Imperial College London

DR WES HINSLEY

Faculty of MedicineSchool of Public Health

GIS/Database/HPTC Analyst Tech Support
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 3269w.hinsley

 
 
//

Location

 

G31Norfolk PlaceSt Mary's Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Publication Type
Year
to

55 results found

Knock ES, Whittles LK, Lees JA, Perez-Guzman PN, Verity R, FitzJohn RG, Gaythorpe KAM, Imai N, Hinsley W, Okell LC, Rosello A, Kantas N, Walters CE, Bhatia S, Watson OJ, Whittaker C, Cattarino L, Boonyasiri A, Djaafara BA, Fraser K, Fu H, Wang H, Xi X, Donnelly CA, Jauneikaite E, Laydon DJ, White PJ, Ghani AC, Ferguson NM, Cori A, Baguelin Met al., 2021, Key epidemiological drivers and impact of interventions in the 2020 SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in England, Science Translational Medicine, Vol: 13, Pages: 1-12, ISSN: 1946-6234

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 modelling 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 (Rteff ) below 1 consistently; if introduced one week earlier it could have reduced deaths in the first wave from an estimated 48,600 to 25,600 (95% credible interval [95%CrI]: 15,900-38,400). The infection fatality ratio decreased from 1.00% (95%CrI: 0.85%-1.21%) to 0.79% (95%CrI: 0.63%-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%-35.2%) than those residing in the community (7.9%, 95%CrI: 5.9%-10.3%). On 2nd December 2020 England was still far from herd immunity, with regional cumulative infection incidence between 7.6% (95%CrI: 5.4%-10.2%) and 22.3% (95%CrI: 19.4%-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 non-pharmaceutical interventions to be lifted without a resurgence of transmission.

Journal article

Laydon D, Dorigatti I, Small R, Jackson N, Coudeville L, Ferguson Net al., 2021, Efficacy profile of the CYD-TDV dengue vaccine revealed by Bayesian survival analysis of individual-level Phase III data, eLife, Vol: 10, ISSN: 2050-084X

Background: Sanofi-Pasteur’s CYD-TDV is the only licensed dengue vaccine. Two phase III trials showed higher efficacy in seropositive than seronegative recipients. Hospital follow-up revealed increased hospitalisation in 2-5-year-old vaccinees, where serostatus and age effects were unresolved.Methods: We fit a survival model to individual-level data from both trials, including year one of hospital follow-up. We determine efficacy by age, serostatus, serotype and severity, and examine efficacy duration and vaccine action mechanism.Results: Our modelling indicates that vaccine-induced immunity is long-lived in seropositive recipients, and therefore that vaccinating seropositives gives higher protection than two natural infections. Long-term increased hospitalisation risk outweighs short-lived immunity in seronegatives. Independently of serostatus, transient immunity increases with age, and is highest against serotype 4. Benefit is higher in seropositives, and risk enhancement is greater in seronegatives, against hospitalised disease than febrile disease.Conclusions: Our results support vaccinating seropositives only. Rapid diagnostic tests would enable viable “screen-then-vaccinate” programs. Since CYD-TDV acts as a silent infection, long-term safety of other vaccine candidates must be closely monitored.Funding: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust.

Journal article

Volz E, Mishra S, Chand M, Barrett JC, Johnson R, Geidelberg L, Hinsley WR, Laydon DJ, Dabrera G, O'Toole Á, Amato R, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Harrison I, Jackson B, Ariani CV, Boyd O, Loman NJ, McCrone JT, Gonçalves S, Jorgensen D, Myers R, Hill V, Jackson DK, Gaythorpe K, Groves N, Sillitoe J, Kwiatkowski DP, COVID-19 Genomics UK COG-UK consortium, Flaxman S, Ratmann O, Bhatt S, Hopkins S, Gandy A, Rambaut A, Ferguson NMet al., 2021, Assessing transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in England, Nature, Vol: 593, Pages: 266-269, ISSN: 0028-0836

The SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, designated a Variant of Concern 202012/01 (VOC) by Public Health England1, originated in the UK in late Summer to early Autumn 20202. Whole genome SARS-CoV-2 sequence data collected from community-based diagnostic testing shows an unprecedentedly rapid expansion of the B.1.1.7 lineage during Autumn 2020, suggesting a selective advantage. We find that changes in VOC frequency inferred from genetic data correspond closely to changes inferred by S-gene target failures (SGTF) in community-based diagnostic PCR testing. Analysis of trends in SGTF and non-SGTF case numbers in local areas across England shows that the VOC has higher transmissibility than non-VOC lineages, even if the VOC has a different latent period or generation time. The SGTF data indicate a transient shift in the age composition of reported cases, with a larger share of under 20 year olds among reported VOC than non-VOC cases. Time-varying reproduction numbers for the VOC and cocirculating lineages were estimated using SGTF and genomic data. The best supported models did not indicate a substantial difference in VOC transmissibility among different age groups. There is a consensus among all analyses that the VOC has a substantial transmission advantage with a 50% to 100% higher reproduction number.

Journal article

Laydon D, Mishra S, Hinsley W, Samartsidis P, Flaxman S, Gandy A, Ferguson N, Bhatt Set al., 2021, Modelling the impact of the Tier system on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the UK between the first and second national lockdowns, BMJ Open, Vol: 11, ISSN: 2044-6055

Objective To measure the effects of the tier system on the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK between the first and second national lockdowns, before the emergence of the B.1.1.7 variant of concern.Design This is a modelling study combining estimates of real-time reproduction number Rt (derived from UK case, death and serological survey data) with publicly available data on regional non-pharmaceutical interventions. We fit a Bayesian hierarchical model with latent factors using these quantities to account for broader national trends in addition to subnational effects from tiers.Setting The UK at lower tier local authority (LTLA) level. 310 LTLAs were included in the analysis.Primary and secondary outcome measures Reduction in real-time reproduction number Rt.Results Nationally, transmission increased between July and late September, regional differences notwithstanding. Immediately prior to the introduction of the tier system, Rt averaged 1.3 (0.9–1.6) across LTLAs, but declined to an average of 1.1 (0.86–1.42) 2 weeks later. Decline in transmission was not solely attributable to tiers. Tier 1 had negligible effects. Tiers 2 and 3, respectively, reduced transmission by 6% (5%–7%) and 23% (21%–25%). 288 LTLAs (93%) would have begun to suppress their epidemics if every LTLA had gone into tier 3 by the second national lockdown, whereas only 90 (29%) did so in reality.Conclusions The relatively small effect sizes found in this analysis demonstrate that interventions at least as stringent as tier 3 are required to suppress transmission, especially considering more transmissible variants, at least until effective vaccination is widespread or much greater population immunity has amassed.

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, NASCIMENTO F, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, green W, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jeffrey, 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., 2021, Reduction in mobility and COVID-19 transmission, Nature Communications, Vol: 12, ISSN: 2041-1723

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.

Journal article

Li X, Mukandavire C, Cucunuba ZM, Londono SE, Abbas K, Clapham HE, Jit M, Johnson HL, Papadopoulos T, Vynnycky E, Brisson M, Carter ED, Clark A, de Villiers MJ, Eilertson K, Ferrari MJ, Gamkrelidze I, Gaythorpe KAM, Grassly NC, Hallett TB, Hinsley W, Jackson ML, Jean K, Karachaliou A, Klepac P, Lessler J, Li X, Moore SM, Nayagam S, Duy MN, Razavi H, Razavi-Shearer D, Resch S, Sanderson C, Sweet S, Sy S, Tam Y, Tanvir H, Quan MT, Trotter CL, Truelove S, van Zandvoort K, Verguet S, Walker N, Winter A, Woodruff K, Ferguson NM, Garske Tet al., 2021, Estimating the health impact of vaccination against ten pathogens in 98 low-income and middle-income countries from 2000 to 2030: a modelling study, The Lancet, Vol: 397, Pages: 398-408, ISSN: 0140-6736

