RESUMO
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), which began as a small outbreak in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, became a global pandemic within months due to its high transmissibility. In the absence of pharmaceutical treatment, various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to contain the spread of COVID-19 brought the entire world to a halt. After almost a year of seemingly returning to normalcy with the world's quickest vaccine development, the emergence of more infectious and vaccine resistant coronavirus variants is bringing the situation back to where it was a year ago. In the light of this new situation, we conducted a study to portray the possible scenarios based on the three key factors: impact of interventions (pharmaceutical and NPIs), vaccination rate, and vaccine efficacy. In our study, we assessed two of the most crucial factors, transmissibility and vaccination rate, in order to reduce the spreading of COVID-19 in a simple but effective manner. In order to incorporate the time-varying mutational landscape of COVID-19 variants, we estimated a weighted transmissibility composed of the proportion of existing strains that naturally vary over time. Additionally, we consider time varying vaccination rates based on the number of daily new cases. Our method for calculating the vaccination rate from past active cases is an effective approach in forecasting probable future scenarios as it actively tracks people's attitudes toward immunization as active case changes. Our simulations show that if a large number of individuals cannot be vaccinated by ensuring high efficacy in a short period of time, adopting NPIs is the best approach to manage disease transmission with the emergence of new vaccine breakthrough and more infectious variants.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation. CONCLUSION: The developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.