
Citation: Gerald Pawlish, Kyle Spivack, Adam Gabriel, Zuyi Huang, Noelle Comolli. Chemotherapeutic loading via tailoring of drug-carrier interactions in poly (sialic acid) micelles[J]. AIMS Bioengineering, 2018, 5(2): 106-132. doi: 10.3934/bioeng.2018.2.106
[1] | Miled El Hajji . Periodic solutions for chikungunya virus dynamics in a seasonal environment with a general incidence rate. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24888-24913. doi: 10.3934/math.20231269 |
[2] | Miled El Hajji, Mohammed Faraj S. Aloufi, Mohammed H. Alharbi . Influence of seasonality on Zika virus transmission. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(7): 19361-19384. doi: 10.3934/math.2024943 |
[3] | Salah Boulaaras, Ziad Ur Rehman, Farah Aini Abdullah, Rashid Jan, Mohamed Abdalla, Asif Jan . Coronavirus dynamics, infections and preventive interventions using fractional-calculus analysis. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8680-8701. doi: 10.3934/math.2023436 |
[4] | Xin Jiang . Threshold dynamics of a general delayed HIV model with double transmission modes and latent viral infection. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2456-2478. doi: 10.3934/math.2022138 |
[5] | Ahmed Alshehri, Miled El Hajji . Mathematical study for Zika virus transmission with general incidence rate. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 7117-7142. doi: 10.3934/math.2022397 |
[6] | Mohammed H. Alharbi . HIV dynamics in a periodic environment with general transmission rates. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 31393-31413. doi: 10.3934/math.20241512 |
[7] | I. A. Moneim, G. A. Mosa . A realistic model for the periodic dynamics of the hand-foot-and-mouth disease. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2585-2601. doi: 10.3934/math.2022145 |
[8] | Kamel Guedri, Rahat Zarin, Mowffaq Oreijah . Evaluating the impact of vaccination and progression delays on tuberculosis dynamics with disability outcomes: A case study in Saudi Arabia. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 7970-8001. doi: 10.3934/math.2025366 |
[9] | Rahat Zarin, Amir Khan, Aurangzeb, Ali Akgül, Esra Karatas Akgül, Usa Wannasingha Humphries . Fractional modeling of COVID-19 pandemic model with real data from Pakistan under the ABC operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 15939-15964. doi: 10.3934/math.2022872 |
[10] | Huihui Liu, Yaping Wang, Linfei Nie . Dynamical analysis and optimal control of an multi-age-structured vector-borne disease model with multiple transmission pathways. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 36405-36443. doi: 10.3934/math.20241727 |
In the relentless battle against infectious diseases, the development and refinement of mathematical models plays a crucial role in understanding the dynamics of epidemics and devising effective control strategies. The complex interplay of various factors, such as population heterogeneity, imperfect interventions, and periodic fluctuations, requires a comprehensive approach to model formulation. The dynamics of infectious diseases is influenced by the interaction between the pathogen and the host population, as well as the effectiveness of the control measures implemented [1]. In real-world scenarios, the implementation of quarantine, isolation, and vaccination strategies is often imperfect due to compliance issues, limited resources, and the emergence of new variants [2]. Understanding the impact of imperfect interventions on epidemic dynamics is crucial to designing robust public health strategies [3]. Imperfect quarantine and isolation can have an impact on the spread of infectious diseases. The use of quarantine and isolation as control measures can lead to the elimination of the disease if its level of effectiveness is sufficiently moderate [4]. However, the effectiveness of these measures may be influenced by other factors. For example, the level of transmission by isolated individuals in hospitals plays an important role in determining the impact of quarantine and isolation [5]. Furthermore, the combined use of quarantine and isolation with a vaccination strategy can further improve disease control and elimination [6]. It is important to note that the impact of quarantine and isolation can vary depending on the specific characteristics of the disease and the population studied.
The periodic nature of many infectious diseases, influenced by seasonal variations, environmental factors, or human behavior, adds an additional layer of complexity to the modeling framework [7,8,9,10]. Periodicity introduces threshold dynamics that govern the stability and persistence of epidemic cycles [11,12]. Investigating the interaction between threshold dynamics and imperfect interventions is essential to understand disease transmission and control. In [13], the authors investigate the dynamical behavior of an SIRVS (susceptible - infected - recovered - vaccinated) epidemic model with time-dependent coefficients and give some new threshold conditions which determine whether or not the disease will go to extinction. In their work, [14] introduces a nonautonomous SIQR (susceptible - infected - quarantine - recovered) model that incorporates time-varying parameters and examines the criteria for eliminating or sustaining infection within this framework. The study defines critical thresholds for the autonomous, asymptotically autonomous and periodic scenarios, along with the general nonautonomous model featuring various forms of disease transmission.
Threshold dynamics in a periodic mathematical model with imperfect interventions have been studied in the context of various infectious diseases. The basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) is a key parameter that determines the persistence or extinction of the disease. If $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ is less than one, the disease will gradually disappear, while if $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ is greater than one, the disease will become endemic and persist [15,16,17,18]. The research by Safi et al. [19] examines a nonautonomous SEIRS (susceptible - exposed - infected - recovered) model that incorporates quarantine and isolation measures for a contagious disease. It shows that the disease-free state is globally asymptotically stable if the reproduction ratio is less than one, while the disease persists if the ratio exceeds one. The findings suggest that the introduction of periodicity into the autonomous quarantine/isolation model does not alter the threshold behavior of the system in terms of the elimination or persistence of the disease within the population. In [17], a mathematical model was established that includes a seasonal transmission parameter and a double dose vaccination to examine how measles spreads over time. The basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ was defined, and its utility as a threshold parameter for global dynamics and the existence of periodic solutions was demonstrated.
In this work, a nonautonomous mathematical model is developed to understand the spread of diseases over time, considering the complexities of periodic epidemic dynamics coupled with imperfections in quarantine, isolation, and vaccination strategies. Our model is based on previous work, specifically those presented in [5,6,17,20,21]. Through a comprehensive exploration of threshold dynamics, the global dynamics of disease transmission is governed by the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $). This number serves as a threshold value to determine the extinction or persistence of the disease, as well as the existence of periodic solutions. The following section introduces a comprehensive periodic model encompassing quarantine, isolation, and vaccination, revealing the presence of a disease-free equilibrium. Sections 3 to 6 are dedicated to derive the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) for our model. These sections elucidate that, depending on its value, the disease-free equilibrium will either be globally stable or the disease will persist within the population. In Section 7, we integrate our model with the measles data from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Through this collaboration, we estimate various unknown parameters and determine the basic reproduction number. Furthermore, we illustrate the sensitivity of the parameters to the average reproduction number ($ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $). Section 8 presents numerical simulations for both scenarios, reinforcing our theoretical findings. Subsequently, we performed numerical evaluations to examine the influence of seasonal contact rate, imperfect quarantine, isolation, imperfect vaccination, and other significant parameters on the transmission dynamics of measles. Section 9 contains our final discussion, summarizing the key findings and insights from the study.
In this study, we consider the division of the total human population, indicated by $ N(t) $, taking into account quarantine for exposed individuals, isolation for those with clinical symptoms of the disease, and vaccination. This partition was designed to analyze the dynamics of disease transmission and includes eight distinct compartments: susceptible ($ S(t) $), individuals who have received the first dose of the vaccine ($ V_{1}(t) $), those who have received the second dose of the vaccine ($ V_{2}(t) $), exposed individuals who are infected but not yet show clinical symptoms of the disease ($ E(t) $), infected individuals who are symptomatic ($ I(t) $), quarantined individuals who are infected but do not display clinical symptoms of the disease ($ Q(t) $), hospitalized individuals ($ H(t) $) and recovered individuals ($ R(t) $).
Quarantine in general involves the isolation of susceptible individuals suspected of exposure to a disease, but in this work, quarantine refers to the removal of newly-infected individuals from contact with the general population [19,22]. This is because quarantine of susceptible individuals is unlikely to significantly impact disease dynamics for large total population sizes, as it only involves newly-infected individuals detected through contact tracing or random testing. Those who remain susceptible at the end of the quarantine period are not included in the $ Q $ class [19,22].
Displayed in Figure 1 is the transition of individuals among compartments, while the model equations are expressed as follows:
$ dS(t)dt=Λ−λ(t)S(t)−(θ+μ)S(t),dV1(t)dt=θS(t)−(1−α1)λ(t)V1(t)−(σ1+μ)V1(t),dV2(t)dt=σ1V1(t)−(1−α2)λ(t)V2(t)−(σ2+μ)V2(t),dE(t)dt=λ(t)(S(t)+(1−α1)V1(t)+(1−α2)V2(t))−(v1+v2+μ)E(t),dI(t)dt=v1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),dQ(t)dt=v2E(t)−γ2Q(t)−κ2Q(t)−μQ(t),dH(t)dt=κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t),dR(t)dt=γ1I(t)+γ2Q(t)+γ3H(t)+σ2V2(t)−μR(t), $ | (2.1) |
where
$ \lambda(t) = \beta(t) \frac{\tau_e E(t)+I(t) + \tau (\varepsilon_1 Q(t) + \varepsilon_2 H(t))}{N(t) - (1-\varepsilon_1) Q(t) - (1-\varepsilon_2) H(t)}, $ |
denotes the time-dependent infection rate and $ N(t) - (1-\varepsilon_1) Q(t) - (1-\varepsilon_2) H(t) = S(t) + V_1(t)+ V_2(t)+ I(t) + \varepsilon_1 Q(t) +\varepsilon_2 H(t) + R(t) $ is the total actively-mixing population.
In the system (2.1), we assume that the effective contact rate $ \beta(t) $ is a continuous, positive $ \omega $-periodic function. The human recruitment rate and the natural death rate are denoted by $ \Lambda $ and $ \mu $, respectively. Susceptible individuals who have received the first dose of the vaccine transition to the vaccinated compartment $ V_1 $ at a rate of $ \theta $. Because the first dose of the disease vaccine is not very effective, people who have had a single dose can contract the disease by coming into contact with infected people at a rate of $ (1-\alpha_1)\lambda(t) $. On the other hand, most people fall into the category of people who have received two doses at a rate of $ \sigma_1 $, as explained in [17,20,23]. Unlike [17,20,23], and in agreement with [24], we assume that the second dose of the vaccine is ineffective in preventing the disease. Individuals with two doses can contract the disease by contact with infected individuals at a rate of $ (1-\alpha_2)\lambda(t) $, while the majority of the population transitions to the recovery class at a rate of $ \sigma_2 $. It is important to note that $ \alpha_1 = 0 $ or $ \alpha_2 = 0 $ indicates a vaccine that offers no protection at all, while $ \alpha_1 = 1 $ or $ \alpha_2 = 1 $ represents a perfect vaccine, with $ 0 < \alpha_1, \alpha_2 < 1 $. Based on the insights of [19], it is important to note that, in the context of this study, the quarantine process usually involves isolating susceptible individuals suspected of exposure to the disease. Specifically, the quarantine class ($ Q $) comprises newly infected (asymptomatic) individuals, with detection usually carried out through contact tracing or random tests. In this study, quarantine specifically refers to the separation of newly infected individuals from the general population. Consequently, individuals who remain susceptible at the end of the quarantine period are not considered to be part of the $ Q $ class. The parameters $ \varepsilon_1 $ and $ \varepsilon_2 $, both of which range from $ 0 $ to $ 1 $, act as modifiers to measure the effectiveness of quarantine and isolation. Perfection is achieved when $ \varepsilon_1 = 0 = \varepsilon_2 $, ensuring that individuals in these categories avoid contact with the general public, thus preventing the transmission of infection. Leaky quarantine is represented by $ 0 < \varepsilon_1, \varepsilon_2 < 1 $. On the contrary, when $ \varepsilon_1 = 1 = \varepsilon_2 $, people in quarantine and isolation are as likely as any other member of the population to interact with the general public. We provide a complete description of the model parameters, which is presented in Table 1.
