RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The public health impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. METHODS: Using a mathematical model of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care, we explore the public-health impact of different potential therapeutics, under a range of scenarios varying healthcare capacity, epidemic trajectories; and drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. RESULTS: The impact of drugs like dexamethasone (delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming Râ =â 1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalization) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. CONCLUSIONS: Advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date have been focused on hospitalized-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics delivered earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Costo de Enfermedad , Humanos , Pandemias/prevención & control , Preparaciones FarmacéuticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: England's COVID-19 roadmap out of lockdown policy set out the timeline and conditions for the stepwise lifting of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as vaccination roll-out continued, with step one starting on March 8, 2021. In this study, we assess the roadmap, the impact of the delta (B.1.617.2) variant of SARS-CoV-2, and potential future epidemic trajectories. METHODS: This mathematical modelling study was done to assess the UK Government's four-step process to easing lockdown restrictions in England, UK. We extended a previously described model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to incorporate vaccination and multi-strain dynamics to explicitly capture the emergence of the delta variant. We calibrated the model to English surveillance data, including hospital admissions, hospital occupancy, seroprevalence data, and population-level PCR testing data using a Bayesian evidence synthesis framework, then modelled the potential trajectory of the epidemic for a range of different schedules for relaxing NPIs. We estimated the resulting number of daily infections and hospital admissions, and daily and cumulative deaths. Three scenarios spanning a range of optimistic to pessimistic vaccine effectiveness, waning natural immunity, and cross-protection from previous infections were investigated. We also considered three levels of mixing after the lifting of restrictions. FINDINGS: The roadmap policy was successful in offsetting the increased transmission resulting from lifting NPIs starting on March 8, 2021, with increasing population immunity through vaccination. However, because of the emergence of the delta variant, with an estimated transmission advantage of 76% (95% credible interval [95% CrI] 69-83) over alpha, fully lifting NPIs on June 21, 2021, as originally planned might have led to 3900 (95% CrI 1500-5700) peak daily hospital admissions under our central parameter scenario. Delaying until July 19, 2021, reduced peak hospital admissions by three fold to 1400 (95% CrI 700-1700) per day. There was substantial uncertainty in the epidemic trajectory, with particular sensitivity to the transmissibility of delta, level of mixing, and estimates of vaccine effectiveness. INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that the risk of a large wave of COVID-19 hospital admissions resulting from lifting NPIs can be substantially mitigated if the timing of NPI relaxation is carefully balanced against vaccination coverage. However, with the delta variant, it might not be possible to fully lift NPIs without a third wave of hospital admissions and deaths, even if vaccination coverage is high. Variants of concern, their transmissibility, vaccine uptake, and vaccine effectiveness must be carefully monitored as countries relax pandemic control measures. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, and UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/transmisión , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/organización & administración , SARS-CoV-2 , Cobertura de Vacunación/organización & administración , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/mortalidad , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
The end-of-outbreak declaration is an important step in controlling infectious disease outbreaks. Objective estimation of the confidence level that an outbreak is over is important to reduce the risk of postdeclaration flare-ups. We developed a simulation-based model with which to quantify that confidence and tested it on simulated Ebola virus disease data. We found that these confidence estimates were most sensitive to the instantaneous reproduction number, the reporting rate, and the time between the symptom onset and death or recovery of the last detected case. For Ebola virus disease, our results suggested that the current World Health Organization criterion of 42 days since the recovery or death of the last detected case is too short and too sensitive to underreporting. Therefore, we suggest a shift to a preliminary end-of-outbreak declaration after 63 days from the symptom onset day of the last detected case. This preliminary declaration should still be followed by 90 days of enhanced surveillance to capture potential flare-ups of cases, after which the official end of the outbreak can be declared. This sequence corresponds to more than 95% confidence that an outbreak is over in most of the scenarios examined. Our framework is generic and therefore could be adapted to estimate end-of-outbreak confidence for other infectious diseases.
