Imperial College London

Professor Neil Ferguson

Faculty of MedicineSchool of Public Health

Vice-Dean (Academic Development)
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 3296neil.ferguson Website

 
 
//

Location

 

Medical SchoolSt Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Publication Type
Year
to

314 results found

McCabe R, Kont M, Schmit N, Whittaker C, Lochen A, Baguelin M, Knock E, Whittles L, Lees J, Walker P, Ghani A, Ferguson N, White P, Donnelly C, Hauck K, Watson Oet al., 2020, Report 36: Modelling ICU capacity under different epidemiological scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic in three western European countries

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed enormous strain on healthcare systems, particularly intensive care units (ICUs), with COVID-19 patient care being a key concern of healthcare system planning for winter 2020/21. Ensuring that all patients who require intensive care, irrespective of COVID-19 status, can access it during this time is essential. This study uses an integrated model of hospital capacity planning and epidemiological projections of COVID-19 patients to estimate the spare capacity of key ICU resources under different epidemic scenarios in France, Germany and Italy across the winter period of 2020/21. In particular, we examine the effect of implementing suppression strategies of varying effectiveness, triggered by different numbers of COVID-19 patients in ICU. The use of a ‘dual-demand’ (COVID-19 and non-COVID-19) patient model and the consideration of multiple ICU resources that determine capacity (beds, doctors, nurses and ventilators) and the interdependencies between them, provides a detailed insight into potential capacity constraints this winter. Without sufficient mitigation, we estimate that COVID-19 ICU patient numbers will exceed those seen in the first peak, resulting in substantial capacity deficits, with beds being consistently found to be the most constrained resource across countries. Lockdowns triggered based on ICU capacity could lead to large improvements in spare capacity during the winter season, with pressure being most effectively alleviated when lockdown is triggered early and implemented at a higher level of suppression. In many cases, maximum deficits are reduced to lower levels which can then be managed by expanding supply-side hospital capacity, to ensure that all patients can receive treatment. The success of such interventions also depends on baseline ICU bed numbers and average non-COVID-19 patient occupancy. We find that lockdowns of longer duration reduce the total number of days in defic

Report

Haw D, Forchini G, Christen P, Bajaj S, Hogan A, Winskill P, Miraldo M, White P, Ghani A, Ferguson N, Smith P, Hauck Ket al., 2020, Report 35: How can we keep schools and universities open? Differentiating closures by economic sector to optimize social and economic activity while containing SARS-CoV-2 transmission

There is a trade-off between the education sector and other economic sectors in the control of SARS-Cov-2 transmission. Here we integrate a dynamic model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission with a 63-sector economic model reflecting sectoral heterogeneity in transmission and economic interdependence between sectors. We identify COVID-19 control strategies which optimize economic production while keeping schools and universities operational and constraining infections such that emergency hospital capacity is not exceeded. The model estimates an economic gain of between £163bn and £205bn for the United Kingdom compared to a blanket lockdown of non-essential activity over six months, depending on hospital capacity. Sectors identified as potential priorities for closure are contact-intensive and/or less economically productive.

Report

Biggerstaff M, Cowling BJ, Cucunubá ZM, Dinh L, Ferguson NM, Gao H, Hill V, Imai N, Johansson MA, Kada S, Morgan O, Pastore y Piontti A, Polonsky JA, Prasad PV, Quandelacy TM, Rambaut A, Tappero JW, Vandemaele KA, Vespignani A, Warmbrod KL, Wong JYet al., 2020, Early insights from statistical and mathematical modeling of key epidemiologic parameters of COVID-19, Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol: 26, ISSN: 1080-6040

We report key epidemiologic parameter estimates for coronavirus disease identified in peer-reviewed publications, preprint articles, and online reports. Range estimates for incubation period were 1.8–6.9 days, serial interval 4.0–7.5 days, and doubling time 2.3–7.4 days. The effective reproductive number varied widely, with reductions attributable to interventions. Case burden and infection fatality ratios increased with patient age. Implementation of combined interventions could reduce cases and delay epidemic peak up to 1 month. These parameters for transmission, disease severity, and intervention effectiveness are critical for guiding policy decisions. Estimates will likely change as new information becomes available.

Journal article

Okell LC, Verity R, Katzourakis A, Volz EM, Watson OJ, Mishra S, Walker P, Whittaker C, Donnelly CA, Riley S, Ghani AC, Gandy A, Flaxman S, Ferguson NM, Bhatt Set al., 2020, Host or pathogen-related factors in COVID-19 severity? - Authors' reply., Lancet, Vol: 396

Journal article

Brazeau N, Verity R, Jenks S, Fu H, Whittaker C, Winskill P, Dorigatti I, Walker P, Riley S, Schnekenberg RP, Heltgebaum H, Mellan T, Mishra S, Unwin H, Watson O, Cucunuba Perez Z, Baguelin M, Whittles L, Bhatt S, Ghani A, Ferguson N, Okell Let al., 2020, Report 34: COVID-19 infection fatality ratio: estimates from seroprevalence

The infection fatality ratio (IFR) is a key statistic for estimating the burden of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and has been continuously debated throughout the current pandemic. Previous estimates have relied on data early in the epidemic, or have not fully accounted for uncertainty in serological test characteristics and delays from onset of infection to seroconversion, death, and antibody waning. After screening 175 studies, we identified 10 representative antibody surveys to obtain updated estimates of the IFR using a modelling framework that addresses the limitations listed above. We inferred serological test specificity from regional variation within serosurveys, which is critical for correctly estimating the cumulative proportion infected when seroprevalence is still low. We find that age-specific IFRs follow an approximately log-linear pattern, with the risk of death doubling approximately every eight years of age. Using these age-specific estimates, we estimate the overall IFR in a typical low-income country, with a population structure skewed towards younger individuals, to be 0.23% (0.14-0.42 95% prediction interval range). In contrast, in a typical high income country, with a greater concentration of elderly individuals, we estimate the overall IFR to be 1.15% (0.78-1.79 95% prediction interval range). We show that accounting for seroreversion, the waning of antibodies leading to a negative serological result, can slightly reduce the IFR among serosurveys conducted several months after the first wave of the outbreak, such as Italy. In contrast, uncertainty in test false positive rates combined with low seroprevalence in some surveys can reconcile apparently low crude fatality ratios with the IFR in other countries. Unbiased estimates of the IFR continue to be critical to policymakers to inform key response decisions. It will be important to continue to monitor the IFR as new treatments are introduced. The code for reproducing these results are av

