Combination antiviral drug therapy improves the survival rates of patients chronically infected with hepatitis B virus by controlling viral replication and enhancing immune responses. Some of these drugs have side effects that make them unsuitable for long-term administration. To address the trade-off between the positive and negative effects of the combination therapy, we investigated an optimal control problem for a delay differential equation model of immune responses to hepatitis virus B infection. Our optimal control problem investigates the interplay between virological and immunomodulatory effects of therapy, the control of viremia and the administration of the minimal dosage over a short period of time. Our numerical results show that the high drug levels that induce immune modulation rather than suppression of virological factors are essential for the clearance of hepatitis B virus.

Control strategies that employ real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for the diagnosis and surveillance of COVID-19 epidemic are inefficient in fighting the epidemic due to high cost, delays in obtaining results, and the need of specialized personnel and equipment for laboratory processing. Cheaper and faster alternatives, such as antigen and paper-strip tests, have been proposed. They return results rapidly, but have lower sensitivity thresholds for detecting virus. To quantify the effects of the tradeoffs between sensitivity, cost, testing frequency, and delay in test return on the overall course of an outbreak, we built a multi-scale immuno-epidemiological model that connects the virus profile of infected individuals with transmission and testing at the population level. We investigated various randomized testing strategies and found that, for fixed testing capacity, lower sensitivity tests with shorter return delays slightly flatten the daily incidence curve and delay the time to the peak daily incidence. However, compared with RT-PCR testing, they do not always reduce the cumulative case count at half a year into the outbreak. When testing frequency is increased to account for the lower cost of less sensitive tests, we observe a large reduction in cumulative case counts, from $55.4\%$ to as low as $1.22\%$ half a year into the outbreak. The improvement is preserved even when the testing budget is reduced by one half or one third. Our results predict that surveillance testing that employs low-sensitivity tests at high frequency is an effective tool for epidemic control.

Vaccination is considered the best strategy for limiting and eliminating the COVID-19 pandemic. The success of this strategy relies on the rate of vaccine deployment and acceptance across the globe. As these efforts are being conducted, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is continuously mutating, which leads to the emergence of variants with increased transmissibility, virulence, and resistance to vaccines. One important question is whether surveillance testing is still needed in order to limit SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a vaccinated population. In this study, we developed a multi-scale mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a vaccinated population and used it to predict the role of testing in an outbreak with variants of increased transmissibility. We found that, for low transmissibility variants, testing was most effective when vaccination levels were low to moderate and its impact was diminished when vaccination levels were high. For high transmissibility variants, widespread vaccination was necessary in order for testing to have a significant impact on preventing outbreaks, with the impact of testing having maximum effects when focused on the non-vaccinated population.

Control strategies that employ real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests for the diagnosis and surveillance of COVID-19 epidemic are inefficient in fighting the epidemic due to high cost, delays in obtaining results, and the need of specialized personnel and equipment for laboratory processing. Cheaper and faster alternatives, such as antigen and paper-strip tests, have been proposed. They return results rapidly, but have lower sensitivity thresholds for detecting virus. To quantify the effects of the tradeoffs between sensitivity, cost, testing frequency, and delay in test return on the overall course of an outbreak, we built a multi-scale immuno-epidemiological model that connects the virus profile of infected individuals with transmission and testing at the population level. We investigated various randomized testing strategies and found that, for fixed testing capacity, lower sensitivity tests with shorter return delays slightly flatten the daily incidence curve and delay the time to the peak daily incidence. However, compared with RT-PCR testing, they do not always reduce the cumulative case count at half a year into the outbreak. When testing frequency is increased to account for the lower cost of less sensitive tests, we observe a large reduction in cumulative case counts, from 57% to as low as 1.5% half a year into the outbreak and to 3.2% three years into the outbreak. The improvement is preserved even when the testing budget is reduced by one half or one third. Our results predict that surveillance testing that employs low-sensitivity tests at high frequency is an effective tool for epidemic control.