Asunto(s)
Brotes de Enfermedades/estadística & datos numéricos , Fiebre Hemorrágica Ebola/epidemiología , Control de Infecciones/estadística & datos numéricos , Salud Global , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As in many countries, quantifying COVID-19 spread in Indonesia remains challenging due to testing limitations. In Java, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented throughout 2020. However, as a vaccination campaign launches, cases and deaths are rising across the island. METHODS: We used modelling to explore the extent to which data on burials in Jakarta using strict COVID-19 protocols (C19P) provide additional insight into the transmissibility of the disease, epidemic trajectory, and the impact of NPIs. We assess how implementation of NPIs in early 2021 will shape the epidemic during the period of likely vaccine rollout. RESULTS: C19P burial data in Jakarta suggest a death toll approximately 3.3 times higher than reported. Transmission estimates using these data suggest earlier, larger, and more sustained impact of NPIs. Measures to reduce sub-national spread, particularly during Ramadan, substantially mitigated spread to more vulnerable rural areas. Given current trajectory, daily cases and deaths are likely to increase in most regions as the vaccine is rolled out. Transmission may peak in early 2021 in Jakarta if current levels of control are maintained. However, relaxation of control measures is likely to lead to a subsequent resurgence in the absence of an effective vaccination campaign. CONCLUSIONS: Syndromic measures of mortality provide a more complete picture of COVID-19 severity upon which to base decision-making. The high potential impact of the vaccine in Java is attributable to reductions in transmission to date and dependent on these being maintained. Increases in control in the relatively short-term will likely yield large, synergistic increases in vaccine impact.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/terapia , Humanos , Programas de Inmunización/métodos , Indonesia , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Síndrome , Vacunación/métodos , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The UK was the first country to start national COVID-19 vaccination programmes, initially administering doses 3 weeks apart. However, early evidence of high vaccine effectiveness after the first dose and the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant prompted the UK to extend the interval between doses to 12 weeks. In this study, we aimed to quantify the effect of delaying the second vaccine dose in England. METHODS: We used a previously described model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, calibrated to COVID-19 surveillance data from England, including hospital admissions, hospital occupancy, seroprevalence data, and population-level PCR testing data, using a Bayesian evidence-synthesis framework. We modelled and compared the epidemic trajectory in the counterfactual scenario in which vaccine doses were administered 3 weeks apart against the real reported vaccine roll-out schedule of 12 weeks. We estimated and compared the resulting numbers of daily infections, hospital admissions, and deaths. In sensitivity analyses, we investigated scenarios spanning a range of vaccine effectiveness and waning assumptions. FINDINGS: In the period from Dec 8, 2020, to Sept 13, 2021, the number of individuals who received a first vaccine dose was higher under the 12-week strategy than the 3-week strategy. For this period, we estimated that delaying the interval between the first and second COVID-19 vaccine doses from 3 to 12 weeks averted a median (calculated as the median of the posterior sample) of 58 000 COVID-19 hospital admissions (291 000 cumulative hospitalisations [95% credible interval 275 000-319 000] under the 3-week strategy vs 233 000 [229 000-238 000] under the 12-week strategy) and 10 100 deaths (64 800 deaths [60 200-68 900] vs 54 700 [52 800-55 600]). Similarly, we estimated that the 3-week strategy would have resulted in more infections compared with the 12-week strategy. Across all sensitivity analyses the 3-week strategy resulted in a greater number of hospital admissions. In results by age group, the 12-week strategy led to more hospitalisations and deaths in older people in spring 2021, but fewer following the emergence of the delta variant during summer 2021. INTERPRETATION: England's delayed-second-dose vaccination strategy was informed by early real-world data on vaccine effectiveness in the context of limited vaccine supplies in a growing epidemic. Our study shows that rapidly providing partial (single-dose) vaccine-induced protection to a larger proportion of the population was successful in reducing the burden of COVID-19 hospitalisations and deaths overall. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research; UK Medical Research Council; Community Jameel; Wellcome Trust; UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; and EU.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Anciano , Lactante , Teorema de Bayes , Estudios Seroepidemiológicos , Australia , SARS-CoV-2 , InglaterraRESUMEN