Parameters | Description |
$ \Lambda $ | Recruitment rate of susceptible humans |
$ \mu $ | Natural death rate |
$ \beta(t) $ | Periodic transmission rate of symptomatic infection |
$ \tau_e $ | Relative transmissibility of exposed to infected |
$ \tau $ | Relative transmissibility of quarantined and hospitalized to infected |
$ \alpha_1 $, $ \alpha_2 $ | Modification parameters for vaccine efficacy |
$ \varepsilon_1 $, $ \varepsilon_2 $ | Modification parameters for the efficacy of quarantine and isolation |
$ \theta $ | Coverage rate of vaccine for entire population |
$ \sigma_1 $ | Rate of vaccination with second dose |
$ \sigma_2 $ | Progression rate from $ V_2 $ to $ R $ |
$ \nu_1 $ | Progression rate from exposed to infectious class |
$ \nu_2 $ | Quarantine rate for exposed individuals |
$ \kappa_1 $, $ \kappa_2 $ | Hospitalization rate for infectious and quarantined individuals |
$ \gamma_1 $, $ \gamma_2 $, $ \gamma_2 $ | Recovery rate for infectious, quarantined, and hospitalized individuals |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | Disease-induced death rate for infectious and hospitalized individuals |
It is evident that any solution to the system (2.1) that begins with nonnegative initial values will also be nonnegative. Therefore, we will first examine the bounds of the solution of this system.
Define
$ X={(S,V1,V2,E,I,Q,H,R)∈R8+:S+V1+V2+E+I+Q+H+R≤N},X(0)=(S(0),V1(0),V2(0),E(0),I(0),Q(0),H(0),R(0))∈R8+, $ | (2.2) |
and let $ \Psi $ be defined as the set
$ \Psi := \left\lbrace (S, V_1, V_2, E, I, Q, H, R) \in X : S+V_1+V_2+ E+ I+ Q+ H+ R = N \leq \frac{\Lambda}{\mu} \right\rbrace. $ |
Under this definition, we introduce the following lemma.
Lemma 1. The solution to System (2.1) is both unique and bounded, given the initial value $ X(0) \in X $ defined in (2.2). Moreover, the set $ \Psi $ is compact, positively invariant, and attracts all positive orbits in $ X $.
Proof. Consider $ X_1 = (S, V_1, V_2, E, I, Q, H, N) $. Building upon references [19,25,26], we introduce the functions $ g_1, g_2, g_3 \in (\mathbb{R}^8_+, \mathbb{R}_+) $ defined as follows:
$ g1(X1)={0,if X1=(0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0),I+τeE+τ(ε1Q+ε2H)N−(1−ε1)Q−(1−ε2)HS,otherwise.g2(X1)={0,if X1=(0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0),I+τeE+τ(ε1Q+ε2H)N−(1−ε1)Q−(1−ε2)HV1,otherwise.g3(X1)={0,if X1=(0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0),I+τeE+τ(ε1Q+ε2H)N−(1−ε1)Q−(1−ε2)HV2,otherwise.. $ | (2.3) |
Through a change of variable where $ N = S + V_1 + V_2 + E + I + Q + H + R $ and from (2.3), system (2.1) can be reformulated as follows:
$ dS(t)dt=Λ−β(t)g1(X1)−(θ+μ)S(t),dV1(t)dt=θS(t)−(1−α1)β(t)g2(X1)−(σ1+μ)V1(t),dV2(t)dt=σ1V1(t)−(1−α2)β(t)g3(X1)−(σ2+μ)V2(t),dE(t)dt=β(t)g1(X1)+(1−α1)β(t)g2(X1)+(1−α2)β(t)g3(X1)−(v1+v2+μ)E(t),dI(t)dt=v1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),dQ(t)dt=v2E(t)−γ2Q(t)−κ2Q(t)−μQ(t),dH(t)dt=κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t),dN(t)dt=Λ−δ1I(t)−δ2H(t)−μN(t) $ | (2.4) |
It is evident that $ g_1(X_1) $, $ g_2(X_1) $, and $ g_3(X_1) $ are continuous and globally Lipschitz in $ \mathbb{R}^8_+ $. Applying Theorem 5.2.1 from [27] allows us to establish that, for any $ (S(0), V_1(0), V_2(0), E(0), I(0), Q(0), H(0), N(0)) \in \mathbb{R}^8_+ $, the system (2.4) possesses a unique local nonnegative solution $ (S, V_1, V_2, E, I, Q, H, N) $.
From the total human population $ N(t) $ with a positive initial condition $ X(0) \in \mathbb{R}^{8}_{+} $, we have the equation
$ dN(t)dt=Λ−δ1I(t)−δ2H(t)−μN(t)≤Λ−μN(t), $ |
indicating that the associated linear differential equation,
$ dN(t)dt=Λ−μN(t), $ |
has a unique equilibrium $ N^* = \frac{\Lambda}{\mu} $ in $ \mathbb{R}_{+} $. Hence, as $ t \to \infty $, the difference $ |N(t)-N^*| $ tends to zero and $ N^* $ becomes globally attractive in $ \mathbb{R}_{+} $. Additionally, employing the comparison theorem [28] confirms that $ N(t) $ remains bounded. Consequently, the solution of the system (2.1) exists globally over the interval $ [0, \infty) $.
The equilibrium without the presence of the disease, known as the disease-free equilibrium in (2.1), can be determined by solving the system below:
$ 0=Λ−(θ+μ)S∗,0=θS∗−(σ1+μ)V∗1,0=σ1V∗1−(σ2+μ)V∗2,0=σ2V∗2−μR∗. $ | (2.5) |
Clearly, the solution to (2.5) is the unique disease-free equilibrium of system (2.1), as given by:
$ D0=(S∗,V∗1,V∗2,0,0,0,0,R∗)=(S∗,θσ1+μS∗,σ1θ(σ1+μ)(σ2+μ)S∗,0,0,0,0,σ1σ2θμ(σ1+μ)(σ2+μ)S∗), $ |
where $ S^{*} = \dfrac{\Lambda}{\theta+\mu} $.
For periodic epidemic compartmental models, Bacaër and Guernaou [29] provided a definition of $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ as the spectral radius of an integral operator acting on the space of continuous periodic functions. Later, Wang and Zhao [11] characterized $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ for such models and proved that it serves as a threshold parameter regarding the local stability properties of the disease-free periodic solution. Rebelo et al. [12] studied persistence in epidemiological models in a seasonal environment. Bacaër and Ait Dads [30] gave a more biological explanation of $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ for compartmental epidemic models with periodic parameters. Therefore, the global dynamics of the system is characterized by the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) of periodic compartmental models.
Within this section, we employ the methodology introduced in [11,12,31] to determine the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) for the system (2.1). Define the vector $ \mathcal{H} = (E, I, Q, H, S, V_1, V_2, R)^T $, where $ E $, $ I $, $ Q $, and $ H $ correspond to the infected classes, and $ S $, $ V_1 $, $ V_2 $, and $ R $ denote the uninfected classes with
$ F(t,H(t))=[λ(t)(S(t)+(1−α1)V1(t)+(1−α2)V2(t))0000000],V−(t,H(t))=[(ν1+ν2+μ)E(t)γ1I(t)+κ1I(t)+(δ1+μ)I(t)κ2Q(t)+γ2Q(t)+μQ(t)γ3H(t)+(δ2+μ)H(t)λ(t)S(t)+(θ+μ)S(t)((1−α1)λ(t)+σ1+μ)V1(t)((1−α2)λ(t)+σ2+μ)V2(t)μR(t)],V+(t,H(t))=[0ν1E(t)ν2E(t)κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)ΛθS(t)σ1V1(t)γ1I(t)+γ2Q(t)+γ3H(t)+σ2V2(t)]. $ |
The nonautonomous equation presented below,
$ H′(t)=F(t,H(t))−V(t,H(t))=F(t,H(t))+V+(t,H(t))−V−(t,H(t)), $ | (3.1) |
is equivalent to System (2.1). The disease-free equilibrium for (3.1) is $ \mathcal{H}^{*} = \left(0, 0, 0, 0, S^*, V_1^*, V_2^*, R^*\right) $. To start the analysis, we verify that the model (2.1) satisfies the conditions (A1)–(A7) outlined in [11]. Subsequently, we determine the matrix functions $ 4\times 4 $, $ F(t) = \big(\frac{\partial \mathcal{F}_i(t, \mathcal{H}^{*})}{\partial \mathcal{H}_j}\big)_{1 \leqslant i, j \leqslant 4} $, and $ V(t) = \big(\frac{\partial \mathcal{V}_i(t, \mathcal{H}^{*})}{\partial \mathcal{H}_j}\big)_{1 \leqslant i, j \leqslant 4} $ in the following manner:
$ F(t)=[τeβ(t)L∗β(t)L∗τϵ1β(t)L∗τϵ2β(t)L∗000000000000], $ |
and
$ V(t)=[ν1+ν2+μ000−ν1γ1+κ1+δ1+μ00−ν20γ2+κ2+μ00−κ1−κ2γ3+δ2+μ], $ |
where $ L^* = \frac{S^*+ (1-\alpha_1) V_1^*+ (1-\alpha_2) V_2^*}{N^*} $. Conditions (A1) through (A6) provided in [11] are easily verified, and the disease-free subspace $ \mathcal{H}^{*} $ is linearly asymptotically stable at $ \mathcal{H}_s = (0, 0, 0, 0, S, V_1, V_2, R) \in \mathbb{R}_{+}^{8}. $
Consider $ \mathbf{G}(x, y) $ as a matrix solution to the initial value problem presented below, where $ x\geqslant y $:
$ dG(x,y)dx=−V(x)G(x,y),G(y,y)=I,∀x⩾y, $ | (3.2) |
where $ I $ is the $ 4 \times 4 $ identity matrix. Thus, $ \mathbf{G}(x, y) $ can easily be calculated as
$ G(x,y)=[e−(ν1+ν2+μ)(x−y)000−ν1e−(ν1+ν2+μ)(x−y)−e−(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)(x−y)(ν1+ν2−γ1−κ1−δ1)e−(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)(x−y)00−ν2e−(ν1+ν2+μ)(x−y)−e−(γ2+κ2+μ)(x−y)(ν1+ν2−γ2+κ2)0e−(γ2+κ2+μ)(x−y)0G31(x,y)−κ1G32(x,y)−κ2G33(x,y)e−(γ3+δ2+μ)(x−y)], $ |
where
$ G31(x,y)=((γ1+κ1+δ1−γ3−δ2)κ2ν2+(ν1+ν2−γ2−κ2)κ1ν1)(ν1+ν2−γ1−κ1−δ1)(ν1+ν2−γ2−κ2)(ν1+ν2−γ3−δ2)e−(ν1+ν2+μ)(x−y)+((ν1+ν2−γ1−κ1−δ1)κ2ν2+(γ2+κ2−γ3−δ2)κ1ν1)(ν1+ν2−γ3−δ2)(γ1+κ1+δ1−γ3−δ2)(γ2+κ2−γ3−δ2)e−(γ3+δ2+μ)(x−y)−κ1ν1(ν1+ν2−γ1−κ1−δ1)(γ1+κ1+δ1−γ3−δ2)e−(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)(x−y)−κ2ν2(ν1+ν2−γ2−κ2)(γ2+κ2−γ3−δ2)e−(γ2+κ2+μ)(x−y),G32(x,y)=e−(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)(x−y)−e−(γ3+δ2+μ)(x−y)γ1+κ1+δ1−γ3−δ2,G33(x,y)=e−(γ2+κ2+μ)(x−y)−e−(γ3+δ2+μ)(x−y)γ2+κ2−γ3−δ2. $ |
Therefore, the requirement (A7) described in [11] is met, as the matrix $ \mathcal{\varPsi}_{-{V}}(x) $ of (3.2) for $ x \geqslant 0 $ is equivalent to $ \mathbf{G}(x, 0) $. Let $ \mathcal{B}_\omega $ represent the ordered Banach space of $ \omega $-periodic functions from $ \mathbb{R} $ to $ \mathbb{R}^{4} $, equipped with the usual maximum norm $ \|\cdot\|_{\infty} $. Additionally, define $ \mathcal{B}^{+}_\omega := \{\phi \in \mathcal{B}_\omega : \phi(t) \geqslant 0, \ \forall t \in \mathbb{R}\} $ as the positive cone.