Report

Fu H, Wang H, Xi X, Boonyasiri A, Wang Y, Hinsley W, Fraser KJ, McCabe R, Olivera Mesa D, Skarp J, Ledda A, Dewé T, Dighe A, Winskill P, van Elsland SL, Ainslie KEC, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boyd O, Brazeau NF, Cattarino L, Charles G, Coupland H, Cucunubá ZM, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Donnelly CA, Dorigatti I, Eales OD, Fitzjohn RG, Flaxman S, Gaythorpe KAM, Ghani AC, Green WD, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Haw DJ, Jeffrey B, Laydon DJ, Lees JA, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag KV, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Riley S, Schmit N, Thompson HA, Unwin HJT, Verity R, Vollmer MAC, Volz E, Walker PGT, Walters CE, Waston OJ, Whittaker C, Whittles LK, Imai N, Bhatia S, Ferguson NMet al., 2020, A database for the epidemic trends and control measures during the first wave of COVID-19 in mainland China, International Journal of Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 1201-9712

Objectives: This data collation effort aims to provide a comprehensive database to describe the epidemic trends and responses during the first wave of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)across main provinces in China. Methods: From mid-January to March 2020, we extracted publicly available data on the spread and control of COVID-19 from 31 provincial health authorities and major media outlets in mainland China. Based on these data, we conducted a descriptive analysis of the epidemics in the six most-affected provinces. Results: School closures, travel restrictions, community-level lockdown, and contact tracing were introduced concurrently around late January but subsequent epidemic trends were different across provinces. Compared to Hubei, the other five most-affected provinces reported a lower crude case fatality ratio and proportion of critical and severe hospitalised cases. From March 2020, as local transmission of COVID-19 declined, switching the focus of measures to testing and quarantine of inbound travellers could help to sustain the control of the epidemic. Conclusions: Aggregated indicators of case notifications and severity distributions are essential for monitoring an epidemic. A publicly available database with these indicators and information on control measures provides useful source for exploring further research and policy planning for response to the COVID-19 epidemic.

Journal article

McCabe R, Schmit N, Christen P, D'Aeth J, Løchen A, Rizmie D, Nayagam AS, Miraldo M, Aylin P, Bottle R, Perez-Guzman PN, Ghani A, Ferguson N, White P, Hauck Ket al., 2020, Adapting hospital capacity to meet changing demands during the COVID-19 pandemic, BMC Medicine, Vol: 18, Pages: 1-12, ISSN: 1741-7015

BackgroundTo calculate hospital surge capacity, achieved via hospital provision interventions implemented for the emergency treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and other patients through March to May 2020; to evaluate the conditions for admitting patients for elective surgery under varying admission levels of COVID-19 patients.MethodsWe analysed National Health Service (NHS) datasets and literature reviews to estimate hospital care capacity before the pandemic (pre-pandemic baseline) and to quantify the impact of interventions (cancellation of elective surgery, field hospitals, use of private hospitals, deployment of former medical staff and deployment of newly qualified medical staff) for treatment of adult COVID-19 patients, focusing on general and acute (G&A) and critical care (CC) beds, staff and ventilators.ResultsNHS England would not have had sufficient capacity to treat all COVID-19 and other patients in March and April 2020 without the hospital provision interventions, which alleviated significant shortfalls in CC nurses, CC and G&A beds and CC junior doctors. All elective surgery can be conducted at normal pre-pandemic levels provided the other interventions are sustained, but only if the daily number of COVID-19 patients occupying CC beds is not greater than 1550 in the whole of England. If the other interventions are not maintained, then elective surgery can only be conducted if the number of COVID-19 patients occupying CC beds is not greater than 320. However, there is greater national capacity to treat G&A patients: without interventions, it takes almost 10,000 G&A COVID-19 patients before any G&A elective patients would be unable to be accommodated.ConclusionsUnless COVID-19 hospitalisations drop to low levels, there is a continued need to enhance critical care capacity in England with field hospitals, use of private hospitals or deployment of former and newly qualified medical staff to allow some or all elective surge

Journal article

Unwin H, Mishra S, Bradley V, Gandy A, Mellan T, Coupland H, Ish-Horowicz J, Vollmer M, Whittaker C, Filippi S, Xi X, Monod M, Ratmann O, Hutchinson M, Valka F, Zhu H, Hawryluk I, Milton P, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Boonyasiri A, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Cucunuba Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dorigatti I, Eales O, Eaton J, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hinsley W, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Nedjati-Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag K, Siveroni I, Thompson H, Walker P, Walters C, Watson O, Whittles L, Ghani A, Ferguson N, Riley S, Donnelly C, Bhatt S, Flaxman Set al., 2020, State-level tracking of COVID-19 in the United States, Nature Communications, ISSN: 2041-1723

As of 1st June 2020, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 104,232 confirmed or probable COVID-19-related deaths in the US. This was more than twice the number of deaths reported in the next most severely impacted country. We jointly model the US epidemic at the state-level, using publicly available deathdata within a Bayesian hierarchical semi-mechanistic framework. For each state, we estimate the number of individuals that have been infected, the number of individuals that are currently infectious and the time-varying reproduction number (the average number of secondary infections caused by an infected person). We use changes in mobility to capture the impact that non-pharmaceutical interventions and other behaviour changes have on therate of transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We estimate thatRtwas only below one in 23 states on 1st June. We also estimate that 3.7% [3.4%-4.0%] of the total population of the US had been infected, with wide variation between states, and approximately 0.01% of the population was infectious. We demonstrate good 3 week model forecasts of deaths with low error and good coverage of our credible intervals.