Background: As control efforts progress towards elimination, malaria is likely to become more spatially concentrated in few local areas. The purpose of this study was to quantify and characterise spatial heterogeneity in malaria transmission-intensity across highly endemic Indonesian Papua. Methods: We analysed individual-level malaria surveillance data for nearly half a million cases (2019-2020) reported in the Papua and West Papua provinces and adapted the Gini index approach to quantify spatial heterogeneity at the district and health-unit levels. In this context, high Gini index implies disproportionately distributed malaria cases across the region. We showed malaria incidence trends and the spatial and temporal distribution of sociodemographic characteristics and aetiological parasites among cases. Findings: While Papua province accounted for the majority of malaria cases reported in the region and had seen a rise in transmission since 2015, West Papua province had maintained a comparatively low incidence. We observed that Gini index estimates were high, particularly when the lower spatial scale of health units was evaluated. The Gini index appears to be inversely associated to annual parasite-incidence, as well as the proportions of vivax malaria, male sex, and adults. Interpretation: This study suggests that areas with varying levels of transmission-intensities exhibited distinct characteristics. Malaria was distributed in a markedly disproportionate manner throughout the region, emphasising the need for spatially targeted interventions. Periodic quantification and characterisation of risk heterogeneity at various spatial levels using routine malaria surveillance data may aid in tracking progress towards elimination and guiding evidence-informed prioritisation of resource allocation. Funding: The study was funded by the Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Indo-Pacific Centre for Health Security through the Strengthening Preparedness in the Asia-Pacific Region through Knowledge (SPARK) project.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Worldwide, the 33 recognised megacities comprise approximately 7% of the global population, yet account for 20% COVID-19 deaths. The specific inequities and other factors within megacities that affect vulnerability to COVID-19 mortality remain poorly defined. We assessed individual, community-level and healthcare factors associated with COVID-19-related mortality in a megacity of Jakarta, Indonesia, during two epidemic waves spanning 2 March 2020 to 31 August 2021. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included residents of Jakarta, Indonesia, with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. We extracted demographic, clinical, outcome (recovered or died), vaccine coverage data and disease prevalence from Jakarta Health Office surveillance records, and collected subdistrict level sociodemographics data from various official sources. We used multilevel logistic regression to examine individual, community and subdistrict-level healthcare factors and their associations with COVID-19 mortality. RESULTS: Of 705 503 cases with a definitive outcome by 31 August 2021, 694 706 (98.5%) recovered and 10 797 (1.5%) died. The median age was 36 years (IQR 24-50), 13.2% (93 459) were <18 years and 51.6% were female. The subdistrict level accounted for 1.5% of variance in mortality (p<0.0001). Mortality ranged from 0.9 to 1.8% by subdistrict. Individual-level factors associated with death were older age, male sex, comorbidities and age <5 years during the first wave (adjusted OR (aOR)) 1.56, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.35; reference: age 20-29 years). Community-level factors associated with death were poverty (aOR for the poorer quarter 1.35, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.55; reference: wealthiest quarter) and high population density (aOR for the highest density 1.34, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.58; reference: the lowest). Healthcare factor associated with death was low vaccine coverage (aOR for the lowest coverage 1.25, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.38; reference: the highest). CONCLUSION: In addition to individual risk factors, living in areas with high poverty and density, and low healthcare performance further increase the vulnerability of communities to COVID-19-associated death in urban low-resource settings.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Adulto , Preescolar , Atención a la Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Indonesia/epidemiología , Masculino , Análisis Multinivel , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on COVID-19-related mortality and associated factors from low-resource settings are scarce. This study examined clinical characteristics and factors associated with in-hospital mortality of COVID-19 patients in Jakarta, Indonesia, from March 2 to July 31, 2020. METHODS: This retrospective cohort included all hospitalised patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 in 55 hospitals. We extracted demographic and clinical data, including hospital outcomes (discharge or death). We used logistic regression to examine factors associated with mortality. FINDINGS: Of 4265 patients with a definitive outcome by July 31, 3768 (88%) were discharged and 497 (12%) died. The median age was 46 years (IQR 32-57), 5% were children, and 31% had >1 comorbidity. Age-specific mortalities were 11% (7/61) for <5 years; 4% (1/23) for 5-9; 2% (3/133) for 10-19; 2% (8/638) for 20-29; 3% (26/755) for 30-39; 7% (61/819) for 40-49; 17% (155/941) for 50-59; 22% (132/611) for 60-69; and 34% (96/284) for ≥70. Risk of death was associated with higher age, male sex; pre-existing hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease; clinical diagnosis of pneumonia; multiple (>3) symptoms; immediate ICU admission, or intubation. Across all ages, risk of death was higher for patients with >1 comorbidity compared to those without; notably the risk was six-fold increased among patients <50 years (adjusted odds ratio 5.87, 95%CI 3.28-10.52; 27% vs 3% mortality). INTERPRETATION: Overall in-hospital mortality was lower than reported in high-income countries, probably due to younger age distribution and fewer comorbidities. Deaths occurred across all ages, with >10% mortality among children <5 years and adults >50 years.
