Abstract
We find that epidemic resurgence, defined as an upswing in the effective reproduction number (R) of the contagion from subcritical to supercritical values, is fundamentally difficult to detect in real time. Inherent latencies in pathogen transmission, coupled with smaller and intrinsically noisier case incidence across periods of subcritical spread, mean that resurgence cannot be reliably detected without significant delays of the order of the generation time of the disease, even when case reporting is perfect. In contrast, epidemic suppression (where R falls from supercritical to subcritical values) may be ascertained 5–10 times faster due to the naturally larger incidence at which control actions are generally applied. We prove that these innate limits on detecting resurgence only worsen when spatial or demographic heterogeneities are incorporated. Consequently, we argue that resurgence is more effectively handled proactively, potentially at the expense of false alarms. Timely responses to recrudescent infections or emerging variants of concern are more likely to be possible when policy is informed by a greater quality and diversity of surveillance data than by further optimisation of the statistical models used to process routine outbreak data.
Author summary The timely detection of epidemic resurgence (i.e., upcoming waves of infected cases) is crucial for informing public health policy, providing valuable signals for implementing interventions and identifying emerging pathogenic variants or important population-level behavioural shifts. Increases in epidemic transmissibility, parametrised by the time-varying reproduction number, R, commonly signify resurgence. While many studies have improved computational methods for inferring R from case data, to enhance real-time resurgence detection, few have examined what limits, if any, fundamentally restrict our ability to perform this inference. We apply optimal Bayesian detection algorithms and sensitivity tests and discover that resurgent (upward) R-changes are intrinsically more difficult to detect than equivalent downward changes indicating control. This asymmetry derives from the often lower and stochastically noisier case numbers that associate with resurgence, and induces detection delays on the order of the disease generation time. We prove these delays only worsen if spatial or demographic differences in transmissibility are modelled. As these fundamental limits exist even if case data are perfect, we conclude that designing integrated surveillance systems that fuse potentially timelier data sources (e.g., wastewater) may be more important than improving R-estimation methodology and deduce that there may be merit (subject to false alarm costs) in conservative resurgence response initiatives.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
KVP and CAD acknowledge funding from the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis (reference MR/R015600/1), jointly funded by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO), under the MRC/FCDO Concordat agreement and is also part of the EDCTP2 programme supported by the European Union. CAD thanks the UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) for funding (grant HPRU200907). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
N/A
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.