Journal article

Dighe A, Cattarino L, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Skarp J, Imai N, Bhatia S, Gaythorpe K, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Brazeau N, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Dorigatti I, Eales O, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Green W, Haw D, Hinsley W, Knock E, Laydon D, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Pons Salort M, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Walters C, Watson O, Whittaker C, Whittles L, Ghani A, Donnelly C, Ferguson N, Riley Set al., 2020, Response to COVID-19 in South Korea and implications for lifting stringent interventions, BMC Medicine, Vol: 18, Pages: 1-12, ISSN: 1741-7015

Background After experiencing a sharp growth in COVID-19 cases early in the pandemic, South Korea rapidly controlled transmission while implementing less stringent national social distancing measures than countries in Europe and the US. This has led to substantial interest in their “test, trace, isolate” strategy. However, it is important to understand the epidemiological peculiarities of South Korea’s outbreak and characterise their response before attempting to emulate these measures elsewhere.MethodsWe systematically extracted numbers of suspected cases tested, PCR-confirmed cases, deaths, isolated confirmed cases, and numbers of confirmed cases with an identified epidemiological link from publicly available data. We estimated the time-varying reproduction number, Rt, using an established Bayesian framework, and reviewed the package of interventions implemented by South Korea using our extracted data, plus published literature and government sources. Results We estimated that after the initial rapid growth in cases, Rt dropped below one in early April before increasing to a maximum of 1.94 (95%CrI; 1.64-2.27) in May following outbreaks in Seoul Metropolitan Region. By mid-June Rt was back below one where it remained until the end of our study (July 13th). Despite less stringent “lockdown” measures, strong social distancing measures were implemented in high incidence areas and studies measured a considerable national decrease in movement in late-February. Testing capacity was swiftly increased, and protocols were in place to isolate suspected and confirmed cases quickly however we could not estimate the delay to isolation using our data. Accounting for just 10% of cases, individual case-based contact-tracing picked up a relatively minor proportion of total cases, with cluster investigations accounting for 66%. ConclusionsWhilst early adoption of testing and contact-tracing are likely to be important for South Korea’s successf

Journal article

Hogan A, Winskill P, Watson O, Walker P, Whittaker C, Baguelin M, Haw D, Lochen A, Gaythorpe K, Ainslie K, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Charles G, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Donnelly C, Dorigatti I, Eales O, van Elsland S, Ferreira Do Nascimento F, Fitzjohn R, Flaxman S, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jauneikaite E, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Ower A, Parag K, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Siveroni I, Skarp J, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Volz E, Walters C, Wang H, Wang Y, Whittles L, Xi X, Muhib F, Smith P, Hauck K, Ferguson N, Ghani Aet al., 2020, Report 33: Modelling the allocation and impact of a COVID-19 vaccine

Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates are now in late-stage trials, with efficacy and safety results expected by the end of 2020. Even under optimistic scenarios for manufacture and delivery, the doses available in 2021 are likely to be limited. Here we identify optimal vaccine allocation strategies within and between countries to maximise health (avert deaths) under constraints on dose supply. We extended an existing mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission across different country settings to model the public health impact of potential vaccines, using a range of target product profiles developed by the World Health Organization. We show that as supply increases, vaccines that reduce or block infection – and thus transmission – in addition to preventing disease have a greater impact than those that prevent disease alone, due to the indirect protection provided to high-risk groups. We further demonstrate that the health impact of vaccination will depend on the cumulative infection incidence in the population when vaccination begins, the duration of any naturally acquired immunity, the likely trajectory of the epidemic in 2021 and the level of healthcare available to effectively treat those with disease. Within a country, we find that for a limited supply (doses for <20% of the population) the optimal strategy is to target the elderly and other high-risk groups. However, if a larger supply is available, the optimal strategy switches to targeting key transmitters (i.e. the working age population and potentially children) to indirectly protect the elderly and vulnerable. Given the likely global dose supply in 2021 (2 billion doses with a two-dose vaccine), we find that a strategy in which doses are allocated to countries in proportion to their population size is close to optimal in averting deaths. Such a strategy also aligns with the ethical principles agreed in pandemic preparedness planning.

Report

Monod M, Blenkinsop A, Xi X, Herbert D, Bershan S, Tietze S, Bradley V, Chen Y, Coupland H, Filippi S, Ish-Horowicz J, McManus M, Mellan T, Gandy A, Hutchinson M, Unwin H, Vollmer M, Weber S, Zhu H, Bezancon A, Ferguson N, Mishra S, Flaxman S, Bhatt S, Ratmann O, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Cattarino L, Cooper L, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Djaafara A, Dorigatti I, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, Green W, Hamlet A, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Parag K, Siveroni I, Thompson H, Verity R, Walters C, Donnelly C, Okell L, Bhatia S, Brazeau N, Eales O, Haw D, Imai N, Jauneikaite E, Lees J, Mousa A, Olivera Mesa D, Skarp J, Whittles Let al., 2020, Report 32: Targeting interventions to age groups that sustain COVID-19 transmission in the United States

Following ini􀀂al declines, in mid 2020, a resurgence in transmission of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has occurred in the United States and parts of Europe. Despite the wide implementa􀀂on of non-pharmaceu􀀂cal inter-ven􀀂ons, it is s􀀂ll not known how they are impacted by changing contact pa􀀁erns, age and other demographics. As COVID-19 disease control becomes more localised, understanding the age demographics driving transmission and how these impact the loosening of interven􀀂ons such as school reopening is crucial. Considering dynamics for the United States, we analyse aggregated, age-specific mobility trends from more than 10 million individuals and link these mechanis􀀂cally to age-specific COVID-19 mortality data. In contrast to previous approaches, we link mobility to mortality via age specific contact pa􀀁erns and use this rich rela􀀂onship to reconstruct accurate trans-mission dynamics. Contrary to anecdotal evidence, we find li􀀁le support for age-shi􀀃s in contact and transmission dynamics over 􀀂me. We es􀀂mate that, un􀀂l August, 63.4% [60.9%-65.5%] of SARS-CoV-2 infec􀀂ons in the United States originated from adults aged 20-49, while 1.2% [0.8%-1.8%] originated from children aged 0-9. In areas with con􀀂nued, community-wide transmission, our transmission model predicts that re-opening kindergartens and el-ementary schools could facilitate spread and lead to considerable excess COVID-19 a􀀁ributable deaths over a 90-day period. These findings indicate that targe􀀂ng interven􀀂ons to adults aged 20-49 are an important con-sidera􀀂on in hal􀀂ng resurgent epidemics, and preven􀀂ng COVID-19-a􀀁ributable deaths when kindergartens and elementary schools reopen.