Define the linear next-generation operator (NGO) $ \mathcal{K} $, responsible for subsequent infections, which maps $ \mathcal{B}_\omega $ to $ \mathcal{B}_\omega $ as given below:
$ (Kϕ)(x)=∫∞0G(x,x−r)F(x−r)ϕ(x−r)dr,∀ ϕ∈Bω, x∈R. $ |
The basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ for the model (2.1) can be computed as the spectral radius of $ \mathcal{K} $, denoted as $ \mathcal{R}_0:= \rho(\mathcal{K}). $
In order to calculate an approximate numerical value for $ \mathcal{R}_0 $, as described in [11], we define $ {\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(t, \lambda) $ as the fundamental matrix of the linear $ \omega $-periodic equation
$ x′=[F(t)λ−V(t)]x,∀t∈R, $ | (3.3) |
where $ \lambda $ is a parameter in the interval $ (0, \infty) $. Additionally, without losing generality, we make the assumption that $ {\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(0, \lambda) $ is equivalent to the identity matrix $ I $. It is crucial to keep in mind that $ {\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(\omega, \lambda) $ represents the monodromy matrix of the linear $ \omega $-periodic system (3.3).
Theorem 2 ([11], Theorem 2.1]). The following assertions are valid.
(i) If $ \rho({\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(\omega, \lambda)) = 1 $ has a positive solution $ \lambda_0 $, then $ \lambda_0 $ is an eigenvalue of operator $ \mathcal{K} $ and, hence, $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 0 $.
(ii) If $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 0 $, then $ \lambda_0 = \mathcal{R}_0 $ is a unique solution of $ \rho({\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(\omega, \lambda)) = 1 $.
(iii) $ \mathcal{R}_0 = 0 $ if and only if $ \rho({\varPsi}_{\frac{F}{\lambda}- {V}}(\omega, \lambda)) < 1 $ for all $ \lambda > 0 $.
More details about the numerical method used to compute the basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ (the spectral radius of the NGO $ \mathcal{K} $) can be found in [32,33].
In this section, our objective is to demonstrate the local and global stability of $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ and establish that the disease undergoes extinction when $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 $.
Consider $ {\varPsi}_{{F}- {V}}(t) $ as a fundamental matrix of the linear $ \omega $-periodic system $ \mathbf{x'} = [F(t)-V(t)] \mathbf{x} $. Additionally, and without loss of generality, assume that $ \varPsi_{F-V}(0) = I $, representing the identity matrix. It is important to note that $ \varPsi_{F-V}(\omega) $ is the monodromy matrix of the linear $ \omega $-periodic system mentioned above. Now, we recall the following Theorem 2.2 from [11] regarding the local stability of the disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{D}_0 $.
Theorem 3 ([11], Theorem 2.2). The following statements are valid:
(i) $ \rho(\varPsi_{F-V}(\omega)) < 1 (>1)\iff \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 (>1) $;
(ii) $ \rho(\varPsi_{F-V}(\omega)) = 1 \iff \mathcal{R}_0 = 1 $.
Building on the preceding discussion, the subsequent theorem delves into the local stability of the disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ of (2.1).
Theorem 4. The disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ is locally asymptotically stable if $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 $ and unstable if $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $.
Proof. Consider the Jacobian matrix of (2.1) calculated at $ \mathcal{D}_0 $, represented as
$ J(t)=[F(t)−V(t)0A1(t)A2], $ |
where
$ \mathcal{A}_1(t)=\left[τβ(t)S∗N∗β(t)S∗N∗τβ(t)S∗N∗τβ(t)S∗N∗τβ(t)(1−α1)V∗1N∗β(t)(1−α1)V∗1N∗τβ(t)(1−α1)V∗1N∗τβ(t)(1−α1)V∗1N∗τeβ(t)(1−α2)V∗2N∗β(t)(1−α2)V∗2N∗τβ(t)(1−α2)V∗2N∗τβ(t)(1−α2)V∗2N∗0γ1γ2γ3\right], $ |
and
$ \mathcal{A}_2=\left[−θ−μ000θ−σ1−μ000σ1−σ2−μ000σ2−μ\right]. $ |
Referring to [34], the local asymptotic stability of $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ is contingent on two conditions: $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{\mathcal{A}_2}(\omega)) < 1 $ and $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V}(\omega)) < 1 $. Here, $ \mathcal{A}_2 $ is a constant matrix with negative eigenvalues $ -(\theta+\mu) < 0 $, $ -(\sigma_1+\mu) < 0 $, $ -(\sigma_2+\mu) < 0 $, and $ -\mu < 0 $, so $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{\mathcal{A}_2}) < 1 $. The stability of $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ is ultimately determined by $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V}(\omega)) $. Therefore, $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ is locally asymptotically stable if $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V}(\omega)) < 1 $ and unstable if $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V}(\omega)) > 1 $. This completes the proof using Theorem 3.
Theorem 5. If $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 $, then the disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ of (2.1) is globally asymptotically stable.
Proof. Extending our analysis to local stability in Theorem 4, if $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 $, the disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{H}^* $ is proven to be locally asymptotically stable. However, to establish global attractiveness, it is essential to confirm the fulfillment of requirements (A1) through (A7) as outlined in [12], discussed in Section 3. Furthermore, note that $ \mathcal{H}^* = \left(0, 0, 0, 0, S^*, V_1^*, V_2^*, R^*\right) $ stands as the unique equilibrium of (3.1) within the set of disease-free states $ \mathcal{H}_s $.
The first three equations of (2.1) yield the following system:
$ S′(t)=Λ−λ(t)S(t)−(θ+μ)S(t),V′1(t)=θS(t)−(1−α1)λ(t)V1(t)−(σ1+μ)V1(t),V′2(t)=σ1V1(t)−(1−α2)λ(t)−(σ2+μ)V2(t). $ |
Considering the nonnegativity constraints $ E(t)\geq 0 $, $ I(t)\geq 0 $, $ Q(t)\geq 0 $, and $ H(t)\geq 0 $ established in Lemma 1, we can deduce the following inequalities:
$ S′(t)≤Λ−(θ+μ)S(t),V′1(t)≤θS(t)−(σ1+μ)V1(t),V′2(t)≤σ1V1(t)−(σ2+μ)V2(t). $ |
These inequalities imply:
$ lim supt→∞S(t)≤Λθ+μ=S∗,lim supt→∞V1(t)≤θS∗σ1+μ=θΛ(θ+μ)(σ1+μ)=V∗1,lim supt→∞V2(t)≤σ1V∗1σ2+μ=σ1θΛ(θ+μ)(σ1+μ)(σ2+μ)=V∗2. $ |
Consequently, for any arbitrary positive $ m $, there exists $ t(m) > 0 $ such that $ S(t) \leq S^* + m $, $ V_1(t) \leq V_1^* + m $, and $ V_2(t) \leq V_2^* + m $ for all $ t > t(m) $.
We define $ q (m):= \min\{\frac{S^* + (1-\alpha_1) V_1^* + (1-\alpha_2) V_2^*}{S^*+m + (1-\alpha_1) (V_1^*+m)+ (1-\alpha_2) (V_2^*+m) } \} $. From the system in (2.1), for $ t > t(m) $, the following inequalities can be derived:
$ E′(t)≤β(t)(τeE(t)+I(t)+τ(ε1Q(t)+ε2H(t)))1q(m)−(ν1+ν2+μ)E(t),I′(t)≤ν1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),Q′(t)≤ν2E(t)−κ2Q(t)−γ2Q(t)−μQ(t),H′(t)≤κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t), $ | (4.1) |
and system (4.1) can be reformulated as
$ Y′(t)⩽(F(t)q(m)−V(t))Y(t),∀t⩾t(m), $ | (4.2) |
with $ \mathcal{Y}(t) = \left(E(t), I(t), Q(t), H(t)\right) $. In the limit as $ t $ approaches infinity, $ \mathcal{Y}(t) $ tends to zero, signifying the eventual extinction of the disease. Using ([12], Theorem 2), it follows that $ \mathcal{H}^* $ achieves global asymptotic stability (GAS) due to its GAS behavior within the disease-free subspace $ \mathcal{H}_s $.
In this subsection, we employ the methodology introduced by [12] to showcase the persistence of infective compartments within the system (2.1) when $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $.
Theorem 6. If $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $, the dynamical system described by (2.1) displays persistent behavior regarding the variables $ E $, $ I $, $ Q $, and $ H $.
