MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2213480545 · doi:10.1007/s13238-015-0231-8

Can Ebola virus become endemic in the human population?

2015· article· en· W2213480545 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein & Cell · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Outbreaks Research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsEbola virusSierra leoneOutbreakEbolavirusCase fatality rateEbola Hemorrhagic FeverFiloviridaePopulationTransmission (telecommunications)VirologyDiseaseMedicineBiologyVirusEnvironmental healthViral diseaseEthnologyPathologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2014–15 Ebola virus (EBOV) outbreak, originally reported during March 2014 in the Western African nation of Guinea, has shown itself to be resistant to traditional containment methods, with over 28,000 infections and 11,000 deaths over 18 months. Recently, news that a Scottish nurse had relapsed to EBOV disease with neurological symptoms at 10 months after recovery have astonished experts. The prolonged nature of the outbreak has led to questions whether EBOV can become endemic in the human population, an undesirable outcome due to the large amount of resources required to keep this virus under control. In this commentary, we discuss aspects EBOV disease with those caused by pathogens considered endemic in humans, as well as factors which may contribute to sustained EBOV transmission in humans. Ebola virus (EBOV), of the genus Ebolavirus and family Filoviridae, was historically regarded as a re-emerging pathogen, in which natural infections of humans are sporadic and unpredictable, often with several years passing by before the emergence of a new case. EBOV infection is associated with high case fatality rates (CFR) in humans (up to 90%), but past disease outbreaks due to EBOV lasted only several months on average, and fatal cases numbered at most in the hundreds (CDC.gov, 2014). As such, EBOV was considered a minor public health threat in Africa at the time. Perceptions of this virus changed when the largest documented EBOV outbreak, first reported during March 2014, ran rampant through the Western African nations of Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia, causing over 28,000 infections and 11,000 deaths over the past 18 months (WHO.int, 2015a). Continued efforts by the local and international communities are having an observable effect in mostly confining EBOV transmission within the countries mentioned above, and the numbers of new weekly cases have been declining from a peak of over 700 in mid-September 2014 (WHO.int, 2015a). Since April 5th, 2015, the numbers of new cases reported weekly have fluctuated between 9 and 35, and this number has been less than 10 since July 26th, 2015 (Fig. 1). However, getting to zero cases overall has proven to be a challenge and of the three most heavily affected countries, only Liberia has been declared EBOV-free, on September 3rd, 2015 (WHO.int, 2015b). During this prolonged outbreak, some experts have questioned whether EBOV can become endemic within a human population (WHO Ebola Response Team, 2014) (NPR.org, 2014), a situation characterized by low levels of sustained virus transmission between humans, and the potential for a new outbreak to occur if this transmission is not successfully halted. Figure 1 Numbers of new EBOV infections per week in Guinea, Sierra Leone and Liberia. Numbers are reported by the World Health Organization, and the dates are from March 15th to September 27th, 2015 Can EBOV become endemic in the human population? If we contemplate other pathogens that are considered endemic within humans, such as Hepatitis B virus (HBV), Varicella Zoster virus (VZV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), patients exposed to these viruses very rarely display major, specific symptoms early in the course of infection. In many cases the patients themselves do not know that they have been infected, and thus unknowingly transmit the virus to other susceptible hosts. In contrast, EBOV infection is typified by general, flu-like symptoms that rapidly progresses to severe hemorrhagic fever and multiple-organ failure within between 7–14 days, accompanied by very visible signs of disease such as rash (Feldmann et al., 2013). Patients are not known to be contagious during the incubation period (WHO.int, 2014), and the virus is primarily transmitted during advanced and terminal EBOV disease (Dowell et al., 1999). While asymptomatic infections with EBOV in humans have been documented on previous occasions (Baxter, 2000) (Becquart et al., 2010), there is no evidence thus far that asymptomatic humans can shed live virus. These factors prevent “silent” EBOV spread within an unsuspecting population. On the other hand, live virus has been found in the semen of convalescent survivors at least 3 months after infection (Rowe et al., 1999) (Rodriguez et al., 1999). A Liberian female, who likely contracted EBOV after unprotected sex with a man that had recently recovered from infection (CDC.gov, 2015), showed that some EBOV survivors may still be contagious after recovery from the disease. During the 2014–15 outbreak, live EBOV has also been isolated from the ocular fluids of a physician who had survived infection, 9 weeks after the clearance of viremia (Varkey et al., 2015). The relapse of a Scottish nurse that had survived EBOV infection 10 months previously (Promedmail.org, 2015) suggests that supplementary diagnostics tests, in addition to viremia quantification by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), may be needed to confirm the elimination of EBOV in convalescent survivors. Heightened awareness regarding the possibility of recovering survivors harbouring live EBOV is necessary, but due to the lower amounts of virus present within convalescent patients compared to those with advanced EBOV disease, it is unlikely that survivors play a major role with regards to EBOV propagation in humans. From an evolutionary standpoint, EBOV does not have a significantly higher mutation rate (1.23 × 10−3 substitutions per site per year (Tong et al., 2015)) compared to other RNA viruses (Jenkins et al., 2002), and to date there are only five known member species of Ebolavirus. Published studies have also shown that EBOV is not significantly evolving, despite undergoing extensive passaging in humans during the 2014–15 outbreaks (Hoenen et al., 2015) (Tong et al., 2015). Therefore, the evidence at hand does not support the virus becoming endemic amongst the human population, and current response measures, which have steadily lowered the number of new weekly infections over time, should be sufficient in eventually ending the prolonged EBOV outbreak in Western Africa. However, the existence of possible “super-spreaders” of disease (Wong et al., 2015), and the relapse of Scottish nurse to EBOV disease is a reminder that close surveillance for any potential reoccurrence of EBOV disease in the human population is needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it