Report

van Elsland S, Watson O, Alhaffar M, Mehchy Z, Whittaker C, Akil Z, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Charles G, Ciavarella C, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Djaafara A, Donnelly C, Dorigatti I, Eales O, van Elsland S, Nascimento F, Fitzjohn R, Flaxman S, Forna A, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Haw D, Hayes S, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jeffrey B, Johnson R, Jorgensen D, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Olivera Mesa D, Pons Salort M, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Siveroni I, Stopard I, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Volz E, Walters C, Wang H, Wang Y, Whittles L, Winskill P, Xi X, Ferguson N, Beals E, Walker P, Anonymous Authorset al., 2020, Report 31: Estimating the burden of COVID-19 in Damascus, Syria: an analysis of novel data sources to infer mortality under-ascertainment

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in substantial mortality worldwide. However, to date, countries in the Middle East and Africa have reported substantially lower mortality rates than in Europe and the Americas. One hypothesis is that these countries have been ‘spared’, but another is that deaths have been under-ascertained (deaths that have been unreported due to any number of reasons, for instance due to limited testing capacity). However, the scale of under-ascertainment is difficult to assess with currently available data. In this analysis, we estimate the potential under-ascertainment of COVID-19 mortality in Damascus, Syria, where all-cause mortality data has been reported between 25th July and 1st August. We fit a mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission to reported COVID-19 deaths in Damascus since the beginning of the pandemic and compare the model-predicted deaths to reported excess deaths. Exploring a range of different assumptions about under-ascertainment, we estimate that only 1.25% of deaths (sensitivity range 1% - 3%) due to COVID-19 are reported in Damascus. Accounting for under-ascertainment also corroborates local reports of exceeded hospital bed capacity. To validate the epidemic dynamics inferred, we leverage community-uploaded obituary certificates as an alternative data source, which confirms extensive mortality under-ascertainment in Damascus between July and August. This level of under-ascertainment suggests that Damascus is at a much later stage in its epidemic than suggested by surveillance reports, which have repo. We estimate that 4,340 (95% CI: 3,250 - 5,540) deaths due to COVID-19 in Damascus may have been missed as of 2nd September 2020. Given that Damascus is likely to have the most robust surveillance in Syria, these findings suggest that other regions of the country could have experienced similar or worse mortality rates due to COVID-19.

Report

Candido DS, Claro IM, de Jesus JG, Souza WM, Moreira FRR, Dellicour S, Mellan TA, du Plessis L, Pereira RHM, Sales FCS, Manuli ER, Theze J, Almeida L, Menezes MT, Voloch CM, Fumagalli MJ, Coletti TM, Silva CAM, Ramundo MS, Amorim MR, Hoeltgebaum HH, Mishra S, Gill MS, Carvalho LM, Buss LF, Prete Jr CA, Ashworth J, Nakaya H, Peixoto PS, Brady OJ, Nicholls SM, Tanuri A, Rossi AD, Braga CK, Gerber AL, Guimaraes APDC, Gaburo Jr N, Alencar CS, Ferreira ACS, Lima CX, Levi JE, Granato C, Ferreira GM, Francisco Jr RS, Granja F, Garcia MT, Moretti ML, Perroud Jr MW, Castineiras TMPP, Lazari CS, Hill SC, de Souza Santos AA, Simeoni CL, Forato J, Sposito AC, Schreiber AZ, Santos MNN, de Sa CZ, Souza RP, Resende-Moreira LC, Teixeira MM, Hubner J, Leme PAF, Moreira RG, Nogueira ML, Ferguson NM, Costa SF, Proenca-Modena JL, Vasconcelos ATR, Bhatt S, Lemey P, Wu C-H, Rambaut A, Loman NJ, Aguiar RS, Pybus OG, Sabino EC, Faria NRet al., 2020, Evolution and epidemic spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Brazil, Science, Vol: 369, Pages: 1255-1260, ISSN: 0036-8075

Brazil currently has one of the fastest-growing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) epidemics in the world. Because of limited available data, assessments of the impact of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on this virus spread remain challenging. Using a mobility-driven transmission model, we show that NPIs reduced the reproduction number from >3 to 1 to 1.6 in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. Sequencing of 427 new genomes and analysis of a geographically representative genomic dataset identified >100 international virus introductions in Brazil. We estimate that most (76%) of the Brazilian strains fell in three clades that were introduced from Europe between 22 February and 11 March 2020. During the early epidemic phase, we found that SARS-CoV-2 spread mostly locally and within state borders. After this period, despite sharp decreases in air travel, we estimated multiple exportations from large urban centers that coincided with a 25% increase in average traveled distances in national flights. This study sheds new light on the epidemic transmission and evolutionary trajectories of SARS-CoV-2 lineages in Brazil and provides evidence that current interventions remain insufficient to keep virus transmission under control in this country.

Journal article

Hogan A, Jewell B, Sherrard-Smith E, Watson O, Whittaker C, Hamlet A, Smith J, Winskill P, Verity R, Baguelin M, Lees J, Whittles L, Ainslie K, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Djaafara A, Donnelly C, Eaton J, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Haw D, Hayes S, Hinsley W, Imai N, Laydon D, Mangal T, Mellan T, Mishra S, Parag K, Thompson H, Unwin H, Vollmer M, Walters C, Wang H, Ferguson N, Okell L, Churcher T, Arinaminpathy N, Ghani A, Walker P, Hallett Tet al., 2020, Potential impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on HIV, TB and malaria in low- and middle-income countries: a modelling study, The Lancet Global Health, Vol: 8, Pages: e1132-e1141, ISSN: 2214-109X

Background: COVID-19 has the potential to cause substantial disruptions to health services, including by cases overburdening the health system or response measures limiting usual programmatic activities. We aimed to quantify the extent to which disruptions in services for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), tuberculosis (TB) and malaria in low- and middle-income countries with high burdens of those disease could lead to additional loss of life. Methods: We constructed plausible scenarios for the disruptions that could be incurred during the COVID-19 pandemic and used established transmission models for each disease to estimate the additional impact on health that could be caused in selected settings.Findings: In high burden settings, HIV-, TB- and malaria-related deaths over five years may increase by up to 10%, 20% and 36%, respectively, compared to if there were no COVID-19 pandemic. We estimate the greatest impact on HIV to be from interruption to antiretroviral therapy, which may occur during a period of high health system demand. For TB, we estimate the greatest impact is from reductions in timely diagnosis and treatment of new cases, which may result from any prolonged period of COVID-19 suppression interventions. We estimate that the greatest impact on malaria burden could come from interruption of planned net campaigns. These disruptions could lead to loss of life-years over five 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/TB epidemics.Interpretation: Maintaining the most critical prevention activities and healthcare services for HIV, TB and malaria could significantly reduce the overall impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The Wellcome Trust, DFID, MRC

