Literature DB >> 33890566

Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern B.1.1.7, B.1.351 or P.1: data from seven EU/EEA countries, weeks 38/2020 to 10/2021.

Tjede Funk1, Anastasia Pharris1, Gianfranco Spiteri1, Nick Bundle1, Angeliki Melidou1, Michael Carr2,3, Gabriel Gonzalez2,3, Alejandro Garcia-Leon4, Fiona Crispie5, Lois O'Connor6, Niamh Murphy6, Joël Mossong7, Anne Vergison7, Anke K Wienecke-Baldacchino8, Tamir Abdelrahman8, Flavia Riccardo9, Paola Stefanelli9, Angela Di Martino9, Antonino Bella9, Alessandra Lo Presti9, Pedro Casaca10, Joana Moreno10, Vítor Borges11, Joana Isidro11, Rita Ferreira11, João Paulo Gomes11, Liidia Dotsenko12, Heleene Suija12, Jevgenia Epstein12, Olga Sadikova12, Hanna Sepp12, Niina Ikonen13, Carita Savolainen-Kopra13, Soile Blomqvist13, Teemu Möttönen13, Otto Helve13, Joana Gomes-Dias1, Cornelia Adlhoch1.   

Abstract

We compared 19,207 cases of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7/S gene target failure (SGTF), 436 B.1.351 and 352 P.1 to non-variant cases reported by seven European countries. COVID-19 cases with these variants had significantly higher adjusted odds ratios for hospitalisation (B.1.1.7/SGTF: 1.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0-2.9; B.1.351: 3.6, 95% CI: 2.1-6.2; P.1: 2.6, 95% CI: 1.4-4.8) and B.1.1.7/SGTF and P.1 cases also for intensive care admission (B.1.1.7/SGTF: 2.3, 95% CI: 1.4-3.5; P.1: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.7-2.8).

Entities:  

Keywords:  COVID-19; Europe; SARS-CoV-2; surveillance; variants of concern

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33890566      PMCID: PMC8063589          DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.16.2100348

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Euro Surveill        ISSN: 1025-496X


Here, we analyse coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases infected with any of the three severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC): B.1.1.7/S gene target failure (SGTF), B.1.351 or P.1. We compare them with cases reported as infected with non-VOC virus with a focus on disease severity.

SARS-CoV-2 variant viruses

In December 2020, the United Kingdom (UK) reported an emerging SARS-CoV-2 VOC classified as Pangolin lineage B.1.1.7 [1]. In the UK, and shortly thereafter in Denmark, B.1.1.7 infections increased rapidly. In parallel to the identification of B.1.1.7, increased whole-genome sequencing (WGS) efforts globally led to the identification of further SARS-CoV-2 VOC, including B.1.351 (described in South Africa) or P.1 (originating in Brazil) [2-6]. While viral evolution is expected and has occurred since the discovery of SARS-CoV-2, these VOC were associated with higher transmissibility and severity as well as altered antigenicity with potential implications for acquired immunity or effectiveness of current vaccines compared with other circulating lineages lacking particular defining mutations such as E484K, N501Y or del69-70 [7-12].

Reporting of SARS-CoV-2 variants in the EU/EEA

On a weekly basis, countries in the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA) report data on COVID-19 cases to The European Surveillance System (TESSy) hosted at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). In response to the emerging VOC, ECDC implemented new reporting variables for variants on 24 December 2020 allowing retrospective data upload (Supplement A). COVID-19 cases that do not have the VOC-defining mutations should be reported as non-VOC because of the complexity of the taxonomy of SARS-CoV-2. However, countries sequence only a minor proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 positive specimens (Supplement A, Figures S1 and S2 [6]). We analysed data on COVID-19 cases infected with SARS-CoV-2 VOC (below referred to as B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1 cases) reported to TESSy for weeks 38/2020 to 10/2021 by seven countries (Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg and Portugal) (Figure). Data included information on sex, age, clinical symptoms, pre-existing conditions, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) admission and outcome (i.e. survived or died). The spike (S) gene deletion (del 69–70) is present in multiple lineages including B.1.1.7 and has been used for rapid screening using qRT-PCR (SGTF) because of a strong correlation between B.1.1.7 cases and SGTF [13,14]. Portugal showed a > 90% correlation between SGTF and B.1.1.7 cases and almost all (98%) of the SGTF cases included in this analysis came from Portugal (Figure). We therefore considered all SGTF cases as B.1.1.7 in our analysis [15].
Figure