Proof. Given the persistence of the sum $ E+I+Q $, we can establish the persistence of each infectious variable $ E $, $ I $, and $ Q $, ultimately resulting in the persistence of variable $ H $. Let $ \varepsilon $ be a positive value such that $ \lim\inf_{t\to +\infty} \big(E+I+Q\big)\geqslant m $. Consequently, for large values of $ t $, it can be deduced that $ E \geqslant \frac{m}{3}-I-Q $. Obtaining expressions for $ I' $ and $ Q' $ from the equations in (2.1), we derive the following inequalities:
$ I′(t)≥ν1m3−ν1Q(t)−(ν1+γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)I(t),Q′(t)≥ν2m3−ν2I(t)−(ν2+κ2+γ2+μ)Q(t). $ |
Consequently, we can infer that
$ I(t)≥ν1m3(ν1+γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)=:κi(m),Q(t)≥ν2m3(ν2+κ2+γ2+μ)=:κq(m). $ | (5.1) |
Upon substituting the inequality (5.1) into the equation for $ H' $ in (2.1), we derive the inequality
$ H'(t){}\geq {} \kappa_1 \kappa_i(m) +\kappa_2 \kappa_q(m)-(\gamma_3 +\delta_2 +\mu) H(t), $ |
from which we deduce
$ H(t)≥κ1κi(m)+κ2κq(m)γ3+δ2+μ=:κh(m). $ |
Define $ \eta(m):= \max\{\frac{S^* + (1-\alpha_1) V_1^* + (1-\alpha_2) V_2^* }{S^*-4 m + (1-\alpha_1) (V_1^*-4 m)+ (1-\alpha_2) (V_2^*-4 m) } \}. $ For sufficiently large $ t \geq t(m) $, from the equations of (2.1), we have
$ E′(t)≥β(t)(τeE(t)+I(t)+τ(ε1Q(t)+ε2H(t)))1η(m)−(ν1+ν2+μ)E(t),I′(t)≥ν1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),Q′(t)≥ν2E(t)−κ2Q(t)−γ2Q(t)−μQ(t),H′(t)≥κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t). $ | (5.2) |
The system (5.2) can be expressed as
$ ˜Y′(t)≥(F(t)η(m)−V(t))˜Y(t),∀t⩾t(m), $ | (5.3) |
with $ \tilde{\mathcal{Y}}(t) = \left(\tilde{E}(t), \tilde{I}(t), \tilde{Q}(t), \tilde{H}(t)\right) $. Therefore, the assumptions of ([12], Theorem 4) are satisfied, establishing the persistence of the system (2.1) with respect to $ E $, $ I $, $ Q $, and $ H $.
Define
$ U:=Ψ,U0:={(S,V1,V2,E,I,Q,H,R)∈U:E>0,I>0,Q>0,H>0},$ |
and
$ \partial \mathcal{U}_0:= {} \mathcal{U}\setminus \mathcal{U}_0 = {} \left\lbrace (S, V_1, V_2, E, I, Q, H, R) \in \mathcal{U}: \ E = 0 \ \text{or}\ I = 0\ \text{or}\ Q = 0\ \text{or}\ H = 0 \right\rbrace. $ |
Consider the Poincaré map $ \mathcal{Q} \colon \mathbb{R}^{8}_+ \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{8}_+ $ associated with (2.1). Then, for $ q^0 \in \mathbb{R}^{8}_+ $, the map is given by $ \mathcal{Q}(q^0) = u(\omega, q^0) $, where $ u(t, q^0) $ represents the unique solution of (2.1) with the initial condition $ q^0 \in \mathcal{U} $.
Lemma 7. For $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $, there exists $ \chi > 0 $ such that, for any $ X(0) \in \mathcal{U}_0 $ defined in (2.2) with $ \| X(0) -\mathcal{D}_0 \| \leqslant \chi $, the following holds:
$ \limsup\limits_{m \to \infty} \operatorname{d} \left(\mathcal{Q}^m (X(0)) , \mathcal{D}_0 \right) \geqslant \chi. $ |
Proof. Given $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $, as indicated by Theorem 3, we ascertain $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V}(\omega)) > 1 $. Thus, it is possible to choose a sufficiently small $ \zeta > 0 $ to ensure $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V-\mathcal{P}_{\zeta}}(\omega)) > 1 $. The matrix function $ \mathcal{P}_{\zeta}(t) $, sized $ 4\times4 $, is defined by
$ \mathcal{P}_{\zeta}(t) = {} [τec(t)c(t)τϵ1c(t)τϵ2c(t)000000000000], $ |
where $ c(t) = \beta(t) (\zeta + (1-\alpha_1)\zeta+ (1-\alpha_2) \zeta) $.
In what follows, we claim
$ lim supm→∞d(Qm(X(0)),D0)⩾χ. $ | (6.1) |
Assume, for the sake of contradiction, that equation (6.1) is false. Then, there exists $ X(0)\in \mathcal{U}_0 $ such that
$ lim supm→∞d(Qm(X(0)),D0)<χ. $ | (6.2) |
For simplicity, let us suppose that
$ \operatorname{d} \left(\mathcal{Q}^m(X(0)), \mathcal{D}_0\right) < \chi, \qquad \forall m \geq 0. $ |
Owing to the continuous dependency of the solutions on the initial values, we obtain
$ \| u(s, \mathcal{Q}^m(X(0)) -u(s, \mathcal{D}_0)\| < \zeta, \qquad \forall m \geq 0, \ s\in\left[ 0, \omega\right]. $ |
Let $ t\geqslant0 $ be expressed as $ t = m\omega + s, $ where $ s \in\left[0, \omega\right) $ and $ m = \big[\frac{t }{\omega}\big] $, representing the largest integer less than or equal to $ \frac{t}{\omega} $. Consequently, we can derive
$ ‖u(t,X(0))−u(t,D0)‖=‖u(s,Qm(X(0)))−u(s,D0)‖<ζ, $ |
for all $ t \geqslant 0 $. This inequality implies $ S^* -\zeta \leq S(t) \leq S^* +\zeta $, $ V_1^* -\zeta \leq V_1(t) \leq V_1^* +\zeta $, $ V_2^* -\zeta \leq V_2(t) \leq V_2^* +\zeta $, $ 0\leq E(t) \leq \zeta $, $ 0\leq I(t) \leq \zeta $, $ 0\leq Q(t) \leq \zeta $, and $ 0\leq H(t) \leq \zeta $. Given that $ \| X(0) - \mathcal{D}_0\| \leqslant \chi $, we can derive the following:
$ E′(t)≥β(t)(τeE(t)+I(t)+τ(ε1Q(t)+ε2H(t)))b(ζ)−(ν1+ν2+μ)E(t),I′(t)≥ν1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),Q′(t)≥ν2E(t)−κ2Q(t)−γ2Q(t)−μQ(t),H′(t)≥κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t), $ |
where $ b(\zeta) = \frac{S^*-\zeta+ (1-\alpha_1) (V_1^*-\zeta) +(1-\alpha_2) (V_2^*-\zeta)}{N^*} $. To aid our analysis, we consider the following linear system
$ E′(t)=β(t)(τeE(t)+I(t)+τ(ε1Q(t)+ε2H(t)))b(ζ)−(ν1+ν2+μ)E(t),I′(t)=ν1E(t)−γ1I(t)−κ1I(t)−(δ1+μ)I(t),Q′(t)=ν2E(t)−κ2Q(t)−γ2Q(t)−μQ(t),H′(t)=κ1I(t)+κ2Q(t)−γ3H(t)−(δ2+μ)H(t). $ | (6.3) |
According to [35, Lemma 1], we can establish the existence of a positive, $ \omega $-periodic function $ p(t) $, making $ (E(t), I(t), Q(t), H(t)) = e^{\xi t} p(t) $ a solution to (6.3), where $ \xi = \frac{1}{\omega} \ln \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V+ \mathcal{P}_{\zeta} }(\omega)) > 0 $. Given that $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $ and $ \rho(\mathcal{\varPsi}_{F-V-\mathcal{P}_{\zeta}}(\omega)) > 1 $, it follows that if $ (E(0), I(t), Q(0), H(0)) > (0, 0, 0, 0) $, then $ (E(t), I(t), Q(t), H(t)) \to \infty $ as $ t\to \infty $. Applying the comparison principle [28, Theorem B.1], we deduce $ E(0) > 0 $, $ I(0) > 0 $, $ Q(0) > 0 $, $ H(0) > 0 $, $ \lim_{t\to \infty} E(t) = \infty $, $ \lim_{t\to \infty} I(t) = \infty $, $ \lim_{t\to \infty} Q(t) = \infty $, and $ \lim_{t\to \infty} H(t) = \infty $. However, this contradicts conditions $ E(t) < \zeta $, $ I(t) < \zeta $, $ Q(t) < \zeta $, $ H(t) < \zeta $, and Eq (6.2). Consequently, Eq (6.1) holds true, and this concludes the proof.
Theorem 8. For $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $, there exists at least one positive periodic solution to system (2.1).
Proof. To establish the uniform persistence of $ \mathcal{Q} $ with respect to $ (\mathcal{U}_0, \partial \mathcal{U}_0) $, we can apply [36, Theorem 3.1.1]. This, in turn, implies the uniform persistence of the solution to (2.1) with respect to $ (\mathcal{U}_0, \partial \mathcal{U}_0) $. To begin, let us establish that $ \mathcal{U}_0 $ and $ \partial \mathcal{U}_0 $ are positively invariant with respect to the system (2.1). For $ X(0) \in \mathcal{U}_0 $, solving (2.1) for all $ t > 0 $, we obtain
$ S(t)=e∫t0−(λ(s)+θ+μ)ds[S(0)+Λ∫t0e∫s0(λ(r)+θ+μ)drds]>0, $ | (6.4) |
$ V1(t)=e∫t0−((1−α1)λ(s)+σ1+μ)ds[V1(0)+θ∫t0S(r)e∫r0((1−α1)λ(s)+σ1+μ)dsdr]>0, $ | (6.5) |
$ V2(t)=e∫t0−((1−α2)λ(s)+σ2+μ)ds[V2(0)+σ1∫t0V1(r)e∫r0((1−α2)λ(s)+σ2+μ)dsdr]>0, $ | (6.6) |
$ E(t)=e−(ν1+ν2+μ)t[E(0)+∫t0a(s)λ(s)e(ν1+ν2+μ)sds]>0, $ | (6.7) |
$ I(t)=e−(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)t[I(0)+ν1∫t0E(s)e(γ1+κ1+δ1+μ)sds]>0, $ | (6.8) |
$ Q(t)=e−(γ2+κ2+μ)t[Q(0)+ν2∫t0E(s)e(γ2+κ2+μ)sds]>0, $ | (6.9) |
$ H(t)=e−(γ3+δ2+μ)t[H(0)+∫t0(κ1I(s)+κ2Q(s))e(γ3+δ2+μ)sds]>0, $ | (6.10) |
$ R(t)=e−μt[R(0)+∫t0(γ1I(s)+γ2Q(s)+γ3H(s)+σ2V2(s))eμsds]>0, $ | (6.11) |
where $ a(t) = S(t) + (1-\alpha_1) V_1(t)+ (1-\alpha_2) V_2(t) $. Therefore, $ \mathcal{U}_0 $ is confirmed as a positively invariant set. Furthermore, considering the positive invariance of $ \mathcal{U} $ and the fact that $ \partial \mathcal{U}_0 $ is relatively closed within $ \mathcal{U} $, we conclude that $ \partial \mathcal{U}_0 $ is also positively invariant. Furthermore, according to Lemma 1, it is established that the system (2.1) is point dissipative.