Journal article

Thompson H, Imai N, Dighe A, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Djaafara B, Dorigatti I, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Haw D, Hayes S, Hinsley W, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mangal T, Mellan T, Mishra S, Mousa A, Nedjati-Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag K, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Riley S, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Volz E, Walker P, Walters C, Wang H, Wang Y, Watson O, Whittaker C, Whittles L, Winskill P, Xi X, Donnelly C, Ferguson Net al., 2020, SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence on repatriation flights from Wuhan City, China, Journal of Travel Medicine, ISSN: 1195-1982

We estimated SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in cohorts of repatriated citizens from Wuhan to be 0.44% (95% CI: 0.19%–1.03%). Although not representative of the wider population we believe these estimates are helpful in providing a conservative estimate of infection prevalence in Wuhan City, China, in the absence of large-scale population testing early in the epidemic.

Journal article

Lavezzo E, Franchin E, Ciavarella C, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Barzon L, Del Vecchio C, Rossi L, Manganelli R, Loregian A, Navarin N, Abate D, Sciro M, Merigliano S, De Canale E, Vanuzzo MC, Besutti V, Saluzzo F, Onelia F, Pacenti M, Parisi S, Carretta G, Donato D, Flor L, Cocchio S, Masi G, Sperduti A, Cattarino L, Salvador R, Nicoletti M, Caldart F, Castelli G, Nieddu E, Labella B, Fava L, Drigo M, Gaythorpe KAM, Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, Brazzale AR, Toppo S, Trevisan M, Baldo V, Donnelly CA, Ferguson NM, Dorigatti I, Crisanti Aet al., 2020, Suppression of a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in the Italian municipality of Vo'., Nature, Vol: 584, Pages: 425-429, ISSN: 0028-0836

On the 21st of February 2020 a resident of the municipality of Vo', a small town near Padua, died of pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection1. This was the first COVID-19 death detected in Italy since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in the Chinese city of Wuhan, Hubei province2. In response, the regional authorities imposed the lockdown of the whole municipality for 14 days3. We collected information on the demography, clinical presentation, hospitalization, contact network and presence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in nasopharyngeal swabs for 85.9% and 71.5% of the population of Vo' at two consecutive time points. On the first survey, which was conducted around the time the town lockdown started, we found a prevalence of infection of 2.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.1-3.3%). On the second survey, which was conducted at the end of the lockdown, we found a prevalence of 1.2% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.8-1.8%). Notably, 42.5% (95% CI 31.5-54.6%) of the confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections detected across the two surveys were asymptomatic (i.e. did not have symptoms at the time of swab testing and did not develop symptoms afterwards). The mean serial interval was 7.2 days (95% CI 5.9-9.6). We found no statistically significant difference in the viral load of symptomatic versus asymptomatic infections (p-values 0.62 and 0.74 for E and RdRp genes, respectively, Exact Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test). This study sheds new light on the frequency of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, their infectivity (as measured by the viral load) and provides new insights into its transmission dynamics and the efficacy of the implemented control measures.

Journal article

Grassly NC, Pons-Salort M, Parker EPK, White PJ, Ferguson NM, Imperial College COVID-19 Response Teamet al., 2020, Comparison of molecular testing strategies for COVID-19 control: a mathematical modelling study, Lancet Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 1473-3099

BACKGROUND: WHO has called for increased testing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but countries have taken different approaches and the effectiveness of alternative strategies is unknown. We aimed to investigate the potential impact of different testing and isolation strategies on transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: We developed a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission based on infectiousness and PCR test sensitivity over time since infection. We estimated the reduction in the effective reproduction number (R) achieved by testing and isolating symptomatic individuals, regular screening of high-risk groups irrespective of symptoms, and quarantine of contacts of laboratory-confirmed cases identified through test-and-trace protocols. The expected effectiveness of different testing strategies was defined as the percentage reduction in R. We reviewed data on the performance of antibody tests reported by the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics and examined their implications for the use of so-called immunity passports. FINDINGS: If all individuals with symptoms compatible with COVID-19 self-isolated and self-isolation was 100% effective in reducing onwards transmission, self-isolation of symptomatic individuals would result in a reduction in R of 47% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 32-55). PCR testing to identify SARS-CoV-2 infection soon after symptom onset could reduce the number of individuals needing to self-isolate, but would also reduce the effectiveness of self-isolation (around 10% would be false negatives). Weekly screening of health-care workers and other high-risk groups irrespective of symptoms by use of PCR testing is estimated to reduce their contribution to SARS-CoV-2 transmission by 23% (95% UI 16-40), on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms, assuming results are available at 24 h. The effectiveness of test and trace depends strongly on coverage and the timelines

Journal article

Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, Unwin HJT, Mellan TA, Coupland H, Whittaker C, Zhu H, Berah T, Eaton JW, Monod M, Perez Guzman PN, Schmit N, Cilloni L, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Cattarino L, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Djaafara A, Dorigatti I, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, Grassly N, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Parag K, Siveroni I, Thompson H, Verity R, Volz E, Walters C, Wang H, Watson O, Winskill P, Xi X, Walker P, Ghani AC, Donnelly CA, Riley SM, Vollmer MAC, Ferguson NM, Okell LC, Bhatt Set al., 2020, Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe, Nature, Vol: 584, Pages: 257-261, ISSN: 0028-0836

Following the emergence of a novel coronavirus1 (SARS-CoV-2) and its spread outside of China, Europe has experienced large epidemics. In response, many European countries have implemented unprecedented non-pharmaceutical interventions such as closure of schools and national lockdowns. We study the impact of major interventions across 11 European countries for the period from the start of COVID-19 until the 4th of May 2020 when lockdowns started to be lifted. Our model calculates backwards from observed deaths to estimate transmission that occurred several weeks prior, allowing for the time lag between infection and death. We use partial pooling of information between countries with both individual and shared effects on the reproduction number. Pooling allows more information to be used, helps overcome data idiosyncrasies, and enables more timely estimates. Our model relies on fixed estimates of some epidemiological parameters such as the infection fatality rate, does not include importation or subnational variation and assumes that changes in the reproduction number are an immediate response to interventions rather than gradual changes in behavior. Amidst the ongoing pandemic, we rely on death data that is incomplete, with systematic biases in reporting, and subject to future consolidation. We estimate that, for all the countries we consider, current interventions have been sufficient to drive the reproduction number Rt below 1 (probability Rt< 1.0 is 99.9%) and achieve epidemic control. We estimate that, across all 11 countries, between 12 and 15 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 4th May, representing between 3.2% and 4.0% of the population. Our results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions and lockdown in particular have had a large effect on reducing transmission. Continued intervention should be considered to keep transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under control.