BackgroundThe past two decades have seen expansion of childhood vaccination programmes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We quantify the health impact of these programmes by estimating the deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted by vaccination against ten pathogens in 98 LMICs between 2000 and 2030.Methods16 independent research groups provided model-based disease burden estimates under a range of vaccination coverage scenarios for ten pathogens: hepatitis B virus, Haemophilus influenzae type B, human papillomavirus, Japanese encephalitis, measles, Neisseria meningitidis serogroup A, Streptococcus pneumoniae, rotavirus, rubella, and yellow fever. Using standardised demographic data and vaccine coverage, the impact of vaccination programmes was determined by comparing model estimates from a no-vaccination counterfactual scenario with those from a reported and projected vaccination scenario. We present deaths and DALYs averted between 2000 and 2030 by calendar year and by annual birth cohort.FindingsWe estimate that vaccination of the ten selected pathogens will have averted 69 million (95% credible interval 52–88) deaths between 2000 and 2030, of which 37 million (30–48) were averted between 2000 and 2019. From 2000 to 2019, this represents a 45% (36–58) reduction in deaths compared with the counterfactual scenario of no vaccination. Most of this impact is concentrated in a reduction in mortality among children younger than 5 years (57% reduction [52–66]), most notably from measles. Over the lifetime of birth cohorts born between 2000 and 2030, we predict that 120 million (93–150) deaths will be averted by vaccination, of which 58 million (39–76) are due to measles vaccination and 38 million (25–52) are due to hepatitis B vaccination. We estimate that increases in vaccine coverage and introductions of additional vaccines will result in a 72% (59–81) reduction in lifetime mortality in t

Journal article

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., 2021, A database for the epidemic trends and control measures during the first wave of COVID-19 in mainland China, International Journal of Infectious Diseases, Vol: 102, Pages: 463-471, 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

Knock E, Whittles L, Lees J, Perez Guzman P, Verity R, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Imai N, Hinsley W, Okell L, Rosello A, Kantas N, Walters C, Bhatia S, Watson O, Whittaker C, Cattarino L, Boonyasiri A, Djaafara A, Fraser K, Fu H, Wang H, Xi X, Donnelly C, Jauneikaite E, Laydon D, White P, Ghani A, Ferguson N, Cori A, Baguelin Met al., 2020, Report 41: The 2020 SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in England: key epidemiological drivers and impact of interventions

England has been severely affected by COVID-19. We fitted a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in care homes and the community to regional 2020 surveillance data. Only national lockdown brought the reproduction number below 1 consistently; introduced one week earlier in the first wave it could have reduced mortality by 23,300 deaths on average. The mean infection fatality ratio was initially ~1.3% across all regions except London and halved following clinical care improvements. The infection fatality ratio was two-fold lower throughout in London, even when adjusting for demographics. The infection fatality ratio in care homes was 2.5-times that in the elderly in the community. Population-level infection-induced immunity in England is still far from herd immunity, with regional mean cumulative attack rates ranging between 4.4% and 15.8%.

Report

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, Vol: 11, Pages: 1-9, 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

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, Vol: 20, Pages: 1381-1389, 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

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, Vol: 27, Pages: 1-3, 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dighe A, Cattarino L, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Skarp J, Imai N, Bhatia S, Gaythorpe K, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Charles G, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Djaafara A, Dorigatti I, Eales O, Eaton J, van Elsland S, Ferreira Do Nascimento F, Fitzjohn R, Flaxman S, Fraser K, Geidelberg L, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Hauck K, Haw D, Hinsley W, Jeffrey B, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag K, Pons Salort M, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Whittaker C, Whittles L, Xi X, Ghani A, Donnelly C, Ferguson N, Riley Set al., 2020, Report 25: Response to COVID-19 in South Korea and implications for lifting stringent interventions, 25

While South Korea experienced a sharp growth in COVID-19 cases early in the global pandemic, it has since rapidly reduced rates of infection and now maintains low numbers of daily new cases. Despite using less stringent “lockdown” measures than other affected countries, strong social distancing measures have been advised in high incidence areas and a 38% national decrease in movement occurred voluntarily between February 24th - March 1st. Suspected and confirmed cases were isolated quickly even during the rapid expansion of the epidemic and identification of the Shincheonji cluster. South Korea swiftly scaled up testing capacity and was able to maintain case-based interventions throughout. However, individual case-based contact tracing, not associated with a specific cluster, was a relatively minor aspect of their control program, with cluster investigations accounting for a far higher proportion of cases: the underlying epidemic was driven by a series of linked clusters, with 48% of all cases in the Shincheonji cluster and 20% in other clusters. Case-based contacts currently account for only 11% of total cases. The high volume of testing and low number of deaths suggests that South Korea experienced a small epidemic of infections relative to other countries. Therefore, caution is needed in attempting to duplicate the South Korean response in settings with larger more generalized epidemics. Finding, testing and isolating cases that are linked to clusters may be more difficult in such settings.

