic infection (relative risk 0.35, 95% CI 0.10-1.27). Modelling studies fit to data found a higher proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 infections resulting from transmission from presymptomatic individuals than from asymptomatic individuals. Limitations of the review include that most included studies were not designed to estimate the proportion of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections and were at risk of selection biases; we did not consider the possible impact of false negative RT-PCR results, which would underestimate the proportion of asymptomatic infections; and the database does not include all sources. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this living systematic review suggest that most people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 will not remain asymptomatic throughout the course of the infection. The contribution of presymptomatic and asymptomatic infections to overall SARS-CoV-2 transmission means that combination prevention measures, with enhanced hand hygiene, masks, testing tracing, and isolation strategies and social distancing, will continue to be needed.

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Abstract: Importance Crowded indoor environments, such as households, are high-risk settings for the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Objectives To examine evidence for household transmission of SARS-CoV-2, disaggregated by several covariates, and to compare it with other coronaviruses. Data Source PubMed, searched through October 19, 2020. Search terms includedSARS-CoV-2orCOVID-19withsecondary attack rate,household,close contacts,contact transmission,contact attack rate, orfamily transmission. Study Selection All articles with original data for estimating household secondary attack rate were included. Case reports focusing on individual households and studies of close contacts that did not report secondary attack rates for household members were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis Meta-analyses were done using a restricted maximum-likelihood estimator model to yield a point estimate and 95% CI for secondary attack rate for each subgroup analyzed, with a random effect for each study. To make comparisons across exposure types, study was treated as a random effect, and exposure type was a fixed moderator. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed. Main Outcomes and Measures Secondary attack rate for SARS-CoV-2, disaggregated by covariates (ie, household or family contact, index case symptom status, adult or child contacts, contact sex, relationship to index case, adult or child index cases, index case sex, number of contacts in household) and for other coronaviruses. Results A total of 54 relevant studies with 77 758 participants reporting household secondary transmission were identified. Estimated household secondary attack rate was 16.6% (95% CI, 14.0%-19.3%), higher than secondary attack rates for SARS-CoV (7.5%; 95% CI, 4.8%-10.7%) and MERS-CoV (4.7%; 95% CI, 0.9%-10.7%). Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%), to adult contacts (28.3%; 95% CI, 20.2%-37.1%) than to child contacts (16.8%; 95% CI, 12.3%-21.7%), to spouses (37.8%; 95% CI, 25.8%-50.5%) than to other family contacts (17.8%; 95% CI, 11.7%-24.8%), and in households with 1 contact (41.5%; 95% CI, 31.7%-51.7%) than in households with 3 or more contacts (22.8%; 95% CI, 13.6%-33.5%). Conclusions and Relevance The findings of this study suggest that given that individuals with suspected or confirmed infections are being referred to isolate at home, households will continue to be a significant venue for transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

From SARS and MERS to COVID-19: a brief summary and comparison of severe acute respiratory infections caused by three highly pathogenic human coronaviruses.

Abstract: Within two decades, there have emerged three highly pathogenic and deadly human coronaviruses, namely SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The economic burden and health threats caused by these coronaviruses are extremely dreadful and getting more serious as the increasing number of global infections and attributed deaths of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Unfortunately, specific medical countermeasures for these hCoVs remain absent. Moreover, the fast spread of misinformation about the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic uniquely places the virus alongside an annoying infodemic and causes unnecessary worldwide panic. SARS-CoV-2 shares many similarities with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, certainly, obvious differences exist as well. Lessons learnt from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, timely updated information of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, and summarized specific knowledge of these hCoVs are extremely invaluable for effectively and efficiently contain the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. By gaining a deeper understanding of hCoVs and the illnesses caused by them, we can bridge knowledge gaps, provide cultural weapons for fighting and controling the spread of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, and prepare effective and robust defense lines against hCoVs that may emerge or reemerge in the future. To this end, the state-of-the-art knowledge and comparing the biological features of these lethal hCoVs and the clinical characteristics of illnesses caused by them are systematically summarized in the review.