Journal article

Perez Guzman PN, Daunt A, Mukherjee S, Crook P, Forlano R, Kont M, Lochen A, Vollmer M, Middleton P, Judge R, Harlow C, Soubieres A, Cooke G, White PJ, Hallett T, Aylin P, Ferguson N, Hauck K, Thursz M, Nayagam Set al., 2020, Clinical characteristics and predictors of outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in a multi-ethnic London NHS Trust: a retrospective cohort study, Clinical Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 1058-4838

Background: Emerging evidence suggests ethnic minorities are disproportionatelyaffected by COVID-19. Detailed clinical analyses of multi-cultural hospitalized patientcohorts remain largely undescribed.Methods: We performed regression, survival andcumulative competing risk analyses to evaluate factors associated with mortality inpatients admitted for COVID-19 in three large London hospitals between February 25and April 5, censored as of May 1, 2020.Results: Of 614 patients (median age 69years, (IQR 25) and 62% male), 381 (62%) had been discharged alive, 178 (29%)died and 55 (9%) remained hospitalized at censoring. Severe hypoxemia (aOR 4.25,95%CI 2.36-7.64), leukocytosis (aOR 2.35, 95%CI 1.35-4.11), thrombocytopenia (aOR1.01, 95%CI 1.00-1.01, increase per 10x9decrease), severe renal impairment (aOR5.14, 95%CI 2.65-9.97), and low albumin (aOR 1.06, 95%CI 1.02-1.09, increase per gdecrease) were associated with death. Forty percent (244) were from black, Asian andother minority ethnic (BAME) groups, 38% (235) white and for 22% (135) ethnicity wasunknown. BAME patients were younger and had fewer comorbidities. Whilst theunadjusted odds of death did not differ by ethnicity, when adjusting for age, sex andcomorbidities, black patients were at higher odds of death compared to whites (aOR1.69, 95%CI 1.00-2.86). This association was stronger when further adjusting foradmission severity (aOR 1.85 95% CI 1.06-3.24). Conclusions: BAME patients were over-represented in our cohort and, whenaccounting for demographic and clinical profile of admission, black patients were atincreased odds of death. Further research is needed into biologic drivers of differencesin COVID-19 outcomes by ethnicity.

Journal article

Gaythorpe KAM, Hamlet A, Cibrelus L, Garske T, Ferguson NMet al., 2020, The effect of climate change on yellow fever disease burden in Africa, ELIFE, Vol: 9, ISSN: 2050-084X

Journal article

Grassly NC, Pons Salort M, Parker EPK, White PJ, Ferguson NM, Imperial College COVID-19 Response Teamet al., 2020, Role of molecular testing in COVID-19 control: a mathematical modelling study, Lancet Infectious Diseases, ISSN: 1473-3099

Background: The World Health Organization has called for increased testing in response to COVID-19, but countries have taken different approaches and the effectiveness of alternative strategies is unknown. Methods: We developed a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission based on infectiousness and PCR test sensitivity over time since infection. We estimated the reduction in the reproduction number (R) achieved by testing and isolating symptomatic individuals, regular screening of high-risk groups irrespective of symptoms,and quarantine of contacts identified through ‘test-and-trace’ protocols. We reviewed data on the performance of antibody tests reported by the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics and examined the potential of ‘immunity passports’. Results: Weekly screening of healthcare workers and other high-riskgroups irrespective of symptoms using PCR is estimated to reduce their contribution to transmissionby 23% (95% uncertainty interval: 16-40%), on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms, assuming results are available at 24 hours. The effectiveness of test-and-trace depends strongly on coverage and the timeliness of contact tracing, potentially reducing R by26% (14-35%) if 80% of cases and contactsare identified and there is immediate testing on symptom onset and quarantine of contacts within 24 hours. Immunity passports based on tests for antibody or infection face significant technical, legal and ethical challenges. Interpretation: PCR and antibody testing can play a critical role in prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, especially among healthcare workers and other high-risk groups,but no single strategy will reduce R below 1 at current levels of population immunity.

Journal article

Fu H, Xi X, Wang H, Boonyasiri A, Wang Y, Hinsley W, Fraser K, McCabe R, Olivera Mesa D, Skarp J, Ledda A, Dewe T, Dighe A, Winskill P, van Elsland S, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Charles G, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Donnelly C, Dorigatti I, Green W, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Haw D, Jeffrey B, Laydon D, Lees J, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag K, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Riley S, Schmit N, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Volz E, Walker P, Walters C, Watson O, Whittaker C, Whittles L, Imai N, Bhatia S, Ferguson Net al., 2020, Report 30: The COVID-19 epidemic trends and control measures in mainland China

Report

Vollmer M, Radhakrishnan S, Kont M, Flaxman S, Bhatt S, Costelloe C, Honeyford C, Aylin P, Cooke G, Redhead J, White P, Ferguson N, Hauck K, Nayagam AS, Perez Guzman PNet al., 2020, Report 29: The impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on all-cause attendances to emergency departments in two large London hospitals: an observational study