Let $ M_{\partial} $ be defined as the set of $ \left\lbrace X(0) \in \partial \mathcal{U}_0: \mathcal{Q}^m(X(0))\in \partial \mathcal{U}_0, \ \forall m \geqslant 0 \right\rbrace. $ We aim to establish that
$ M_{\partial} = \big\lbrace \big( S(0), V_1(0), V_2(0), E(0), I(0), Q(0), H(0), R(0)\big) : S > 0, V_1 > 0, V_2 > 0, R > 0 \big\rbrace. $ |
It is evident that $ M_{\partial} $ includes the set $ \big\lbrace \big(S(0), V_1(0), V_2(0), E(0), I(0), Q(0), H(0), R(0)\big) : S > 0, V_1 > 0, V_2 > 0, R > 0 \big\rbrace $. To complete the proof, we need to show that $ M_{\partial} \subset \big\lbrace \big(S, V_1, V_2, 0, 0, 0, 0, R \big) : S > 0, V_1 > 0, V_2 > 0, R > 0 \big\rbrace, $ for any initial condition $ X(0) \in \partial \mathcal{U}_0 $, $ E(n \omega) = 0 $ or $ I(n \omega) = 0 $ or $ Q(n \omega) = 0 $ or $ H(n \omega) = 0 $, for all $ n \geqslant 0 $.
Suppose, for the sake of contradiction, that there exists an integer $ n_1 \geqslant 0 $ such that $ E(n_1 \omega) > 0 $ and $ I(n_1 \omega) > 0 $. Substituting $ t = n_1 \omega $ for the initial time $ t = 0 $ into (6.4)–(6.11), we obtain $ S(t) > 0 $, $ V_1(t) > 0 $, $ V_2(t) > 0 $, $ E(t) > 0 $, $ I(t) > 0 $, $ Q(t) > 0 $, $ H(t) > 0 $, and $ R(t) > 0 $. However, this contradicts the positive invariance of $ \partial \mathcal{U}_0 $.
Establishing weak uniform persistence with respect to $ (\mathcal{U}_0, \partial \mathcal{U}_0) $ is ensured by Lemma 7. The presence of a global attractor for $ \mathcal{Q} $ is guaranteed by Lemma 1. This implies that $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ serves as an isolated invariant set within $ \mathcal{U} $ and $ W^s(\mathcal{D}_0) \cap \mathcal{U}_0 = \emptyset $. All solutions within $ M_\partial $ converge to $ \mathcal{D}_0 $, and it is evident that $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ is acyclic in $ M_\partial $. Applying [36, Theorem 1.3.1 and Remark 1.3.1], we can therefore conclude that $ \mathcal{Q} $ exhibits uniform (strong) persistence with respect to $ (\mathcal{U}_0, \partial \mathcal{U}_0) $. Consequently, there exists an $ \varepsilon > 0 $ such that
$ \liminf\limits_{t\rightarrow \infty} \big(E(t), I(t), Q(t), H(t)\big)^T \geqslant \big(\varepsilon, \varepsilon, \varepsilon, \varepsilon \big)^T $ |
for all $ X(0) \in \mathcal{U}_0 $. Invoking [36, Theorem 1.3.6], we determine the existence of a fixed point $ \bar{X}(0) \in \mathcal{U}_0 $ for $ \mathcal{Q} $. Consequently, system (2.1) has at least one periodic solution $ u(t, \bar{X}(0)) $, where $ \bar{X}(0) = (\bar{S}(0), \bar{V}_1(0), \bar{V}_2(0), \bar{E}(0), \bar{I}(0), \bar{Q}(0), \bar{H}(0), \bar{R}(0)) \in \mathcal{U}_0 $. To establish that $ \bar{S}(0) $ is positive, consider the scenario where $ \bar{S}(0) = 0 $. In this case, it is inferred that $ \bar{S}(0) > 0 $ for all $ t > 0 $. However, by exploiting the periodicity of the solution, a contradiction arises with $ \bar{S}(0) = \bar{S}(n \omega) = 0 $.
In order to verify and strengthen our analytical results, we apply our seasonal compartmental mathematical model to real measles data from two Asian countries. Measles, an infectious disease, presents substantial public health and economic challenges throughout the world. Despite the limitations of testing, quarantine, and isolation measures it has been effective in controlling the spread of diseases [37,38]. These measures play a crucial role in reducing the risk of infection and preventing the future prevalence of the disease. Vaccination is essential for the management of infectious diseases, but many vaccines are imperfect, with partial protective effects and trade-offs between transmission and recovery [37,38]. The efficacy of a vaccine and the population turnover rate play crucial roles in disease eradication. The results of vaccination games depend on factors such as the dynamics of disease transmission, the cost of infection, and the efficacy of the vaccine. It is important to consider the imperfections of vaccines in disease models, especially for diseases with high basic reproduction numbers.
Within this section, our focus turns to investigating the spread of measles as a case study in two different countries: Saudi Arabia from August 2018 to August 2021 and Pakistan from January 2019 to December 2021, as documented by the World Health Organization (WHO) [39], using our established model. The simulation results presented aim to illustrate the performance of our model with periodic parameters in capturing seasonal fluctuation data. With reference to [7,17,40,41,42], we assume that the transmission rate $ \beta(t) $ follows a time-periodic pattern with a period of 12 months. This is mathematically expressed as $ \beta(t) = \beta_0 \cdot \left(a + b \sin\left(c + \frac{2\pi t}{12}\right)\right). $ Here, $ a $ and $ b $ function as adjustable parameters, $ c $ denotes the amplitude of the forcing, and $ \beta_0 $ signifies the baseline value of the time-dependent contact rate.
The World Bank report on Saudi Arabia [43] in 2021 indicates a total population of $ 36, 408, 820 $ with a life expectancy at birth of $ 77 $ years. This results in a monthly birth rate of approximately $ \Lambda = \mu \times N = 39, 403 $, where $ \mu $ is determined as $ 1/(12 \times 77) $. Similarly, World Bank data for Pakistan [44] reveals a total population of $ 231, 402, 117 $ in 2021, with a life expectancy at birth of $ 66 $ years. Applying the same calculation, the estimated monthly human birth population in Pakistan is approximately $ 292, 174 $, with $ \mu $ calculated as $ 1/(12 \times 66) $. A single administration of the MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccine demonstrates an efficacy of around 93% in preventing measles, while two doses of the vaccine exhibits an efficacy of approximately 97%, as reported by both the WHO [45] and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [46]. Consequently, the assumed values for the efficacy of the vaccine are denoted as $ \alpha_1 = 0.93 $ for a single dose and $ \alpha_1 = 0.97 $ for two doses. Applying Latin hypercube sampling alongside the least squares method, we aim to estimate the parameters of the model (2.1) to obtain the optimal fit with the given data. This sampling technique allows for the simultaneous evaluation of variance in multiple parameter values, as outlined in [34].
Fitting our model (2.1) to confirmed measles cases in Saudi Arabia from August 2018 to August 2021 and in Pakistan from January 2019 to December 2021 allowed us to obtain estimates for the parameters of the measles model. Although certain parameter values were drawn from existing literature to inform our initial estimates, the remaining parameters were determined through the process of fitting the model to the observed data.
Figure 2 presents the fit of the model with data on measles (cumulative cases and new cases) from Saudi Arabia between 2018 and 2021, showing a reasonably good fit and a high goodness of fit $ R^2 = 0.95961 $. Using the method established in [32], we numerically estimated the current basic reproduction number as $ \mathcal{R}_0 \approx 0.585887 < 1 $, signifying the extinction of the disease in Saudi Arabia.
On the contrary, Figure 3 shows the fit of the model with Pakistan's measles data between 2019 and 2021, also showing a reasonably good fit and a high goodness of fit $ R^2 = 0.972413 $, indicating its ability to capture key patterns of incidence of measles epidemics during 2019-2021. Once again, we estimate $ \mathcal{R}_0 \approx 4.05938 > 1 $, which reveals the persistence of the disease in Pakistan. This demonstrates that our model (2.1) is capable of reproducing the two types of outcomes observed in the measles epidemic in Asia.
Performing a sensitivity analysis on the basic reproductive number $\mathcal{R}_0$, our aim is to quantify the variations in the parameters of the model given in Eq (2.1). This analysis helps identify parameters that significantly influence both the basic reproduction number and disease transmission dynamics. Given that our main focus lies in determining the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) of the periodic model (2.1), which lacks an explicit expression for $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ defined as the spectral radius of a linear operator, we will employ the following remark to derive a formula for the time–average reproduction number ($ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $) of the associated nonautonomous system (see [32] for more details).
Remark 9. In accordance with the notation provided in [32], the integral average of a continuous function $ f(t) $, which exhibits periodicity with a period of $ \omega $, can be defined as $ \langle f \rangle := \frac{1}{\omega} \int_{0}^{\omega} f(t) \, dt. $
By applying the findings derived from the study conducted by [50], we obtain
$ ⟨F⟩=[τe⟨β⟩L∗⟨β⟩L∗τϵ1⟨β⟩L∗τϵ2⟨β⟩L∗000000000000], $ |
and
$ V=[ν1+ν2+μ000−ν1γ1+κ1+δ1+μ00−ν20γ2+κ2+μ00−κ1−κ2γ3+δ2+μ], $ |
where $ L^* = \frac{S^*+ (1-\alpha_1) V_1^*+ (1-\alpha_2) V_2^*}{N^*} $. Hence, we get
$ ⟨R0⟩=ρ(⟨F⟩V−1)=⟨RE⟩+⟨RI⟩+⟨RQ⟩+⟨RH⟩, $ | (7.1) |
where
$ ⟨RE⟩=⟨β⟩τeL∗μ+ν1+ν2,⟨RI⟩=⟨β⟩ν1L∗(γ1+δ1+κ1+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2),⟨RQ⟩=⟨β⟩ϵ1ν2τL∗(γ2+κ2+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2),⟨RH⟩=⟨β⟩ϵ2τL∗(γ3+δ2+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2)(κ1ν1γ1+δ1+κ1+μ+κ2ν2γ2+κ2+μ). $ |
The use of sensitivity indices is a common practice in sensitivity analysis, as elucidated in [51]. The normalized forward sensitivity index for a variable concerning a parameter is determined by calculating the ratio between the relative change in the variable and the relative change in the parameter. Specifically, the normalized forward sensitivity index of $ \langle\mathcal{R}_0\rangle $ with respect to a parameter $ x $ is defined as
$ \Upsilon^{\langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle}_x = \frac{x}{\langle\mathcal{R}_0\rangle} \times \frac{\partial \langle\mathcal{R}_0\rangle}{\partial x} . $ |
We conducted a sensitivity analysis for the time-averaged reproduction number $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $, as defined in Eq (7.1). Our investigation, as depicted in Figure 4, reveals that $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $ exhibits heightened sensitivity to variations in the infection rate ($ \langle \beta \rangle $), relative transmissibility ($ \tau $ and $ \tau_e $), and recovery rates ($ \gamma_1 $ and $ \gamma_3 $). Turning our attention to Figure 5, we present the sensitivity indices for $ \langle \mathcal{R}_E \rangle $, $ \langle \mathcal{R}_I \rangle $, $ \langle \mathcal{R}_Q \rangle $, and $ \langle \mathcal{R}_H \rangle $. This visualization allows for a comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence these specific reproduction numbers, providing a nuanced perspective on their sensitivities to parameters such as infection rate, relative transmissibility, and recovery rates.