Reported SARS-CoV-2 VOC cases, by reporting country and week of reporting, EU/EEA, weeks 38/2020–10/2021 (n = 23,343)

Reported SARS-CoV-2 VOC cases, by reporting country and week of reporting, EU/EEA, weeks 38/2020–10/2021 (n = 23,343) EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; VOC: Variant of concern. We compared VOC cases caused by variants B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 or P.1 to non-VOC cases which derived from the same surveillance system (Supplement A). Cases reported with missing or unknown information on the virus variant were excluded because an increasing number of VOC cases with missing confirmation would be included in this group and introduce a bias when used as a reference category (Supplement A, Table S1 and Figure S3). Proportions, medians and means were calculated and compared using chi-squared, rank sum and t-tests with a significance of p = 0.05 using STATA v16.1. Different logistic regression models, 1:1 matched (on 10-year age groups, sex and week of reporting, using conditional logistic regression) and unmatched (adjusted for age, sex, week and country, including having a pre-existing condition and healthcare worker status, using logistic regression), were applied to assess differences in severity (hospitalisation, ICU and death) between VOC (B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1) and non-VOC cases.

Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern

Of 3.2 million COVID-19 cases reported from the included countries during the study period (Supplements A and B), 23,343 had information on SARS-CoV-2 variants, of which 19,995 were VOC and 3,348 non-VOC cases included in this analysis. Among all cases with information on the variant, B.1.1.7/SGTF was the most frequently reported VOC (19,207; 82.3%), followed by B.1.351 (436; 1.9%) and P.1 (352; 1.5%) (Table 1). Cases from Portugal accounted for almost half (9,740) of the reported VOC. VOC cases have been increasing since week 51/2020, with lower numbers in weeks 6 to 10 probably caused by reporting delay (Figure). The male to female ratio differed slightly between the variants, ranging from 49% to 54% of male cases (p < 0.001) (Table 1).
Table 1

Characteristics of reported SARS-CoV-2 VOC and non-VOC cases, EU/EEA, weeks 38/2020–10/2021 (n = 23,343)

CharacteristicsB.1.1.7/SGTF%B.1.351%P.1%non-VOC%
Totala 19,2074363523,348
Sex
Female9,70050.521148.417950.91,54146
Male9,50649.5*22551.617349.11,80754
Totalb 19,2064363523,348
Age (years)
Range0–103 0–109 2–101 0–105 
Median39 42 46 38 
Mean39 43 46* 40 
Standard deviation21 22 25 21 
Age group (years)
0–193,73019.46013.87922.456917.0
20–396,00531.314733.76618.81,19535.7
40–596,15132.013931.910730.498629.5
60–792,53813.26214.25816.539011.6
≥ 807834.1286.44211.92086.2
Totalb 19,207 436 352 3,348 
Symptoms
No2,02527.439.7233.312518.6
Yes5,36572.6*2890.3466.754781.4
Totalb 7,390 31 672 
Pre-existing condition
No10,60855.28920.425472.236911.0
Yes8,59944.8*34779.6*9827.8*2,97989.0
Totalb 19,207 436 3523,348 
Hospitalisation
No7,85589.030980.727280.02,39992.5
Yes96611.0*7419.3*6820.0*1957.5
Totalb 8,821 383 340 2,594 
ICU admission
No8,59398.638097.733297.92,55399.4
Yes1211.4*92.3*72.1*160.6
Totalb 8,714 389 3392,569 
Mortality/outcome
Alive/ on treatment7,49098.030994.829596.11,77396.0
Died1552.0*175.2123.9734.0
Totalb 7,645 326 307 1,846 
Cases imported
No6,14398.510791.526398.569499.6
Yes931.5*108.5*41.530.4
Totalb 6,236 117 267 697 
Healthcare worker
No11,98594.335892.78580.22,42592.0
Yes7305.7*287.32119.8*2118.0
Totalb 12,715 386 106 2,636

EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; ICU: intensive care unit; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern.

a Total number of cases included in the analysis.

b Total number of cases for whom information was reported.