The health care system in England has been highly affected by the surge in demand due to patients afflicted by COVID-19. Yet the impact of the pandemic on the care seeking behaviour of patients and thus on Emergency department (ED) services is unknown, especially for non-COVID-19 related emergencies. In this report, we aimed to assess how the reorganisation of hospital care and admission policies to respond to the COVID-19 epidemic affected ED attendances and emergency hospital admissions. We performed time-series analyses of present year vs historic (2015-2019) trends of ED attendances between March 12 and May 31 at two large central London hospitals part of Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (ICHNT) and compared these to regional and national trends. Historic attendances data to ICHNT and publicly available NHS situation reports were used to calibrate time series auto-regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) forecasting models. We thus predicted the (conterfactual) expected number of ED attendances between March 12 (when the first public health measure leading to lock-down started in England) to May 31, 2020 (when the analysis was censored) at ICHNT, at all acute London Trusts and nationally. The forecasted trends were compared to observed data for the same periods of time. Lastly, we analysed the trends at ICHNT disaggregating by mode of arrival, distance from postcode of patient residence to hospital and primary diagnosis amongst those that were subsequently admitted to hospital and compared these data to an average for the same period of time in the years 2015 to 2019.During the study period (January 1 to May 31, 2020) there was an overall decrease in ED attendances of 35% at ICHNT, of 50% across all London NHS Trusts and 53% nationally. For ICHNT, the decrease in attendances was mainly amongst those aged younger than 65 and those arriving by their own means (e.g. personal or public transport). Increasing distance (km) from postcode of residence to hospi

Report

Okell LC, Verity R, Watson OJ, Mishra S, Walker P, Whittaker C, Katzourakis A, Donnelly CA, Riley S, Ghani AC, Gandy A, Flaxman S, Ferguson NM, Bhatt Set al., 2020, Have deaths from COVID-19 in Europe plateaued due to herd immunity?, LANCET, Vol: 395, Pages: E110-E111, ISSN: 0140-6736

Journal article

Forchini G, Lochen A, Hallett T, Aylin P, White P, Donnelly C, Ghani A, Ferguson N, Hauck Ket al., 2020, Report 28: Excess non-COVID-19 deaths in England and Wales between 29th February and 5th June 2020

There were 189,403 deaths from any cause reported in England from 29th February to 5th June 2020 inclusive, and 11,278 all-cause deaths in Wales over the same period. Of those deaths, 44,736 (23.6%) registered COVID-19 on the death certificate in England, and 2,294 (20.3%) in Wales, while 144,667 (76.4%) were not recorded as having been due to COVID-19 in England, and 8,984 (79.7%) in Wales. However, it could be that some of the ‘non-COVID-19’ deaths have in fact also been caused by COVID-19, either as the direct cause of death, or indirectly through provisions for the pandemic impeding access to care for other conditions. There is uncertainty in how many of the non-COVID-19 deaths were directly or indirectly caused by the pandemic. We estimated the excess deaths that were not recorded as associated with COVID-19 in the death certificate (excess non-COVID-19 deaths) as the deaths for which COVID-19 was not reported as the cause, compared to those we would have expected to occur had the pandemic not happened. Expected deaths were forecast with an analysis of historic trends in deaths between 2010 and April 2020 using data by the Office of National Statistics and a statistical time series model. According to the model, we expected 136,294 (95% CI 133,882 - 138,696) deaths in England, and 8,983 (CI 8,051 - 9,904) in Wales over this period, significantly fewer than the number of deaths reported. This means that there were 8,983 (95% CI 5,971 - 10,785) total excess non-COVID-19 deaths in England. For every 100 COVID-19 deaths during the period from 29th February to 5th June 2020 there were between 13 and 24 cumulative excess non-COVID-19 deaths. The proportion of cumulative excess non-COVID-19 deaths of all reported deaths during this period was 4.4% (95% CI 3.2% - 5.7%) in England, with small regional variations. Excess deaths were highest in the South East at 2,213 (95% CI 327 - 4,047) and in London at 1,937 (95% CI 896 - 3,010), respectively. There is no e

Report

Bhatia S, Imai N, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Baguelin M, Boonyasiri A, Cori A, Cucunuba Perez Z, Dorigatti I, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Ghani A, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Okell L, Riley S, Thompson H, van Elsland S, Volz E, Wang H, Wang Y, Whittaker C, Xi X, Donnelly CA, Ferguson NMet al., 2020, Estimating the number of undetected COVID-19 cases among travellers from mainland China, Publisher: F1000 Research Ltd

Background: Since the start of the COVID-19 epidemic in late 2019, there have been more than 152 affected regions and countries with over 110,000 confirmed cases outside mainland China.Methods: We analysed COVID-19 cases among travellers from mainland China to different regions and countries, comparing the region- and country-specific rates of detected and confirmed cases per flight volume to estimate the relative sensitivity of surveillance in different regions and countries.Results: Although travel restrictions from Wuhan City and other cities across China may have reduced the absolute number of travellers to and from China, we estimated that more than two thirds (70%, 95% CI: 54% - 80%, compared to Singapore; 75%, 95% CI: 66% - 82%, compared to multiple countries) of cases exported from mainland China have remained undetected.Conclusions: These undetected cases potentially resulted in multiple chains of human-to-human transmission outside mainland China.

Working paper

McCabe R, Schmit N, Christen P, D'Aeth J, Lochen A, Rizmie D, Nayagam AS, Miraldo M, Aylin P, Bottle R, Perez Guzman PN, Ghani A, Ferguson N, White PJ, Hauck Ket al., 2020, Report 27 Adapting hospital capacity to meet changing demands during the COVID-19 pandemic

To meet the growing demand for hospital care due to the COVID-19 pandemic, England implemented a range of hospital provision interventions including the procurement of equipment, the establishment of additional hospital facilities and the redeployment of staff and other resources. Additionally, to further release capacity across England’s National Health Service (NHS), elective surgery was cancelled in March 2020, leading to a backlog of patients requiring care. This created a pressure on the NHS to reintroduce elective procedures, which urgently needs to be addressed. Population-level measures implemented in March and April 2020 reduced transmission of SARS-CoV-2, prompting a gradual decline in the demand for hospital care by COVID-19 patients after the peak in mid-April. Planning capacity to bring back routine procedures for non-COVID-19 patients whilst maintaining the ability to respond to any potential future increases in demand for COVID-19 care is the challenge currently faced by healthcare planners.In this report, we aim to calculate hospital capacity for emergency treatment of COVID-19 and other patients during the pandemic surge in April and May 2020; to evaluate the increase in capacity achieved via five interventions (cancellation of elective surgery, field hospitals, use of private hospitals, and deployment of former and newly qualified medical staff); and to determine how to re-introduce elective surgery considering continued demand from COVID-19 patients. We do this by modelling the supply of acute NHS hospital care, considering different capacity scenarios, namely capacity before the pandemic (baseline scenario) and after the implementation of capacity expansion interventions that impact available general and acute (G&A) and critical care (CC) beds, staff and ventilators. Demand for hospital care is accounted for in terms of non-COVID-19 and COVID-19 patients. Our results suggest that NHS England would not have had sufficient daily capacity

