Abstract
Background Dengue virus (DENV) infection is a global health concern of increasing magnitude. To target intervention strategies, accurate estimates of the force of infection (FOI) are necessary. Catalytic models have been widely used to estimate DENV FOI and rely on a binary classification of serostatus as seropositive or seronegative, according to pre-defined antibody thresholds. Previous work has demonstrated the use of thresholds can cause serostatus misclassification and biased estimates. In contrast, mixture models do not rely on thresholds and use the full distribution of antibody titres. To date, there has been limited application of mixture models to estimate DENV FOI.
Methods We compare the application of mixture models and time-constant and time-varying catalytic models to simulated data and to serological data collected in Vietnam from 2004 to 2009 (N ≥ 2178) and Indonesia in 2014 (N = 3194).
Results The simulation study showed greater estimate bias from the time-constant and time-varying catalytic models (FOI bias = 1.3% (0.05%, 4.6%) and 2.3% (0.06%, 7.8%), seroprevalence bias = 3.1% (0.25%, 9.4%) and 2.9% (0.26%, 8.7%), respectively) than from the mixture model (FOI bias = 0.41% (95% CI 0.02%, 2.7%), seroprevalence bias = 0.11% (0.01%, 3.6%)). When applied to real data from Vietnam, the mixture model frequently produced higher FOI and seroprevalence estimates than the catalytic models.
Conclusions Our results suggest mixture models represent valid, potentially less biased, alternatives to catalytic models, which could be particularly useful when estimating FOI and seroprevalence in low transmission settings, where serostatus misclassification tends to be higher.
Author summary Characterising the transmission intensity of dengue virus in different geographic areas over time is essential to understand who is at greatest risk of infection, and to inform the implementation of interventions, such as vector control and vaccination. It is therefore important to understand how methodological differences and model choice may influence estimates of transmission intensity. We compared the application of catalytic and mixture models to calculate the force of infection (FOI) of dengue virus from antibody titre data. We observed greater bias in FOI estimates obtained from catalytic models than from mixture models in areas where the transmission intensity was low. In high transmission intensity areas, catalytic and mixture models produced consistent estimates. Our results indicate that in low transmission settings, when antibody titre data are available, mixture models could be preferential to estimate dengue virus FOI.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported by 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. I.D. acknowledges research funding from a Sir Henry Dale Fellowship funded by the Royal Society and Wellcome Trust [grant 213494/Z/18/Z]. V.C. acknowledges funding from the Wellcome Trust [grant 222375/Z/21/Z].
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:
Ethical approval for the Indonesian survey was obtained from the Health Research Ethics Committee of Faculty of Medicine of University of Indonesia. The scientific committee of the Pasteur Institute Ho Chi Minh City and the Ministry of Health of Viet Nam provided ethical approval for the Vietnamese study. Ethical approval for the secondary analysis of the data was granted by the Imperial College Research Ethics Committee (Approval Reference 21IC7066).
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
Data Availability
The serological data from Vietnam and Indonesia used in this work is proprietary and cannot be publicly shared. Qualified researchers may request access to the data provider. Further details on Sanofi's data sharing criteria and process for requesting access can be found at: https://www.clinicalstudydatarequest.com. The simulated data can be recreated using code that we have made available in the GitHub repository.