Totals for all included cases are given on top; totals for the individual characteristics refer to the cases for whom this information was reported.

* p < 0.05 compared with non-VOC cases (chi-squared or t-test).

EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; ICU: intensive care unit; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern. a Total number of cases included in the analysis. b Total number of cases for whom information was reported. Totals for all included cases are given on top; totals for the individual characteristics refer to the cases for whom this information was reported. * p < 0.05 compared with non-VOC cases (chi-squared or t-test). The proportion of B.1.1.7/SGTF cases in the oldest age group decreased slightly over the reporting weeks (Supplement A, Figure S4). Our analysis showed that the proportion of cases in younger age groups (< 60 years) was similar for VOC and non-VOC cases, with similar mean ages for B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and non-VOC but significantly older mean age for P.1 cases (Table 1). Among the VOC cases with available information, the majority were domestic cases, with 1.5% of B.1.1.7/SGTF and P.1 cases and 8.5% of B.1.351 cases reported as importations, compared with 0.4% of non-VOC cases (Table 1). Healthcare workers were slightly less represented among VOC cases than among non-VOC cases. The exception was P.1 with 19.8% of cases being a healthcare worker (Table 1). No COVID-19 case infected with a VOC was reported as pregnant. Among the B.1.1.7/SGTF cases, 72.6% (5,365/7,390) were reported symptomatic, fewer than among the non-VOC cases (81.4%; 547/672; p < 0.001), which in turn was lower than the proportion of symptomatic B.1.351 cases (90.3%; 28/31; p = 0.2; Table 1, Supplement A, Figure S5). Cases of infection with P.1 with available information on this variable were too rare to allow a comparison with the other groups. The proportion of cases who reported any pre-existing condition was significantly lower among B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1 than among non-VOC cases (p < 0.001; Table 1). The lower likelihood of having pre-existing conditions was confirmed in the matched analysis for all VOC cases, with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 0.08 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07–0.1) for B.1.1.7/SGTF, an aOR of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.38–0.86) for B.1.351 and an aOR of 0.02 (95% CI: 0.01–0.06) for P.1 compared with non-VOC cases.

Differences in severity between VOC and non-VOC cases

A larger proportion of VOC cases were admitted to hospital (B.1.1.7/SGTF 11.0%; B.1.351 19.3%, and P.1 20.0%; p < 0.001 for all VOC) and ICU (B.1.1.7/SGTF 1.4%, p = 0.002; B.1.351 2.3%, p = 0.001 and P.1 2.1%, p = 0.005) compared with non-VOC cases (7.5%, hospitalised and 0.6% requiring ICU; Table 1, Supplement A, Figure S6). Of all hospitalisations with any VOC, 58.3% were male (646/1,108), which was comparable to non-VOC cases (55.4% male; p = 0.4). Hospitalised B.1.1.7/SGTF cases were significantly younger (mean age: 63 years, median age: 65 years; p < 0.001) than non-VOC (mean: 69 years, median: 75 years) in contrast to B.1.351 (mean and median age: 67 years; p = 0.1) and P.1 cases (mean: 71 years, median: 76 years; p = 0.7) which were of a similar age as the non-VOC cases. Both the matched and unmatched multivariable analysis found that B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1 cases had significantly higher odds of hospitalisation than non-VOC cases (aOR: 1.6–4.2 (matched) vs 1.7–3.6 (unmatched)) (Table 2). In the unmatched analysis, B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 or P.1 cases were, respectively, 2.3, 3.3 and 2.2 times more likely to be admitted to ICU than non-VOC cases.
Table 2

Logistic regression for outcome admission to hospital or intensive care unit for cases with SARS-CoV-2 VOC B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1 compared with non-VOC cases, EU/EEA, weeks 38/2020–10/2021 (n = 23,342)