Report

Walker PGT, Whittaker C, Watson OJ, Baguelin M, Winskill P, Hamlet A, Djafaara BA, Cucunubá Z, Olivera Mesa D, Green W, Thompson H, Nayagam S, Ainslie KEC, Bhatia S, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau NF, Cattarino L, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Donnelly CA, Dorigatti I, van Elsland SL, FitzJohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe KAM, Geidelberg L, Grassly N, Haw D, Hayes S, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jorgensen D, Knock E, Laydon D, Mishra S, Nedjati-Gilani G, Okell LC, Unwin HJ, Verity R, Vollmer M, Walters CE, Wang H, Wang Y, Xi X, Lalloo DG, Ferguson NM, Ghani ACet al., 2020, The impact of COVID-19 and strategies for mitigation and suppression in low- and middle-income countries, Science, Vol: 369, Pages: 413-422, ISSN: 0036-8075

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic poses a severe threat to public health worldwide. We combine data on demography, contact patterns, disease severity, and health care capacity and quality to understand its impact and inform strategies for its control. Younger populations in lower income countries may reduce overall risk but limited health system capacity coupled with closer inter-generational contact largely negates this benefit. Mitigation strategies that slow but do not interrupt transmission will still lead to COVID-19 epidemics rapidly overwhelming health systems, with substantial excess deaths in lower income countries due to the poorer health care available. Of countries that have undertaken suppression to date, lower income countries have acted earlier. However, this will need to be maintained or triggered more frequently in these settings to keep below available health capacity, with associated detrimental consequences for the wider health, well-being and economies of these countries.

Journal article

Nouvellet P, Bhatia S, Cori A, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Djaafara A, Dorigatti I, Eales O, van Elsland S, Nscimento F, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, Grassly N, Green W, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mangal T, Mellan T, Nedjati Gilani G, Parag K, Pons Salort M, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Riley S, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Volz E, Walker P, Walters C, Wang H, Watson O, Whittaker C, Whittles L, Xi X, Ferguson N, Donnelly Cet al., 2020, Report 26: Reduction in mobility and COVID-19 transmission

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, countries have sought to control transmission of SARS-CoV-2by restricting population movement through social distancing interventions, reducing the number ofcontacts.Mobility data represent an important proxy measure of social distancing. Here, we develop aframework to infer the relationship between mobility and the key measure of population-level diseasetransmission, the reproduction number (R). The framework is applied to 53 countries with sustainedSARS-CoV-2 transmission based on two distinct country-specific automated measures of humanmobility, Apple and Google mobility data.For both datasets, the relationship between mobility and transmission was consistent within andacross countries and explained more than 85% of the variance in the observed variation intransmissibility. We quantified country-specific mobility thresholds defined as the reduction inmobility necessary to expect a decline in new infections (R<1).While social contacts were sufficiently reduced in France, Spain and the United Kingdom to controlCOVID-19 as of the 10th of May, we find that enhanced control measures are still warranted for themajority of countries. We found encouraging early evidence of some decoupling of transmission andmobility in 10 countries, a key indicator of successful easing of social-distancing restrictions.Easing social-distancing restrictions should be considered very carefully, as small increases in contactrates are likely to risk resurgence even where COVID-19 is apparently under control. Overall, strongpopulation-wide social-distancing measures are effective to control COVID-19; however gradualeasing of restrictions must be accompanied by alternative interventions, such as efficient contacttracing, to ensure control.

Report

Verity R, Okell LC, Dorigatti I, Winskill P, Whittaker C, Imai N, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Thompson H, Walker PGT, Fu H, Dighe A, Griffin JT, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, Boonyasiri A, Cori A, Cucunubá Z, FitzJohn R, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Laydon D, Nedjati-Gilani G, Riley S, van Elsland S, Volz E, Wang H, Wang Y, Xi X, Donnelly CA, Ghani AC, Ferguson NMet al., 2020, Estimates of the severity of coronavirus disease 2019: a model-based analysis., Lancet Infectious Diseases, Vol: 20, Pages: 669-677, ISSN: 1473-3099

BACKGROUND: In the face of rapidly changing data, a range of case fatality ratio estimates for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been produced that differ substantially in magnitude. We aimed to provide robust estimates, accounting for censoring and ascertainment biases. METHODS: We collected individual-case data for patients who died from COVID-19 in Hubei, mainland China (reported by national and provincial health commissions to Feb 8, 2020), and for cases outside of mainland China (from government or ministry of health websites and media reports for 37 countries, as well as Hong Kong and Macau, until Feb 25, 2020). These individual-case data were used to estimate the time between onset of symptoms and outcome (death or discharge from hospital). We next obtained age-stratified estimates of the case fatality ratio by relating the aggregate distribution of cases to the observed cumulative deaths in China, assuming a constant attack rate by age and adjusting for demography and age-based and location-based under-ascertainment. We also estimated the case fatality ratio from individual line-list data on 1334 cases identified outside of mainland China. Using data on the prevalence of PCR-confirmed cases in international residents repatriated from China, we obtained age-stratified estimates of the infection fatality ratio. Furthermore, data on age-stratified severity in a subset of 3665 cases from China were used to estimate the proportion of infected individuals who are likely to require hospitalisation. FINDINGS: Using data on 24 deaths that occurred in mainland China and 165 recoveries outside of China, we estimated the mean duration from onset of symptoms to death to be 17·8 days (95% credible interval [CrI] 16·9-19·2) and to hospital discharge to be 24·7 days (22·9-28·1). In all laboratory confirmed and clinically diagnosed cases from mainland China (n=70 117), we estimated a crude case fatality ratio (adjusted for cen

Journal article

This data is extracted from the Web of Science and reproduced under a licence from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute this data in whole or in part without the written consent of the Science business of Thomson Reuters.

Request URL: http://wlsprd.imperial.ac.uk:80/respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Request URI: /respub/WEB-INF/jsp/search-html.jsp Query String: respub-action=search.html&id=00308881&limit=30&person=true