Hannah Clapham

Dr. Hannah Clapham


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2021 in Journal of Experimental Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NBNina Le Bert
Nina Le Bert
HCHannah Clapham
Hannah Clapham
ATAnthony T. Tan
Anthony T. Tan
WCWan Ni Chia
Wan Ni Chia
CTChristine Y.L. Tham
Christine Y.L. Tham
CTClarence C. Tam
Clarence C. Tam
The efficacy of virus-specific T cells in clearing pathogens involves a fine balance between antiviral and inflammatory features. SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells in individuals who clear SARS-CoV-2 without symptoms could reveal nonpathological yet protective characteristics. We longitudinally studied SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells in a cohort of asymptomatic (n = 85) and symptomatic (n = 75) COVID-19 patients after seroconversion. We quantified T cells reactive to structural proteins (M, NP, and Spike) using ELISpot and cytokine secretion in whole blood. Frequencies of SARS-CoV-2–specific T cells were similar between asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals, but the former showed an increased IFN-γ and IL-2 production. This was associated with a proportional secretion of IL-10 and proinflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, and IL-1β) only in asymptomatic infection, while a disproportionate secretion of inflammatory cytokines was triggered by SARS-CoV-2–specific T cell activation in symptomatic individuals. Thus, asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2–infected individuals are not characterized by weak antiviral immunity; on the contrary, they mount a highly functional virus-specific cellular immune response.

11 November 2019 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MJMichael A. Johansson
Michael A. Johansson
KAKaryn M. Apfeldorf
Karyn M. Apfeldorf
SDScott Dobson
Scott Dobson
JDJason Devita
Jason Devita
ABAnna L. Buczak
Anna L. Buczak
JCJean-Paul Chretien
Jean-Paul Chretien
A wide range of research has promised new tools for forecasting infectious disease dynamics, but little of that research is currently being applied in practice, because tools do not address key public health needs, do not produce probabilistic forecasts, have not been evaluated on external data, or do not provide sufficient forecast skill to be useful. We developed an open collaborative forecasting challenge to assess probabilistic forecasts for seasonal epidemics of dengue, a major global public health problem. Sixteen teams used a variety of methods and data to generate forecasts for 3 epidemiological targets (peak incidence, the week of the peak, and total incidence) over 8 dengue seasons in Iquitos, Peru and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Forecast skill was highly variable across teams and targets. While numerous forecasts showed high skill for midseason situational awareness, early season skill was low, and skill was generally lowest for high incidence seasons, those for which forecasts would be most valuable. A comparison of modeling approaches revealed that average forecast skill was lower for models including biologically meaningful data and mechanisms and that both multimodel and multiteam ensemble forecasts consistently outperformed individual model forecasts. Leveraging these insights, data, and the forecasting framework will be critical to improve forecast skill and the application of forecasts in real time for epidemic preparedness and response. Moreover, key components of this project—integration with public health needs, a common forecasting framework, shared and standardized data, and open participation—can help advance infectious disease forecasting beyond dengue.

26 May 2020 in eLife
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
QMQuan Tran Minh
Quan Tran Minh
TTTran Thi Nhu Thao
Tran Thi Nhu Thao
NDNguyen Manh Duy
Nguyen Manh Duy
TNTran Minh Nhat
Tran Minh Nhat
HCHannah Clapham
Hannah Clapham
Japanese encephalitis (JE) is a mosquito-borne disease, known for its high mortality and disability rate among symptomatic cases. Many effective vaccines are available for JE, and the use of a recently developed and inexpensive vaccine, SA 14-14-2, has been increasing over the recent years particularly with Gavi support. Estimates of the local burden and the past impact of vaccination are therefore increasingly needed, but difficult due to the limitations of JE surveillance. In this study, we implemented a mathematical modelling method (catalytic model) combined with age-stratifed case data from our systematic review which can overcome some of these limitations. We estimate in 2015 JEV infections caused 100,308 JE cases (95% CI: 61,720–157,522) and 25,125 deaths (95% CI: 14,550–46,031) globally, and that between 2000 and 2015 307,774 JE cases (95% CI: 167,442–509,583) were averted due to vaccination globally. Our results highlight areas that could have the greatest benefit from starting vaccination or from scaling up existing programs and will be of use to support local and international policymakers in making vaccine allocation decisions.