By setting the time-varying transmission rate to a constant value, $ \beta(t) = \beta_0 $, one can derive a formula for the basic reproduction number of the autonomous version of system (2.1). Referring to (7.1), we obtain
$ Ra0=β0τeL∗μ+ν1+ν2+β0ν1L∗(γ1+δ1+κ1+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2)+β0ϵ1ν2τL∗(γ2+κ2+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2),β0ϵ2τL∗(γ3+δ2+μ)(μ+ν1+ν2)(κ1ν1γ1+δ1+κ1+μ+κ2ν2γ2+κ2+μ). $ |
Figure 6 depicts the curves of the basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}^a_0 $ of the autonomous version of system (2.1), the time-averaged reproduction number $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $ and the the basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ plotted in relation to certain parameters of the system (2.1). Specifically, these parameters include the average transmission rate ($ \langle \beta \rangle $), relative transmissibility ($ \tau $ and $ \tau_e $), quarantine rate for exposed individuals ($ \nu_2 $), recovery rate for infectious individuals ($ \gamma_1 $), and vaccine coverage rate ($ \theta $). This visual representation of the curve in relation to these system parameters improves our understanding of how they collectively influence the potential for disease transmission.
The calculations show that $ \mathcal{R}^a_0 > \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle \geq \mathcal{R}_0 $, suggesting that $ \mathcal{R}^a_0 $ and $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $ overestimate the risk of disease transmission. It is worth noting that several papers have addressed the issue of underestimation and overestimation of the average basic reproduction number. For instance, it was demonstrated in [11,17,25] that $ \mathcal{R}_0 > [\mathcal{R}_0] $, whereas in [26], the authors provided an example where $ \mathcal{R}_0 < [\mathcal{R}_0] $. More details can also be found in [11,52].
This section is dedicated to presenting numerical simulations. The aim is to both illustrate and validate the theoretical findings discussed earlier. Through these simulations, we provide visual evidence that demonstrates the alignment between our time-periodic model and the observed seasonal fluctuations.
It is clear from the exposition in Section 4 until Section 6 that the parameter $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ plays a significant role in determining whether the disease will persist in the population, as elucidated by Theorems 5 and 8. Theorem 8 asserts that if $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $, the dynamical system (2.1) possesses a positive $ \omega $-periodic solution. To show the persistence of the disease and the existence of the periodic solution, we set the parameter values as follows: $ a = 0.9 $, $ \beta_0 = 0.312 $, $ b = 8.6 $, $ c = 1.7 $, $ \alpha_1 = 0.93 $, $ \alpha_2 = 0.5 $, $ \gamma_1 = 0.1 $, $ \gamma_2 = 0.3 $, $ \gamma_3 = 0.1 $, $ \delta_1 = 0.0365 $, $ \delta_2 = 0.0465 $, $ \epsilon_1 = 0.523 $, $ \epsilon_2 = 0.474 $, $ \theta = 0.000154 $, $ \kappa_1 = 0.231 $, $ \kappa_2 = 0.203 $, $ \nu_1 = 0.166 $, $ \nu_2 = 0.178 $, $ \sigma_1 = 0.047 $, $ \sigma_2 = 0.028 $, $ \tau_e = 0.556 $, and $ \tau = 0.523 $. To further elaborate on the profound implications of this result, Figures 7–9 offer vivid illustrations of the long-term behavior and the enduring presence of measles, along with the existence of periodic positive solutions when $ \mathcal{R}_0 \approx 1.12776 > 1 $. Consequently, disease compartments not only persist, but also evolve into an endemic state within the population, characterized by recurring annual outbreaks.
Figures 10 and 11 provide visual representations that effectively corroborate the theoretical findings. These findings show that the disease-free equilibrium $ \mathcal{D}_0 $ demonstrates global asymptotic stability when $ \mathcal{R}_0 = 0.474236 < 1 $. As a result, it can be inferred that the disease can be eliminated if $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1. $
Imperfect quarantine and isolation can significantly impact the spread of measles. It is crucial to acknowledge that the effects of quarantine and isolation can vary based on the specific characteristics of the disease and the population studied. In this study, we investigate the influence of imperfect quarantine and isolation on the spread of measles in Pakistan, using parameter values fitted to the measles data presented in Table 2.
Parameters | Values Pakistan | Values Saudi Arabia | Units | Sources |
$ \Lambda $ | $ 292174 $ | $ 39403 $ | Persons Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \mu $ | $ 0.00126263 $ | $ 0.00108225 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \beta_0 $ | $ 0.476 $ | $ 0.484 $ | Person$ ^{-1} $ Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ a $ | $ 1.14 $ | $ 2.36 $ | – | Fitted |
$ b $ | $ 1.99 $ | $ 6.78 $ | – | Fitted |
$ c $ | $ 8.88 $ | $ 4.82 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \tau_e $ | $ 0 $ | $ 0 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Assumed |
$ \tau $ | $ 0.841 $ | $ 0.469 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \alpha_1 $ | $ 0.93 $ | $ 0.93 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \alpha_2 $ | $ 0.97 $ | $ 0.97 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \epsilon_1 $ | $ 0.743 $ | $ 0.816 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \epsilon_2 $ | $ 0.699 $ | $ 0.611 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \sigma_1 $, $ \sigma_2 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [48] |
$ \theta $ | $ 0.000154 $ | $ 0.000154 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \nu_1 $ | $ 0.308 $ | $ 0.268 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \nu_2 $ | $ 0.352 $ | $ 0.264 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \kappa_1 $ | $ 0.2 $ | $ 0.226 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \kappa_2 $ | $ 0.252 $ | $ 0.22 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \gamma_1 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.29 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_2 $ | $ 0.3 $ | $ 0.518 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_3 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.344 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [49] |
$ \mathcal{R}_0 $ | $ 4.05938 $ | $ 0.585887 $ | – | Estimated |
To predict and estimate the impact of quarantine and isolation on future measles outbreaks in Pakistan, simulations were started using parameters fitted up to month 35, with subsequent adjustments. Different values of the quarantine efficacy modification parameter, $ \epsilon_1 $, are illustrated in Figure 12, while the isolation efficacy modification parameter, $ \epsilon_2 $, is shown in Figure 13. The results indicate that the imperfect implementation of quarantine and isolation, particularly when $ \epsilon_2 = 1 = \epsilon_2 $, may lead to a substantial increase in the number of measles infectious populations. On the contrary, the perfect implementation of quarantine with $ \epsilon_1 = 0 $ decreases the number of infectious individuals without causing extinction. Perfect isolation, observed when $ \epsilon_2 = 0 $, leads to a significant decrease in the number of infectious individuals, leading to extinction. These findings underscore the importance of implementing perfect quarantine and isolation measures.
The impact of incomplete first- and second-dose vaccination on measles is a significant concern for public health. Incomplete coverage, suboptimal vaccine efficacy, and deviations from recommended dose schedules can undermine the effectiveness of vaccination efforts. As seen in Figure 14, when the vaccination coverage rate ($ \theta $) improves, the impact of the measles epidemic decreases. This can be a challenge to achieve in countries like Pakistan.
While the effectiveness of a vaccine is crucial in managing the spread of diseases, its impact can vary depending on the basic reproduction number of the disease. Diseases with lower basic reproduction numbers may show minimal differences in outcomes between perfect and imperfect vaccines. In contrast, diseases with higher basic reproduction numbers, such as measles, pose greater challenges when faced with an imperfect vaccine. The presence of imperfections in vaccine efficacy can cause increased difficulties in achieving effective disease control measures.
To address the challenge of measles control, the government could prioritize improving the efficacy of vaccines ($ \alpha_1 $ and $ \alpha_2 $), as illustrated in Figures 15 and 16. At the same time, it is crucial to ensure accessibility for individuals in poverty. In particular, achieving a high coverage rate ($ \theta $) for the vaccine, coupled with elevated efficacy rates ($ \alpha_1 $ and $ \alpha_2 $), proves paramount. A higher efficacy rate plays a crucial role in decreasing the number of infectious cases, highlighting its importance in alleviating the impact of the measles epidemic.
This study delves into the intricacies of a nonautonomous mathematical model designed to elucidate the transmission dynamics of infectious diseases over time. By incorporating a seasonal transmission parameter and imperfections in quarantine, isolation, and vaccination strategies, the model builds on previous works such as [17,19] to explore threshold dynamics that govern disease persistence or elimination. Through a comprehensive analysis of the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $), the research establishes its pivotal role as a threshold parameter, delineating the conditions under which the disease-free equilibrium is globally stable or the disease persists. The complexity of the model lies in its integration of time-dependent coefficients and the interplay of quarantine, isolation, and vaccination measures, allowing a nuanced understanding of the dynamics of the disease. This study differs from [17], which employed a mathematical model with a seasonal transmission parameter and a double-dose vaccination to examine the spread of measles over time, assuming that only the first dose of the vaccine was imperfect. In contrast, our study assumes imperfections in both the first and second doses of the vaccine. Additionally, we incorporate the impact of imperfect interventions, specifically quarantine, isolation, and vaccination.
Using real-world measles data from two Asian countries, our seasonal compartmental mathematical model validates and supports our analytical results. The research focuses on examining measles dynamics in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, incorporating essential factors such as vaccination, time-varying transmission rates, and imperfections in control strategies. By calibrating the model with real-world data, the dynamics of the disease are successfully captured. Key parameters such as vaccine efficacy ($ \alpha_1 $ and $ \alpha_2 $) and time-dependent transmission rates were crucial to accurately reproduce observed patterns and estimate critical parameters. Numerical simulations highlighted the importance of the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) in determining the persistence of the disease. Measles demonstrated persistence when $ \mathcal{R}_0 > 1 $ and tended toward extinction when $ \mathcal{R}_0 < 1 $. Sensitivity analysis emphasized the importance of effective quarantine, isolation, and vaccination strategies in the control of infectious populations. Our sensitivity analysis of the time-averaged reproduction number, $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $, in a periodic model revealed a significant sensitivity to key parameters such as infection rate, relative transmissibility, and recovery rates. The formula derived for $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $ allowed for a comprehensive understanding of its contributions from exposed, infectious, quarantined, and hospitalized individuals. Visualizations of the sensitivity indices provided information on the influence of specific parameters on different reproduction numbers, helping to prioritize interventions as shown in Figures 4 and 5. The graphical representation of the curves of the basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}^a_0 $ of the autonomous model, the time-averaged reproduction number $ \langle \mathcal{R}_0 \rangle $, and the basic reproduction number $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ in relation to the system parameters further improved our understanding of its impact on the potential for disease transmission as shown in Figure 6. In general, this analysis provides valuable information to inform interventions and guide future research in infectious disease modeling.