Report

Winskill P, Whittaker C, Walker P, Watson O, Laydon D, Imai N, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Cattarino L, Ciavarella C, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Flaxman S, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Knock E, Lees J, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Parag K, Thompson H, Unwin H, Wang Y, Whittles L, Xi X, Ferguson N, Donnelly C, Ghani Aet al., 2020, Report 22: Equity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: an assessment of the direct and indirect impacts on disadvantaged and vulnerable populations in low- and lower middle-income countries, 22

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in low-income settings is likely to be more severe due to limited healthcare capacity. Within these settings, however, there exists unfair or avoidable differences in health among different groups in society – health inequities – that mean that some groups are particularly at risk from the negative direct and indirect consequences of COVID-19. The structural determinants of these are often reflected in differences by income strata, with the poorest populations having limited access to preventative measures such as handwashing. Their more fragile income status will also mean that they are likely to be employed in occupations that are not amenable to social-distancing measures, thereby further reducing their ability to protect themselves from infection. Furthermore, these populations may also lack access to timely healthcare on becoming ill. We explore these relationships by using large-scale household surveys to quantify the differences in handwashing access, occupation and hospital access with respect to wealth status in low-income settings. We use a COVID-19 transmission model to demonstrate the impact of these differences. Our results demonstrate clear trends that the probability of death from COVID-19 increases with increasing poverty. On average, we estimate a 32.0% (2.5th-97.5th centile 8.0%-72.5%) increase in the probability of death in the poorest quintile compared to the wealthiest quintile from these three factors alone. We further explore how risk mediators and the indirect impacts of COVID-19 may also hit these same disadvantaged and vulnerable the hardest. We find that larger, inter-generational households that may hamper efforts to protect the elderly if social distancing are associated with lower-income countries and, within LMICs, lower wealth status. Poorer populations are also more susceptible to food security issues - with these populations having the highest levels under-nourishment whilst also being

Report

Ainslie KEC, Walters CE, Fu H, Bhatia S, Wang H, Xi X, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Cattarino L, Ciavarella C, Cucunuba Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Dorigatti I, van Elsland SL, FitzJohn R, Gaythorpe K, Ghani AC, Green W, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jorgensen D, Knock E, Laydon D, Nedjati-Gilani G, Okell LC, Siveroni I, Thompson HA, Unwin HJT, Verity R, Vollmer M, Walker PGT, Wang Y, Watson OJ, Whittaker C, Winskill P, Donnelly CA, Ferguson NM, Riley Set al., 2020, Evidence of initial success for China exiting COVID-19 social distancing policy after achieving containment [version 1; peer review: 2 approved], Wellcome Open Res, Vol: 5, ISSN: 2398-502X

Background: The COVID-19 epidemic was declared a Global Pandemic by WHO on 11 March 2020. By 24 March 2020, over 440,000 cases and almost 20,000 deaths had been reported worldwide. In response to the fast-growing epidemic, which began in the Chinese city of Wuhan, Hubei, China imposed strict social distancing in Wuhan on 23 January 2020 followed closely by similar measures in other provinces. These interventions have impacted economic productivity in China, and the ability of the Chinese economy to resume without restarting the epidemic was not clear. Methods: Using daily reported cases from mainland China and Hong Kong SAR, we estimated transmissibility over time and compared it to daily within-city movement, as a proxy for economic activity. Results: Initially, within-city movement and transmission were very strongly correlated in the five mainland provinces most affected by the epidemic and Beijing. However, that correlation decreased rapidly after the initial sharp fall in transmissibility. In general, towards the end of the study period, the correlation was no longer apparent, despite substantial increases in within-city movement. A similar analysis for Hong Kong shows that intermediate levels of local activity were maintained while avoiding a large outbreak. At the very end of the study period, when China began to experience the re-introduction of a small number of cases from Europe and the United States, there is an apparent up-tick in transmission. Conclusions: Although these results do not preclude future substantial increases in incidence, they suggest that after very intense social distancing (which resulted in containment), China successfully exited its lockdown to some degree. Elsewhere, movement data are being used as proxies for economic activity to assess the impact of interventions. The results presented here illustrate how the eventual decorrelation between transmission and movement is likely a key feature of successful COVID-19 exit strategies.