3 May 2018 in PLOS Pathogens
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
QBQuirine A. ten Bosch
Quirine A. ten Bosch
HCHannah Clapham
Hannah Clapham
LLLouis Lambrechts
Louis Lambrechts
VDVeasna Duong
Veasna Duong
PBPhilippe Buchy
Philippe Buchy
TPT. Alex Perkins
T. Alex Perkins
Despite estimates that, each year, as many as 300 million dengue virus (DENV) infections result in either no perceptible symptoms (asymptomatic) or symptoms that are sufficiently mild to go undetected by surveillance systems (inapparent), it has been assumed that these infections contribute little to onward transmission. However, recent blood-feeding experiments with Aedes aegypti mosquitoes showed that people with asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic DENV infections are capable of infecting mosquitoes. To place those findings into context, we used models of within-host viral dynamics and human demographic projections to (1) quantify the net infectiousness of individuals across the spectrum of DENV infection severity and (2) estimate the fraction of transmission attributable to people with different severities of disease. Our results indicate that net infectiousness of people with asymptomatic infections is 80% (median) that of people with apparent or inapparent symptomatic infections (95% credible interval (CI): 0–146%). Due to their numerical prominence in the infectious reservoir, clinically inapparent infections in total could account for 84% (CI: 82–86%) of DENV transmission. Of infections that ultimately result in any level of symptoms, we estimate that 24% (95% CI: 0–79%) of onward transmission results from mosquitoes biting individuals during the pre-symptomatic phase of their infection. Only 1% (95% CI: 0.8–1.1%) of DENV transmission is attributable to people with clinically detected infections after they have developed symptoms. These findings emphasize the need to (1) reorient current practices for outbreak response to adoption of pre-emptive strategies that account for contributions of undetected infections and (2) apply methodologies that account for undetected infections in surveillance programs, when assessing intervention impact, and when modeling mosquito-borne virus transmission. Most dengue virus infections result in either no perceptible symptoms or symptoms that are so mild that they go undetected by surveillance systems. It is unclear how much these infections contribute to the overall transmission and burden of dengue. At an individual level, we show that people with asymptomatic infections are approximately 80% as infectious to mosquitoes as their symptomatic counterparts. At a population level, we show that approximately 88% of infections result from people who display no apparent symptoms at the time of transmission. These results suggest that individuals undetected by surveillance systems may be the primary reservoir of dengue virus transmission and that policy for dengue control and prevention must be revised accordingly.

13 July 2021 in eLife
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JTJaspreet Toor
Jaspreet Toor
SESusy Echeverria-Londono
Susy Echeverria-Londono
XLXiang Li
Xiang Li
KAKaja Abbas
Kaja Abbas
ECEmily D Carter
Emily D Carter
KGKaty Am Gaythorpe
Katy Am Gaythorpe
Background: Vaccination is one of the most effective public health interventions. We investigate the impact of vaccination activities forHaemophilus influenzaetype b, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, Japanese encephalitis, measles,Neisseria meningitidisserogroup A, rotavirus, rubella,Streptococcus pneumoniae, and yellow fever over the years 2000–2030 across 112 countries.Methods: Twenty-one mathematical models estimated disease burden using standardised demographic and immunisation data. Impact was attributed to the year of vaccination through vaccine-activity-stratified impact ratios.Results: We estimate 97 (95%CrI[80, 120]) million deaths would be averted due to vaccination activities over 2000–2030, with 50 (95%CrI[41, 62]) million deaths averted by activities between 2000 and 2019. For children under-5 born between 2000 and 2030, we estimate 52 (95%CrI[41, 69]) million more deaths would occur over their lifetimes without vaccination against these diseases.Conclusions: This study represents the largest assessment of vaccine impact before COVID-19-related disruptions and provides motivation for sustaining and improving global vaccination coverage in the future.Funding: VIMC is jointly funded by Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) (BMGF grant number: OPP1157270 / INV-009125). Funding from Gavi is channelled via VIMC to the Consortium’s modelling groups (VIMC-funded institutions represented in this paper: Imperial College London, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Public Health England, Johns Hopkins University, The Pennsylvania State University, Center for Disease Analysis Foundation, Kaiser Permanente Washington, University of Cambridge, University of Notre Dame, Harvard University, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Emory University, National University of Singapore). Funding from BMGF was used for salaries of the Consortium secretariat (authors represented here: TBH, MJ, XL, SE-L, JT, KW, NMF, KAMG); and channelled via VIMC for travel and subsistence costs of all Consortium members (all authors). We also acknowledge funding from the UK Medical Research Council and Department for International Development, which supported aspects of VIMC's work (MRC grant number: MR/R015600/1).JHH acknowledges funding from National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship; Richard and Peggy Notebaert Premier Fellowship from the University of Notre Dame. BAL acknowledges funding from NIH/NIGMS (grant number R01 GM124280) and NIH/NIAID (grant number R01 AI112970). The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) receives funding support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.This paper was compiled by all coauthors, including two coauthors from Gavi. Other funders had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. All authors had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

1 September 2020 in Emerging Infectious Diseases
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
HCHannah Clapham
Hannah Clapham
JHJames Hay
James Hay
IRIsobel Routledge
Isobel Routledge
STSaki Takahashi
Saki Takahashi
MCMarc Choisy
Marc Choisy
CTClarence C. Tam
Clarence C. Tam
Serologic studies are crucial for clarifying dynamics of the coronavirus disease pandemic. Past work on serologic studies (e.g., during influenza pandemics) has made relevant contributions, but specific conditions of the current situation require adaptation. Although detection of antibodies to measure exposure, immunity, or both seems straightforward conceptually, numerous challenges exist in terms of sample collection, what the presence of antibodies actually means, and appropriate analysis and interpretation to account for test accuracy and sampling biases. Successful deployment of serologic studies depends on type and performance of serologic tests, population studied, use of adequate study designs, and appropriate analysis and interpretation of data. We highlight key questions that serologic studies can help answer at different times, review strengths and limitations of different assay types and study designs, and discuss methods for rapid sharing and analysis of serologic data to determine global transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.