Keisuke Ejima, Marco Ajelli, Ananya Singh, Hoong Kai Chua, Luis Ponce, Yuqian Wang, Yong Dam Jeong, Shingo Iwami, Kenji Shibuya, Kiyosu Taniguchi, Norio Ohmagari, Po Ying Chia, Sean W X Ong, Kelvin Bryan Tan, David Chien Lye, Barnaby E Young
{"title":"Age- and vaccination status-dependent isolation guidelines based on simulation of SARS-CoV-2 Delta cases in Singapore.","authors":"Keisuke Ejima, Marco Ajelli, Ananya Singh, Hoong Kai Chua, Luis Ponce, Yuqian Wang, Yong Dam Jeong, Shingo Iwami, Kenji Shibuya, Kiyosu Taniguchi, Norio Ohmagari, Po Ying Chia, Sean W X Ong, Kelvin Bryan Tan, David Chien Lye, Barnaby E Young","doi":"10.1038/s43856-025-00797-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the absence of effective pharmaceutical interventions early in an infectious disease outbreak, non-pharmaceutical measures, especially isolating infected individuals, critically limit its impact. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has sparked debates on optimal isolation guidelines. This study proposes a variable isolation period approach (variable-period approach), tailoring isolation durations for distinct population groups with varied viral load dynamics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To compare our variable-period approach with a fixed-period strategy, we developed a simulation model generating synthetic longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 viral load data. The data was generated from the viral dynamics model parameterized using SARS-CoV-2 Delta patient data in Singapore, accounting for age and vaccination status.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings show that age and vaccination status significantly influence viral dynamics, with younger age and vaccination linked to shorter viral shedding durations. The variable-period framework suggests longer isolation lengths for older and unvaccinated individuals. By setting the leaking risk (risk of remaining infectious at the end of isolation) below 10%, the optimal fixed-period isolation is 14 days, with an average excess isolation burden of 7.4 unnecessary days. In contrast, the variable-period guideline reduces the excess isolation burden to 6.0 days, with the optimal isolation periods ranging from 9 to 16 days, depending on the population group. We confirmed similar results when we used the effective reproduction number as an alternative to the leaking risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this case, study using the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, our analysis demonstrates that unnecessary time spent in isolation can be reduced by adopting variable-period guidelines based on patient characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":72646,"journal":{"name":"Communications medicine","volume":"5 1","pages":"76"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11906760/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communications medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-025-00797-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: In the absence of effective pharmaceutical interventions early in an infectious disease outbreak, non-pharmaceutical measures, especially isolating infected individuals, critically limit its impact. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has sparked debates on optimal isolation guidelines. This study proposes a variable isolation period approach (variable-period approach), tailoring isolation durations for distinct population groups with varied viral load dynamics.
Methods: To compare our variable-period approach with a fixed-period strategy, we developed a simulation model generating synthetic longitudinal SARS-CoV-2 viral load data. The data was generated from the viral dynamics model parameterized using SARS-CoV-2 Delta patient data in Singapore, accounting for age and vaccination status.
Results: Findings show that age and vaccination status significantly influence viral dynamics, with younger age and vaccination linked to shorter viral shedding durations. The variable-period framework suggests longer isolation lengths for older and unvaccinated individuals. By setting the leaking risk (risk of remaining infectious at the end of isolation) below 10%, the optimal fixed-period isolation is 14 days, with an average excess isolation burden of 7.4 unnecessary days. In contrast, the variable-period guideline reduces the excess isolation burden to 6.0 days, with the optimal isolation periods ranging from 9 to 16 days, depending on the population group. We confirmed similar results when we used the effective reproduction number as an alternative to the leaking risk.
Conclusions: In this case, study using the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant, our analysis demonstrates that unnecessary time spent in isolation can be reduced by adopting variable-period guidelines based on patient characteristics.