Variant in Cuba July–October 2022, Vol 24, No 3–4
INTRODUCTION In November 2021, omicron—a new SARS-CoV-2 variant—was identified in South Africa and almost immediately, WHO declared it a ‘variant of concern’. In view of its rapid worldwide spread and its imminent introduction in Cuba, genomic surveillance was strengthened.
OBJECTIVES Describe cases during the first eight epidemiological weeks (epiweeks) of SARS-CoV-2 infection attributable to omicron variant in Cuba by clinical and epidemiological variables.
METHODS From epiweek 48, 2021 to epiweek 4, 2022, 288 nasopharyngeal swabs were processed for sequencing of a 1836 bp fragment of the S gene. Variants were identified according to GISAID database and confirmed by phylogenetic analysis. Variants’ association with clinical and epidemiological outcomes was assessed.
RESULTS The first cases of omicron variant were imported, mostly from African countries and the United States. During the period studied, omicron was detected in 83.0% (239/288) of cases processed, while the delta variant was found in 17.0% (49/288). Most persons infected with omicron were symptomatic (63.2%; 151/239) and fully vaccinated (65.3%; 156/239); severe cases and deaths occurred mainly among patients aged ≥65 years (92.9%; 13/14), and 12 of these deaths occurred in fully vaccinated persons (92.3%; 12/13). Omicron spread rapidly throughout the country (from 10% of cases in epiweek 48, 2021, to 100% by epiweek 4, 2022), displacing the formerly predominant delta variant.
CONCLUSIONS Omicron’s rapid expansion in Cuba was associated with increased incidence but not with a higher case fatality rate. The relatively milder disease in those infected with this variant could be influenced by the high vaccination coverage, along with the natural immunity acquired as a consequence of previous virus infection.
KEYWORDS Pandemics, epidemiology, epidemiological monitoring, COVID-19 testing, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19 vaccines, Cuba
After December 17, 2014, when the US and Cuban governments announced their intent to restore relations, the two countries participated in various exchange activities in an effort to encourage cooperation in public health, health research and biomedical sciences. The conference entitled Exploring Opportunities for Arbovirus Research Collaboration, hosted at Havana’s Hotel Nacional, was part of these efforts and was the first major US–Cuban scientific conference in over 50 years. Its purpose was to share information about current arbovirus research and recent findings, and to explore opportunities for future joint research. The nearly 100 participants included leading arbovirus and vector transmission experts from ten US academic institutions, NIH, CDC, FDA and the US Department of Defense. Cuban participants included researchers, clinicians and students from Cuba’s Ministry of Public Health, Pedro Kourí Tropical Medicine Institute, Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Center for State Control of Medicines and Medical Devices and other health research and regulatory organizations. Topics highlighted at the three-day meeting included surveillance, research and epidemiology; pathogenesis, immunology and virology; treatment and diagnosis; vector biology and control; vaccine development and clinical trials; and regulatory matters. Concurrent breakout discussions focused on novel vector control, nonvector transmission, community engagement, Zika in pregnancy, and workforce development. Following the conference, the Pedro Kourí Tropical Medicine Institute and the US National Institute of Allergic and Infectious Diseases have continued to explore ways to encourage and support scientists in Cuba and the USA who wish to pursue arbovirus research cooperation to advance scientific discovery to improve disease prevention and control.
KEYWORDS Arboviruses, flavivirus, Zika virus, chikungunya virus, dengue virus, research, disease vectors, Cuba, USA
Translated from the Spanish and reprinted with permission from the Revista Cubana de Higiene y Epidemiología, Vol 48 No 18, Jan–Apr 2010.
Original available at: http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/hie/vol_48_1_10/hie02110.htm
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE Determine point prevalence of febrile syndromes and compare with prevalence reported by habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system in Havana City.
METHODS In October 2007, a descriptive, cross-sectional study was carried out in a representative sample, calculating prevalences of febrile syndromes and undifferentiated febrile syndromes. Chi-square analysis was used for rate comparisons.
RESULTS Point prevalences of febrile syndromes and undifferentiated febrile syndromes were 352.6 and 144.2 times greater, respectively, than those reported by the habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system; these differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS Point prevalence of febrile syndromes was far greater than prevalence reported by the habitual clinical and seroepidemiologic dengue surveillance system, an indication of underreporting.
KEYWORDS fever, undifferentiated fever, dengue, dengue fever, dengue/epidemiology, seroepidemiologic studies, Cuba
Over a decade ago, the Commission on Health Research for Development published a pioneering study on the gross imbalance between the world’s research funding priorities and global disease burden distribution. This study reported that less than 10% of world resources for health research were being applied to the health problems of developing countries, where 90% of the avoidable burden of ill-health was to be found. What became known as the “10/90 gap” has captured the attention and imagination of those committed to global health equity everywhere, searching for ways to incline the research agenda towards “diseases of the poor”.