The numerical simulations conducted in this study serve to validate and illustrate the theoretical insights discussed earlier on the dynamics of measles in a population. The visual evidence presented in Figures 7, 9, 10, and 11 aligns with the theoretical findings, emphasizing the pivotal role of the basic reproduction number ($ \mathcal{R}_0 $) in determining the long-term behavior of measles. When $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ exceeds $ 1 $, the simulations demonstrate the persistence of measles in the population, accompanied by the existence of periodic positive solutions. In contrast, when $ \mathcal{R}_0 $ falls below $ 1 $, the disease-free equilibrium is globally asymptotically stable, leading to the extinction of measles. These results provide valuable information on the conditions under which measles can establish and persist within a population or face elimination. Examining imperfect quarantine, isolation, and vaccination further illuminates the practical implications for disease control. Simulations indicate that the effective implementation of quarantine and isolation measures is crucial to curtailing the spread of measles, highlighting the sensitivity of the model to variations in the parameters of efficacy modification. Furthermore, the impact of imperfect vaccination, considering coverage rates and vaccine efficacy, underscores the importance of these factors in mitigating the burden of measles. These results are important for understanding the variations in the infectious population due to the overestimation/underestimation of the disease transmission risk provided by the basic reproduction numbers of the autonomous system as shown in Figure 6.
Looking forward, future research should explore the long-term impact of vaccination campaigns in dynamic epidemiological landscapes. Incorporating real-time data and refining models based on ongoing observations, considering the time delay between the first and second doses, as well as the time to arrive in the recovered state after receiving the second dose of the vaccine, will improve predictive accuracy. Addressing uncertainties in parameter estimates and evaluating the effectiveness of new vaccines are crucial for future research.
The author declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
M.A.I. was supported by the project No. 146210, implemented with the support provided from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund of Hungary, financed under the PD_23 funding scheme, by the National Laboratory for Health Security, RRF-2.3.1-21-2022-00006 and by the project No. 129877, implemented with the support provided from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund of Hungary, financed under the KKP_19 funding scheme. This publication is funded by University of Szeged Open Access Fund (grant number: 6993).
The author declares no conflict of interest.
[1] | Caliceti P, Salmaso S (2013) Stealth properties to improve therapeutic efficacy of drug nanocarriers. J Drug Deli 2013: 1–19. |
[2] |
Jayant S, Khandare JJ, Wang Y, et al. (2007) Targeted sialic acid-doxorubicin prodrugs for intracellular delivery and cancer treatment. Pharm Res 24: 2120–2130. doi: 10.1007/s11095-007-9406-1
![]() |
[3] |
Li Y, Yang L (2015) Driving forces for drug loading in drug carriers. J Microencapsu 32: 255–272. doi: 10.3109/02652048.2015.1010459
![]() |
[4] |
Wang XH, Tian Q, Wang W, et al. (2012) In vitro evaluation of polymeric micelles based on hydrophobically-modified sulfated chitosan as a carrier of doxorubicin. J Mater Sci-Mater M 23: 1663–1674. doi: 10.1007/s10856-012-4627-1
![]() |
[5] |
Li JF, Yang HY, Zhang YJ, et al. (2015) Choline Derivate-Modified Doxorubicin Loaded Micelle for Glioma Therapy. Acs Appl Mater Inter 7: 21589–21601. doi: 10.1021/acsami.5b07045
![]() |
[6] |
Su Y, Hu Y, Du Y, et al. (2015) Redox-responsive polymer drug conjugates based on doxorubicin and chitosan oligosaccharide-g-stearic acid for cancer therapy. Mol Pharm 12: 1193–1202. doi: 10.1021/mp500710x
![]() |
[7] |
Gou P, Liu W, Mao W, et al. (2013) Self-assembling doxorubicin prodrug forming nanoparticles for cancer chemotherapy: Synthesis and anticancer study in vitro and in vivo. J Mater Chem B 1: 284–292. doi: 10.1039/C2TB00004K
![]() |
[8] |
Sun Y, Zou W, Bian SQ, et al. (2013) Bioreducible PAA-g-PEG graft micelles with high doxorubicin loading for targeted antitumor effect against mouse breast carcinoma. Biomaterials 34: 6818–6828. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.05.032
![]() |
[9] |
Jain RK, Stylianopoulos T (2010) Delivering nanomedicine to solid tumors. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7: 653–664. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.139
![]() |
[10] |
Du YZ, Weng Q, Yuan H, et al. (2010) Synthesis and antitumor activity of stearate-g-dextran micelles for intracellular doxorubicin delivery. Acs Nano 4: 6894–6902. doi: 10.1021/nn100927t
![]() |
[11] |
Wang YC, Wang F, Sun TM, et al. (2011) Redox-responsive nanoparticles from the single disulfide bond-bridged block copolymer as drug carriers for overcoming multidrug resistance in cancer cells. Bioconjugate Chem 22: 1939–1945. doi: 10.1021/bc200139n
![]() |
[12] |
Zhang AP, Zhang Z, Shi FH, et al. (2013) Redox-sensitive shell-crosslinked polypeptide-block-polysaccharide micelles for efficient intracellular anticancer drug delivery. Macromol Biosci 13: 1249–1258. doi: 10.1002/mabi.201300175
![]() |
[13] |
Shuai XT, Ai H, Nasongkla N, et al. (2004) Micellar carriers based on block copolymers of poly(e-caprolactone) and poly(ethylene glycol) for doxorubicin delivery. J Control Release 98: 415–426. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.06.003
![]() |
[14] |
Song HT, Hoang NH, Yun JM, et al. (2016) Development of a new tri-block copolymer with a functional end and its feasibility for treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Colloids Surface B 144: 73–80. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2016.04.002
![]() |
[15] |
Zhao XY, Poon Z, Engler AC, et al. (2012) Enhanced stability of polymeric micelles based on postfunctionalized poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(gamma-propargyl L-glutamate): The substituent effect. Biomacromolecules 13: 1315–1322. doi: 10.1021/bm201873u
![]() |
[16] |
Hamaguchi T, Matsumura Y, Suzuki M, et al. (2005) NK105, a paclitaxel-incorporating micellar nanoparticle formulation, can extend in vivo antitumour activity and reduce the neurotoxicity of paclitaxel. Brit J Cancer 92: 1240–1246. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602479
![]() |
[17] |
Shi Y, van Steenbergen MJ, Teunissen EA, et al. (2013) Pi-Pi stacking increases the stability and loading capacity of thermosensitive polymeric micelles for chemotherapeutic drugs. Biomacromolecules 14: 1826–1837. doi: 10.1021/bm400234c
![]() |
[18] |
Carstens MG, de Jong P, van Nostrum CF, et al. (2008) The effect of core composition in biodegradable oligomeric micelles as taxane formulations. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 68: 596–606. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpb.2007.08.014
![]() |
[19] |
Yokoyama M, Fukushima S, Uehara R, et al. (1998) Characterization of physical entrapment and chemical conjugation of adriamycin in polymeric micelles and their design for in vivo delivery to a solid tumor. J Control Release 50: 79–92. doi: 10.1016/S0168-3659(97)00115-6
![]() |
[20] |
Kataoka K, Matsumoto T, Yokoyama M, et al. (2000) Doxorubicin-loaded poly(ethylene glycol)-poly(beta-benzyl-l-aspartate) copolymer micelles: Their pharmaceutical characteristics and biological significance. J Control Release 64: 143–153. doi: 10.1016/S0168-3659(99)00133-9
![]() |
[21] |
Hofman JW, Carstens MG, van Zeeland F, et al. (2008) Photocytotoxicity of mTHPC (temoporfin) loaded polymeric micelles mediated by lipase catalyzed degradation. Pharm Res 25: 2065–2073. doi: 10.1007/s11095-008-9590-7
![]() |
[22] |
Mikhail AS, Allen C (2010) Poly(ethylene glycol)-b-poly(epsilon-caprolactone) micelles containing chemically conjugated and physically entrapped docetaxel: Synthesis, characterization, and the influence of the drug on micelle morphology. Biomacromolecules 11: 1273–1280. doi: 10.1021/bm100073s
![]() |
[23] |
Wang C, Chen B, Zou M, et al. (2014) Cyclic RGD-modified chitosan/graphene oxide polymers for drug delivery and cellular imaging. Colloid Surface B 122: 332–340. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2014.07.018
![]() |
[24] |
Yan JL, Ye ZY, Chen M, et al. (2011) Fine tuning micellar core-forming block of poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(epsilon-caprolactone) amphiphilic copolymers based on chemical modification for the solubilization and delivery of doxorubicin. Biomacromolecules 12: 2562–2572. doi: 10.1021/bm200375x
![]() |
[25] |
Bader RA, Silvers AL, Zhang N (2011) Polysialic acid-based micelles for encapsulation of hydrophobic drugs. Biomacromolecules 12: 314–320. doi: 10.1021/bm1008603
![]() |
[26] |
Veronese FM, Pasut G (2005) PEGylation, successful approach to drug delivery. Drug Discov Today 10: 1451–1458. doi: 10.1016/S1359-6446(05)03575-0
![]() |
[27] |
Deepagan VG, Thambi T, Ko H, et al. (2013) Amphiphilic polysialic acid derivatives: Synthesis, characterization, and in-vitro cytotoxicity. J Nanosci Nanotechno 13: 7312–7318. doi: 10.1166/jnn.2013.8089
![]() |
[28] |
Gregoriadis G, McCormack B, Wang Z, et al. (1993) Polysialic acids-potential in drug delivery. Febs Lett 315: 271–276. doi: 10.1016/0014-5793(93)81177-2
![]() |
[29] |
Konradi R, Acikgoz C, Textor M (2012) Polyoxazolines for nonfouling surface coatings-a direct comparison to the gold standard PEG. Macromol Rapid Comm 33: 1663–1676. doi: 10.1002/marc.201200422
![]() |
[30] |
Bondioli L, Ruozi B, Belletti D, et al. (2011) Sialic acid as a potential approach for the protection and targeting of nanocarriers. Expert Opin Drug Del 8: 921–937. doi: 10.1517/17425247.2011.577061
![]() |
[31] | Semple SC, Harasym TO, Clow KA, et al. (2005) Immunogenicity and rapid blood clearance of liposomes containing polyethylene glycol-lipid conjugates and nucleic acid. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 312: 1020–1026. |
[32] |
Amoozgar Z, Yeo Y (2012) Recent advances in stealth coating of nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Wires Nanomed Nanobio 4: 219–233. doi: 10.1002/wnan.1157
![]() |
[33] |
Zhang N, Wardwell PR, Bader RA (2013) Polysaccharide-based micelles for drug delivery. Pharmaceutics 5: 329–352. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics5020329
![]() |
[34] |
Wilson DR, Zhang N, Silvers AL, et al. (2014) Synthesis and evaluation of cyclosporine A-loaded polysialic acid-polycaprolactone micelles for rheumatoid arthritis. Eur J Pharm Sci 51: 146–156. doi: 10.1016/j.ejps.2013.09.013
![]() |
[35] |