VOCHospitalisationIntensive care unit admissionDeath
 Matched MultivariableMatchedMultivariableMatchedMultivariable
CasesaORa 95% CICasesaORb 95% CICasesaORa 95% CICasesaORb 95% CICasesaORa 95% CICasesaORb 95% CI
B.1.1.7/SGTFc 3001.61.2–2.311,4141.71.0–2.9481.20.5–2.611,2822.31.4–3.5640.50.3–1.19,4900.50.3–0.9
B.1.3511123.71.9–6.92,9773.62.1–6.2122.00.4–10.92,9583.31.9–5.7301.10.4–3.22,1721.10.4–3.4
P.11044.22.1–8.42,9342.61.4–4.8146.00.7–49.82,9082.21.8–2.9NR 2,1530.60.3–1.0

aOR: adjusted odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; NR: no result; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern.

a Conditional logistic regression of 1:1 matched (age groups at 10-year increments, sex and week of reporting).

b Adjusted for age, sex, week of reporting and country.

c Excluding one case with missing information on sex.

The columns ’Cases’ represent all respective VOC and non-VOC cases included in the analysis.

aOR: adjusted odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; NR: no result; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern. a Conditional logistic regression of 1:1 matched (age groups at 10-year increments, sex and week of reporting). b Adjusted for age, sex, week of reporting and country. c Excluding one case with missing information on sex. The columns ’Cases’ represent all respective VOC and non-VOC cases included in the analysis. In the age-stratified models, B.1.1.7/SGTF cases in the age groups 20–39 and 40–59 years had, respectively, 3.0 and 2.3 times higher odds of hospitalisation when compared with non-VOC cases, while ICU admission or death did not differ significantly in any age group (Table 3). For B.1.351 cases, we observed 3.5–3.6 times higher odds of hospitalisation for age groups 40–59 and 60–79 years compared with non-VOC cases of the same age. Admission to ICU was significantly more likely for B.1.351 cases (aOR: 8; 95% CI: 3.7–17.3) aged 40–59 years. For P.1 cases, we observed between 3.0 and 13.1 times higher odds of hospitalisation in the age groups 20–39, 40–59 and 60–79 as well as a 2.9–13.9 times higher odds of ICU admission (40–59, 60–79 and ≥ 80 age groups).
Table 3

Logistic regression for hospital and intensive care unit admission or death for cases with SARS-CoV-2 VOC B.1.1.7/SGTF B.1.351 and P.1 compared with non-VOC cases, EU/EEA, weeks 38/2020–10/2021 (n = 23,343)

VOC and age groupHospitalisationICU admissionDeath
aORa 95% CIaORa 95% CIaORa 95% CI
B.1.1.7/SGTF
0–19 years n = 1,860 n = 121 NR
B.1.1.7/SGTF1.00.4–2.71Omitted
Pre-existing condition1.00.2–4.31Omitted
Healthcare worker1.0Omitted1OmittedNot included
20–39 years n = 3,167 n = 2,642 NR
B.1.1.7/SGTF3.0*1.4–6.81.0Omitted
Pre-existing condition0.50.2–1.60.50.3–0.8
Healthcare worker1.10.5–2.7Not includedNot included
40–59 years n = 3,017 n = 3,511 n = 2,546
B.1.1.7/SGTF2.3*1.0–5.42.1*1.0–4.70.30.1–0.8
Pre-existing condition0.70.1–3.15.4*1.0–29.91.0Omitted
Healthcare worker0.40.2–0.8Not includedNot included
60–79 years n = 1,263 n = 1,490 n = 1,338
B.1.1.7/SGTF1.70.9–3.41.70.8–3.80.70.4–1.2
Pre-existing condition0.40.1–1.50.80.4–1.52.40.9–6.4
Healthcare worker0.30.1–0.9Not includedNot included
≥ 80 years n = 565 n = 612 n = 526
B.1.1.7/SGTF1.20.6–2.31.10.3–4.20.40.2–1.0
Pre-existing condition0.20.0–3.30.40.0–16.31.40.9–2.0
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
B.1.351
0–19 years n = 504 NR NR
B.1.3512.50.7–9.1
Pre-existing condition0.40.1–1.2
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
20–39 years n = 894 NR NR
B.1.3513.00.7–12.4
Pre-existing condition2.80.7–11.6
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
40–59 years n = 869 n = 398 n = 442
B.1.3513.5*2.5–5.18.0*3.7–17.31.0Omitted
Pre-existing condition0.70.3–1.61.0Omitted1.0Omitted
Healthcare worker0.20.0–2.0Not includedNot included
60–79 years n = 337 n = 313 n = 236
B.1.3513.6*1.1–11.92.00.7–6.01.80.7–4.8
Pre-existing condition0.70.4–1.51.0Omitted1.0Omitted
Healthcare worker0.20.0–1.1Not includedNot included
≥ 80 years n = 215 n = 198 n = 168
B.1.3514.10.8–20.44.30.6–33.11.00.3–2.9
Pre-existing condition1.0Omitted1.0Omitted1.0Omitted
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
P.1
0–19 years n = 453 NR NR
P.11.0Omitted
Pre-existing condition0.60.2–2.2
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
20–39 years n = 811 NR NR
P.113.1*6.5–26.5
Pre-existing condition2.71.2–6.1
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included
40–59 years n = 787 n = 363 n = 442
P.13.0*1.5–5.86.8*2.4–19.61.0Omitted
Pre-existing condition0.50.2–1.01.0Omitted1.0Omitted
Healthcare worker0.10.0–1.7Not includedNot included
60–79 years n = 294 n = 340 n = 267
P.13.7*1.9–7.02.9*1.6–5.41.60.8–3.2
Pre-existing condition0.90.5–1.61.50.6–4.07.73.0–19.6
Healthcare worker0.20.0–1.1Not includedNot included
≥ 80 years n = 191 n = 183 n = 176
P.11.50.8–2.613.9*2.1–89.41.30.6–3.0
Pre-existing condition1.0Omitted1.0Omitted3.73.4–4.0
Healthcare worker1.0OmittedNot includedNot included

