Vector-borne epidemics driven by human mobility

Editors' Suggestion
Open Access

Vector-borne epidemics driven by human mobility

David Soriano-Paños, Juddy Heliana Arias-Castro, Adriana Reyna-Lara, Hector J. Martínez, Sandro Meloni, and Jesús Gómez-Gardeñes

Phys. Rev. Research 2, 013312 – Published 13 March 2020

Abstract

Vector-borne epidemics are progressively becoming a global burden, especially those related to flaviviruses, and the effects of different factors such as climate change or the increase of human mobility can sensibly increase the population at risk worldwide. Such outbreaks are the result of the combination of different factors including crossed contagions between humans and vectors, their demographic distribution and human mobility among others. The current availability of information about all those ingredients demands their incorporation into current mathematical models for vector-borne disease transmission. Here, relying on a Markovian formulation of the metapopulation dynamics, we propose a framework that explicitly includes human-vector interactions, mobility, and demography. The analysis of the framework allows us not only to derive an expression of the epidemic threshold capturing the conditions for the onset of the epidemics but also to highlight some unseen features of vector-borne epidemics, such as abrupt changes in the unfolding patterns of the disease for small variations of the degree of mobility. Finally, driven by these insights, we obtain a prevalence indicator to rank populations according to their risk of being affected by a vector-borne disease. We illustrate the utility of this indicator by reproducing the spatial distribution Dengue cases reported in the city of Santiago de Cali (Colombia) from 2015 to 2016.

Received 16 December 2019
Accepted 24 February 2020

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.013312

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Network phase transitions Spreading

Networks

Authors & Affiliations

David Soriano-Paños ^1,2, Juddy Heliana Arias-Castro³, Adriana Reyna-Lara ^1,2, Hector J. Martínez ³, Sandro Meloni ⁴, and Jesús Gómez-Gardeñes ^1,2,5

¹GOTHAM laboratory, Institute for Biocomputation and Physics of Complex Systems (BIFI), University of Zaragoza, 50018 Zaragoza, Spain
²Departamento de Física de la Materia Condensada, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
³Department of Mathematics, Universidad del Valle, 760032 Santiago de Cali, Colombia
⁴IFISC, Instituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos (CSIC-UIB), 07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain
⁵Center for Computational Social Science (CCSS), Kobe University, 657-8501 Kobe, Japan

Article Text

Click to Expand

References

Click to Expand

Issue

Vol. 2, Iss. 1 — March - May 2020

Subject Areas

Reuse & Permissions

Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Images

Figure 1
Ross-Macdonald model and metapopulation approach. (a) Schematic representation of the processes described in the RM model. Relevant parameters are (i) the probability that an infected vector transmits the disease to a healthy individual, $λ^{M H}$ ; (ii) the probability that an infected human transmits the disease to a healthy vector, $λ^{H M}$ ; (iii) the feeding rate of vectors $β$ ; (iv) the probability that an infected human recovers, $μ^{H}$ ; and (v) the mortality rate of vectors, $μ^{H}$ . In (b) and (c), we show schematically the two basic stages of each Monte Carlo step in our metapopulation approach. As shown in (b), individuals are associated with one of the 3 nodes of a network. Namely, starting from the subpopulation in the top (1) and following clockwise we have populations composed of 8, 10, and 4 humans with 5, 3, and 9 vectors respectively. Once the movement has been done [see (c)] individuals mix and, consequently, the instant populations of humans at each node change to 6, 8, and 8. The RM dynamics then takes place among the individuals and vectors coexisting at that moment in the same subpopulation. Finally, after these interactions, the individuals go back to their respective associated nodes and the configuration is again the one of (b). Note that we consider that vectors do not move from their corresponding node.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 2
Validation of the Markovian formalism. (Top) Epidemic size $ρ_{H}$ as a function of the contagion rate between vectors and humans $λ^{H M} = λ^{M H} = λ$ and the human mobility $p$ (color code). Dots correspond to results of averaging 50 stochastic realizations whereas solid lines represent the theoretical predictions obtained by iterating the equations of the formalism. Model parameters have been fixed to $(β, μ^{H}, μ^{M}) = (1, 0.3, 0.3)$ . The values assumed for the restriction of the mobility of infected agents are (a) $α = 0$ and (b) $α = 1$ . (Bottom) Temporal evolution of the fraction of infected agents (color code) inside each patch obtained by iterating Eqs. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) (c) and by tracking the individual state of each agent while performing a single Monte Carlo simulation (d). Infectivity is fixed to $λ = 0.3$ whereas mobility parameter $p$ is set to $p = 0.3$ . The rest of parameters are the same as in (a).
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 3
Epidemic threshold and evolution of the leading eigenvector of matrix $M \tilde{M}$ . (a)–(c) in the top show three epidemic diagrams $ρ^{H} (p, λ)$ in a synthetic metapopulation of $N = 50$ patches. Each panel corresponds to a different rescaling value ( $α$ ) for the mobility of infected humans, namely: (a) $α = 0$ , (b) $α = 0.5$ and (c) $α = 1$ . In addition, we have set $λ^{H M} = λ^{M H} = λ$ while the rest of the RM parameters are: $μ^{H} = 0.3, μ^{M} = 0.3$ , and $β = 1.0$ . The color code show the incidence $ρ^{H}$ as obtained from agent-based simulations while the solid curve represent the prediction for the epidemic threshold $λ_{c}$ , calculated from Eq. (17). (d)–(f) show the evolution, as a function of $p$ , of the $N$ components of the eigenvector of matrix $M \tilde{M}$ corresponding to maximum eigenvalue $Λ_{\max} (M \tilde{M})$ .
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 4
Real Dengue incidence vs estimated epidemic risk in the city of Cali (Colombia). (Top) Normalized epidemic risk ( $E R / E R_{\max}$ ) vs normalized Dengue incidence ( $I / I_{\max}$ ) for each of the 22 districts of Cali. Color encodes the Epidemic Risk, from the lower (yellow) to the highest (blue).The correlation between the two variables yields a coefficient of determination of $R^{2} = 0.81$ . (Bottom) Spatial distributions of the normalized Dengue incidence in the city of Cali (left) and the normalized epidemic risk (right) according to Eq. (20). The parameters concerning agent mobility have been set to $(p, α) = (0.36, 0.75)$ .
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 5
Temporal evolution, according to the Markovian equations, of the number of infected agents by a VBD which spreads over a BA network. The black line denotes the original curve where no policy has been implemented whereas dashed lines correspond to the case in which patches 26 (red) and 18 (blue) are immunized. The epidemic parameters have been set to $(α, λ^{H M}, λ^{M H}, μ^{H}, μ^{M}) = (0.5, 0.25, 0.25, 0.3, 0.3)$ . The values for human mobility are (a) $p = 0.1$ ( $p < p_{c}$ ) and (b) $p = 0.5$ ( $p > p_{c}$ ).
Reuse & Permissions

Physical Review Research