Bondioli L, Costantino L, Ballestrazzi A, et al. (2010) PLGA nanoparticles surface decorated with the sialic acid, N-acetylneuraminic acid. Biomaterials 31: 3395–3403. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.049
![]() |
[36] |
Deninno MP (1991) The synthesis and glycosidation of n-acetylneuraminic acid. Synthesis 1991: 583–593. doi: 10.1055/s-1991-26522
![]() |
[37] |
Rutishauser U (1998) Polysialic acid at the cell surface: Biophysics in service of cell interactions and tissue plasticity. J Cell Biochem 70: 304–312. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4644(19980901)70:3<304::AID-JCB3>3.0.CO;2-R
![]() |
[38] |
Vodovozova EL, Moiseeva EV, Grechko GK, et al. (2000) Antitumour activity of cytotoxic liposomes equipped with selectin ligand SiaLe(X), in a mouse mammary adenocarcinoma model. Eur J Cancer 36: 942–949. doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00029-0
![]() |
[39] |
Hirai M, Minematsu H, Hiramatsu Y, et al. (2010) Novel and simple loading procedure of cisplatin into liposomes and targeting tumor endothelial cells. Int J Pharm 391: 274–283. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2010.02.030
![]() |
[40] |
Zheng JS, Zheng SY, Zhang YB, et al. (2011) Sialic acid surface decoration enhances cellular uptake and apoptosis-inducing activity of selenium nanoparticles. Colloid Surface B 83: 183–187. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2010.11.023
![]() |
[41] |
Greco F, Arif I, Botting R, et al. (2013) Polysialic acid as a drug carrier: evaluation of a new polysialic acid-epirubicin conjugate and its comparison against established drug carriers. Polym Chem-UK 4: 1600–1609. doi: 10.1039/C2PY20876H
![]() |
[42] |
Zeisig R, Stahn R, Wenzel K, et al. (2004) Effect of sialyl Lewis X-glycoliposomes on the inhibition of E-selectin-mediated tumour cell adhesion in vitro. Biochim Biophys Acta 1660: 31–40. doi: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2003.10.014
![]() |
[43] |
Gajbhiye V, Ganesh N, Barve J, et al. (2013) Synthesis, characterization and targeting potential of zidovudine loaded sialic acid conjugated-mannosylated poly(propyleneimine) dendrimers. Eur J Pharm Sci 48: 668–679. doi: 10.1016/j.ejps.2012.12.027
![]() |
[44] |
Zhang WX, Dong DQ, Li P, et al. (2016) Novel pH-sensitive polysialic acid based polymeric micelles for triggered intracellular release of hydrophobic drug. Carbohyd Polym 139: 75–81. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.12.041
![]() |
[45] |
Ray GB, Chakraborty I, Moulik SP (2006) Pyrene absorption can be a convenient method for probing critical micellar concentration (cmc) and indexing micellar polarity. J Colloid Interf Sci 294: 248–254. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2005.07.006
![]() |
[46] |
Hans M, Shimoni K, Danino D, et al. (2005) Synthesis and characterization of mPEG-PLA prodrug micelles. Biomacromolecules 6: 2708–2717. doi: 10.1021/bm050188k
![]() |
[47] |
Liang HC, Chang WH, Liang HF, et al. (2004) Crosslinking structures of gelatin hydrogels crosslinked with genipin or a water-soluble carbodiimide. J Appl Polym Sci 91: 4017–4026. doi: 10.1002/app.13563
![]() |
[48] |
Koo AN, Min KH, Lee HJ, et al. (2012) Tumor accumulation and antitumor efficacy of docetaxel-loaded core-shell-corona micelles with shell-specific redox-responsive cross-links. Biomaterials 33: 1489–1499. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2011.11.013
![]() |
[49] |
Lee H, Ahn CH, Park TG (2009) Poly lactic-co-(glycolic acid)-grafted hyaluronic acid copolymer micelle nanoparticles for target-specific delivery of doxorubicin. Macromol Biosci 9: 336–342. doi: 10.1002/mabi.200800229
![]() |
[50] |
Sutton D, Wang S, Nasongkia N, et al. (2007) Doxorubicin and beta-lapachone release and interaction with micellar core materials: experiment and modeling. Exp Biol Med 232: 1090–1099. doi: 10.3181/0702-RM-31
![]() |
[51] |
Donaldson O, Huang Z, Comolli N (2013) An integrated experimental and modeling approach to propose biotinylated PLGA microparticles as versatile targeting vehicles for drug delivery. Prog Biomat 2: 1–10. doi: 10.1186/2194-0517-2-1
![]() |
[52] |
Zhai S, Ma Y, Chen Y, et al. (2014) Synthesis of an amphiphilic block copolymer containing zwitterionic sulfobetaine as a novel pH-sensitive drug carrier. Polym Chem 5: 1285–1297. doi: 10.1039/C3PY01325A
![]() |
[53] |
Deshmukh AS, Chauhan PN, Malleshappa NN, et al. (2017) Polymeric micelles: Basic research to clinical practice. Int J Pharm 532: 249–268. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2017.09.005
![]() |
[54] |
Aftab S, Shah A, Nadhman A, et al. (2018) Nanomedicine: An effective tool in cancer therapy. Int J Pharm 540: 132–149. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.02.007
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Parameters | Description |
$ \Lambda $ | Recruitment rate of susceptible humans |
$ \mu $ | Natural death rate |
$ \beta(t) $ | Periodic transmission rate of symptomatic infection |
$ \tau_e $ | Relative transmissibility of exposed to infected |
$ \tau $ | Relative transmissibility of quarantined and hospitalized to infected |
$ \alpha_1 $, $ \alpha_2 $ | Modification parameters for vaccine efficacy |
$ \varepsilon_1 $, $ \varepsilon_2 $ | Modification parameters for the efficacy of quarantine and isolation |
$ \theta $ | Coverage rate of vaccine for entire population |
$ \sigma_1 $ | Rate of vaccination with second dose |
$ \sigma_2 $ | Progression rate from $ V_2 $ to $ R $ |
$ \nu_1 $ | Progression rate from exposed to infectious class |
$ \nu_2 $ | Quarantine rate for exposed individuals |
$ \kappa_1 $, $ \kappa_2 $ | Hospitalization rate for infectious and quarantined individuals |
$ \gamma_1 $, $ \gamma_2 $, $ \gamma_2 $ | Recovery rate for infectious, quarantined, and hospitalized individuals |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | Disease-induced death rate for infectious and hospitalized individuals |
Parameters | Values Pakistan | Values Saudi Arabia | Units | Sources |
$ \Lambda $ | $ 292174 $ | $ 39403 $ | Persons Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \mu $ | $ 0.00126263 $ | $ 0.00108225 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \beta_0 $ | $ 0.476 $ | $ 0.484 $ | Person$ ^{-1} $ Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ a $ | $ 1.14 $ | $ 2.36 $ | – | Fitted |
$ b $ | $ 1.99 $ | $ 6.78 $ | – | Fitted |
$ c $ | $ 8.88 $ | $ 4.82 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \tau_e $ | $ 0 $ | $ 0 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Assumed |
$ \tau $ | $ 0.841 $ | $ 0.469 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \alpha_1 $ | $ 0.93 $ | $ 0.93 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \alpha_2 $ | $ 0.97 $ | $ 0.97 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \epsilon_1 $ | $ 0.743 $ | $ 0.816 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \epsilon_2 $ | $ 0.699 $ | $ 0.611 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \sigma_1 $, $ \sigma_2 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [48] |
$ \theta $ | $ 0.000154 $ | $ 0.000154 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \nu_1 $ | $ 0.308 $ | $ 0.268 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \nu_2 $ | $ 0.352 $ | $ 0.264 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \kappa_1 $ | $ 0.2 $ | $ 0.226 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \kappa_2 $ | $ 0.252 $ | $ 0.22 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \gamma_1 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.29 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_2 $ | $ 0.3 $ | $ 0.518 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_3 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.344 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [49] |
$ \mathcal{R}_0 $ | $ 4.05938 $ | $ 0.585887 $ | – | Estimated |
Parameters | Description |
$ \Lambda $ | Recruitment rate of susceptible humans |
$ \mu $ | Natural death rate |
$ \beta(t) $ | Periodic transmission rate of symptomatic infection |
$ \tau_e $ | Relative transmissibility of exposed to infected |
$ \tau $ | Relative transmissibility of quarantined and hospitalized to infected |
$ \alpha_1 $, $ \alpha_2 $ | Modification parameters for vaccine efficacy |
$ \varepsilon_1 $, $ \varepsilon_2 $ | Modification parameters for the efficacy of quarantine and isolation |
$ \theta $ | Coverage rate of vaccine for entire population |
$ \sigma_1 $ | Rate of vaccination with second dose |
$ \sigma_2 $ | Progression rate from $ V_2 $ to $ R $ |
$ \nu_1 $ | Progression rate from exposed to infectious class |
$ \nu_2 $ | Quarantine rate for exposed individuals |
$ \kappa_1 $, $ \kappa_2 $ | Hospitalization rate for infectious and quarantined individuals |
$ \gamma_1 $, $ \gamma_2 $, $ \gamma_2 $ | Recovery rate for infectious, quarantined, and hospitalized individuals |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | Disease-induced death rate for infectious and hospitalized individuals |
Parameters | Values Pakistan | Values Saudi Arabia | Units | Sources |
$ \Lambda $ | $ 292174 $ | $ 39403 $ | Persons Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \mu $ | $ 0.00126263 $ | $ 0.00108225 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [44,47] |
$ \beta_0 $ | $ 0.476 $ | $ 0.484 $ | Person$ ^{-1} $ Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ a $ | $ 1.14 $ | $ 2.36 $ | – | Fitted |
$ b $ | $ 1.99 $ | $ 6.78 $ | – | Fitted |
$ c $ | $ 8.88 $ | $ 4.82 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \tau_e $ | $ 0 $ | $ 0 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Assumed |
$ \tau $ | $ 0.841 $ | $ 0.469 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \alpha_1 $ | $ 0.93 $ | $ 0.93 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \alpha_2 $ | $ 0.97 $ | $ 0.97 $ | – | [45,46] |
$ \epsilon_1 $ | $ 0.743 $ | $ 0.816 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \epsilon_2 $ | $ 0.699 $ | $ 0.611 $ | – | Fitted |
$ \sigma_1 $, $ \sigma_2 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | $ 0.047 $, $ 0.028 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [48] |
$ \theta $ | $ 0.000154 $ | $ 0.000154 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \nu_1 $ | $ 0.308 $ | $ 0.268 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \nu_2 $ | $ 0.352 $ | $ 0.264 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \kappa_1 $ | $ 0.2 $ | $ 0.226 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \kappa_2 $ | $ 0.252 $ | $ 0.22 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | Fitted |
$ \gamma_1 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.29 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_2 $ | $ 0.3 $ | $ 0.518 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \gamma_3 $ | $ 0.1 $ | $ 0.344 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [37,38] |
$ \delta_1 $, $ \delta_2 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | $ 0.0365 $, $ 0.0465 $ | Month$ ^{-1} $ | [49] |
$ \mathcal{R}_0 $ | $ 4.05938 $ | $ 0.585887 $ | – | Estimated |