Journal article

Grassly N, Pons Salort M, Parker E, White P, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Brazeau N, Cattarino L, Ciavarella C, Cooper L, Coupland H, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Djaafara A, Donnelly C, Dorigatti I, van Elsland S, Ferreira Do Nascimento F, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, Green W, Hallett T, Hamlet A, Hayes S, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jorgensen D, Knock E, Laydon D, Lees J, Mangal T, Mellan T, Mishra S, Nedjati Gilani G, Nouvellet P, Okell L, Ower A, Parag K, Pickles M, Ragonnet-Cronin M, Stopard I, Thompson H, 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, Ferguson Net al., 2020, Report 16: Role of testing in COVID-19 control

The World Health Organization has called for increased molecular testing in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but different countries have taken very different approaches. We used a simple mathematical model to investigate the potential effectiveness of alternative testing strategies for COVID-19 control. Weekly screening of healthcare workers (HCWs) and other at-risk groups using PCR or point-of-care tests for infection irrespective of symptoms is estimated to reduce their contribution to transmission by 25-33%, on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms. Widespread PCR testing in the general population is unlikely to limit transmission more than contact-tracing and quarantine based on symptoms alone, but could allow earlier release of contacts from quarantine. Immunity passports based on tests for antibody or infection could support return to work but face significant technical, legal and ethical challenges. Testing is essential for pandemic surveillance but its direct contribution to the prevention of transmission is likely to be limited to patients, HCWs and other high-risk groups.

Report

Ainslie K, Walters C, Fu H, Bhatia S, Wang H, Baguelin M, Bhatt S, Boonyasiri A, Boyd O, Cattarino L, Ciavarella C, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Dorigatti I, van Elsland S, Fitzjohn R, Gaythorpe K, Geidelberg L, Ghani A, Green W, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Imai N, Jorgensen D, Knock E, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Okell L, Siveroni I, Thompson H, Unwin H, Verity R, Vollmer M, Walker P, Wang Y, Watson O, Whittaker C, Winskill P, Xi X, Donnelly C, Ferguson N, Riley Set al., 2020, Report 11: Evidence of initial success for China exiting COVID-19 social distancing policy after achieving containment

The COVID-19 epidemic was declared a Global Pandemic by WHO on 11 March 2020. As of 20 March 2020, over 254,000 cases and 10,000 deaths had been reported worldwide. The outbreak began in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. In response to the fast-growing epidemic, China imposed strict social distancing in Wuhan on 23 January 2020 followed closely by similar measures in other provinces. At the peak of the outbreak in China (early February), there were between 2,000 and 4,000 new confirmed cases per day. For the first time since the outbreak began there have been no new confirmed cases caused by local transmission in China reported for five consecutive days up to 23 March 2020. This is an indication that the social distancing measures enacted in China have led to control of COVID-19 in China. These interventions have also impacted economic productivity in China, and the ability of the Chinese economy to resume without restarting the epidemic is not yet clear. Here, we estimate transmissibility from reported cases and compare those estimates with daily data on within-city movement, as a proxy for economic activity. Initially, within-city movement and transmission were very strongly correlated in the 5 provinces most affected by the epidemic and Beijing. However, that correlation is no longer apparent even though within-city movement has started to increase. A similar analysis for Hong Kong shows that intermediate levels of local activity can be maintained while avoiding a large outbreak. These results do not preclude future epidemics in China, nor do they allow us to estimate the maximum proportion of previous within-city activity that will be recovered in the medium term. However, they do suggest that after very intense social distancing which resulted in containment, China has successfully exited their stringent social distancing policy to some degree. Globally, China is at a more advanced stage of the pandemic. Policies implemented to reduce the spread of CO

Report

Ferguson N, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Imai N, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, Boonyasiri A, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dighe A, Dorigatti I, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Green W, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Okell L, van Elsland S, Thompson H, Verity R, Volz E, Wang H, Wang Y, Walker P, Walters C, Winskill P, Whittaker C, Donnelly C, Riley S, Ghani Aet al., 2020, Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand

The global impact of COVID-19 has been profound, and the public health threat it represents is the most serious seen in a respiratory virus since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Here we present the results of epidemiological modelling which has informed policymaking in the UK and other countries in recent weeks. In the absence of a COVID-19 vaccine, we assess the potential role of a number of public health measures – so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) – aimed at reducing contact rates in the population and thereby reducing transmission of the virus. In the results presented here, we apply a previously published microsimulation model to two countries: the UK (Great Britain specifically) and the US. We conclude that the effectiveness of any one intervention in isolation is likely to be limited, requiring multiple interventions to be combined to have a substantial impact on transmission. Two fundamental strategies are possible: (a) mitigation, which focuses on slowing but not necessarily stopping epidemic spread – reducing peak healthcare demand while protecting those most at risk of severe disease from infection, and (b) suppression, which aims to reverse epidemic growth, reducing case numbers to low levels and maintaining that situation indefinitely. Each policy has major challenges. We find that that optimal mitigation policies (combining home isolation of suspect cases, home quarantine of those living in the same household as suspect cases, and social distancing of the elderly and others at most risk of severe disease) might reduce peak healthcare demand by 2/3 and deaths by half. However, the resulting mitigated epidemic would still likely result in hundreds of thousands of deaths and health systems (most notably intensive care units) being overwhelmed many times over. For countries able to achieve it, this leaves suppression as the preferred policy option. We show that in the UK and US context, suppression will minimally requi

Report

Gaythorpe K, Imai N, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, Boonyasiri A, Cori A, Cucunuba Perez Z, Dighe A, Dorigatti I, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Green W, 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 C, Ghani A, Ferguson Net al., 2020, Report 8: Symptom progression of COVID-19

The COVID-19 epidemic was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by WHO on 30th January 2020 [1]. As of 8 March 2020, over 107,000 cases had been reported. Here, we use published and preprint studies of clinical characteristics of cases in mainland China as well as case studies of individuals from Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore and South Korea to examine the proportional occurrence of symptoms and the progression of symptoms through time.We find that in mainland China, where specific symptoms or disease presentation are reported, pneumonia is the most frequently mentioned, see figure 1. We found a more varied spectrum of severity in cases outside mainland China. In Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore and South Korea, fever was the most frequently reported symptom. In this latter group, presentation with pneumonia is not reported as frequently although it is more common in individuals over 60 years old. The average time from reported onset of first symptoms to the occurrence of specific symptoms or disease presentation, such as pneumonia or the use of mechanical ventilation, varied substantially. The average time to presentation with pneumonia is 5.88 days, and may be linked to testing at hospitalisation; fever is often reported at onset (where the mean time to develop fever is 0.77 days).

Report

Thompson H, Imai N, Dighe A, Baguelin M, Bhatia S, Boonyasiri A, Cori A, Cucunuba Perez Z, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Dorigatti I, Fitzjohn R, Fu H, Gaythorpe K, Ghani A, Green W, Hamlet A, Hinsley W, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Okell L, Riley S, van Elsland S, Volz E, Wang H, Yuanrong W, Whittaker C, Xi X, Donnelly C, Ferguson Net al., 2020, Report 7: Estimating infection prevalence in Wuhan City from repatriation flights

Since the end of January 2020, in response to the growing COVID-19 epidemic, 55 countries have repatriated over 8000 citizens from Wuhan City, China. In addition to quarantine measures for returning citizens, many countries implemented PCR screening to test for infection regardless of symptoms. These flights therefore give estimates of infection prevalence in Wuhan over time. Between 30th January and 1st February (close to the peak of the epidemic in Wuhan), infection prevalence was 0.87% (95% CI: 0.32% - 1.89%). As countries now start to repatriate citizens from Iran and northern Italy, information from repatriated citizens could help inform the level of response necessary to help control the outbreaks unfolding in newly affected areas.

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, Thompson H, Okell L, Riley S, van Elsland S, Volz E, Wang H, Wang Y, Whittaker C, Xi X, Donnelly C, Ferguson Net al., 2020, Report 6: Relative sensitivity of international surveillance, Report 6: Relative sensitivity of international surveillance

Since the start of the COVID-19 epidemic in late 2019, there are now 29 affected countries with over 1000 confirmed cases outside of mainland China. In previous reports, we estimated the likely epidemic size in Wuhan City based on air traffic volumes and the number of detected cases internationally. Here we analysed COVID-19 cases exported from mainland China to different regions and countries, comparing the country-specific rates of detected and confirmed cases per flight volume to estimate the relative sensitivity of surveillance in different countries. 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 about two thirds of COVID-19 cases exported from mainland China have remained undetected worldwide, potentially resulting in multiple chains of as yet undetected human-to-human transmission outside mainland China.

Report

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=00235803&limit=30&person=true