RESUMEN
We fitted a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in care homes and the community to regional surveillance data for England. Compared with other approaches, our model provides a synthesis of multiple surveillance data streams into a single coherent modeling framework, allowing transmission and severity to be disentangled from features of the surveillance system. Of the control measures implemented, only national lockdown brought the reproduction number (Rt eff) below 1 consistently; if introduced 1 week earlier, it could have reduced deaths in the first wave from an estimated 48,600 to 25,600 [95% credible interval (CrI): 15,900 to 38,400]. The infection fatality ratio decreased from 1.00% (95% CrI: 0.85 to 1.21%) to 0.79% (95% CrI: 0.63 to 0.99%), suggesting improved clinical care. The infection fatality ratio was higher in the elderly residing in care homes (23.3%, 95% CrI: 14.7 to 35.2%) than those residing in the community (7.9%, 95% CrI: 5.9 to 10.3%). On 2 December 2020, England was still far from herd immunity, with regional cumulative infection incidence between 7.6% (95% CrI: 5.4 to 10.2%) and 22.3% (95% CrI: 19.4 to 25.4%) of the population. Therefore, any vaccination campaign will need to achieve high coverage and a high degree of protection in vaccinated individuals to allow nonpharmaceutical interventions to be lifted without a resurgence of transmission.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemias , Anciano , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, countries have sought to control SARS-CoV-2 transmission by restricting population movement through social distancing interventions, thus reducing the number of contacts. Mobility data represent an important proxy measure of social distancing, and here, we characterise the relationship between transmission and mobility for 52 countries around the world. Transmission significantly decreased with the initial reduction in mobility in 73% of the countries analysed, but we found evidence of decoupling of transmission and mobility following the relaxation of strict control measures for 80% of countries. For the majority of countries, mobility explained a substantial proportion of the variation in transmissibility (median adjusted R-squared: 48%, interquartile range - IQR - across countries [27-77%]). Where a change in the relationship occurred, predictive ability decreased after the relaxation; from a median adjusted R-squared of 74% (IQR across countries [49-91%]) pre-relaxation, to a median adjusted R-squared of 30% (IQR across countries [12-48%]) post-relaxation. In countries with a clear relationship between mobility and transmission both before and after strict control measures were relaxed, mobility was associated with lower transmission rates after control measures were relaxed indicating that the beneficial effects of ongoing social distancing behaviours were substantial.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/transmisión , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/métodos , Pandemias/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Algoritmos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles/estadística & datos numéricos , Salud Global , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Distanciamiento Físico , Cuarentena/métodos , SARS-CoV-2/fisiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has the potential to cause substantial disruptions to health services, due to cases overburdening the health system or response measures limiting usual programmatic activities. We aimed to quantify the extent to which disruptions to services for HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria in low-income and middle-income countries with high burdens of these diseases could lead to additional loss of life over the next 5 years. METHODS: Assuming a basic reproduction number of 3·0, we constructed four scenarios for possible responses to the COVID-19 pandemic: no action, mitigation for 6 months, suppression for 2 months, or suppression for 1 year. We used established transmission models of HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria to estimate the additional impact on health that could be caused in selected settings, either due to COVID-19 interventions limiting activities, or due to the high demand on the health system due to the COVID-19 pandemic. FINDINGS: In high-burden settings, deaths due to HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria over 5 years could increase by up to 10%, 20%, and 36%, respectively, compared with if there was no COVID-19 pandemic. The greatest impact on HIV was estimated to be from interruption to antiretroviral therapy, which could occur during a period of high health system demand. For tuberculosis, the greatest impact would be from reductions in timely diagnosis and treatment of new cases, which could result from any prolonged period of COVID-19 suppression interventions. The greatest impact on malaria burden could be as a result of interruption of planned net campaigns. These disruptions could lead to a loss of life-years over 5 years that is of the same order of magnitude as the direct impact from COVID-19 in places with a high burden of malaria and large HIV and tuberculosis epidemics. INTERPRETATION: Maintaining the most critical prevention activities and health-care services for HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria could substantially reduce the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust, UK Department for International Development, and Medical Research Council.