aOR: adjusted odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; ICU: intensive care unit; NR: no result; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern.

a Adjusted for reporting country (seven clusters), sex and week of reporting.

* indicates significance (p < 0.05).

Analysis stratified by age group and adjusted for sex, country and week of reporting. n indicates the number of total cases included in the analysis for each age group (B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 or P.1 as well as non-VOC cases); Omitted variable, no 95% CI calculated.

aOR: adjusted odds ratio; CI: confidence interval; EEA: European Economic Area; EU: European Union; ICU: intensive care unit; NR: no result; SARS-CoV-2: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; SGTF: S gene target failure; VOC: variant of concern. a Adjusted for reporting country (seven clusters), sex and week of reporting. * indicates significance (p < 0.05). Analysis stratified by age group and adjusted for sex, country and week of reporting. n indicates the number of total cases included in the analysis for each age group (B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 or P.1 as well as non-VOC cases); Omitted variable, no 95% CI calculated. A total of 184 (2.2%) deaths were reported among VOC cases; B.1.1.7/SGTF (n = 155), B.1.351 (n = 17), and P.1 cases (n = 12; Table 1), ranging in age between 41–99 years. The matched and multivariable analysis did not show increased risk of death.

Ethical statement

Ethical approval was not required for this study, data are collected through national surveillance.

Discussion

This analysis outlines the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 VOC infections in seven EU/EEA countries and suggests a higher risk for hospitalisation, and also for ICU admission in age groups < 60 years for B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1. Similarly, Germany reported increased hospitalisation in age groups < 60 years following B.1.1.7 dominance [16]. Earlier, higher infection rates in younger, school-age age groups with subsequent infections across all age groups have been observed in the UK [7,9]. Higher odds of hospitalisation for B.1.1.7 cases have also been reported by Denmark [8], but there is currently a lack of published data on severity for B.1.351 and P.1. Overall, only a minor proportion of all SARS-CoV-2-positive specimens are sequenced, however, both VOC and non-VOC cases presented in this analysis are derived from the same sampling frame. It is possible that sampling and sequencing were biased towards hospitalised cases, which could lead to an overestimation of the risk; however, this would be the same for non-VOC cases included in the analysis. Reporting of variant cases is likely to be affected by both underreporting and reporting delay, as WGS efforts take time (≥ 3 weeks), but countries are setting up systematic sampling for WGS monitoring of the circulation of emerging VOC (Supplement A) [17,18]. Supplement B presents a summary of B.1.1.7 and SGTF cases and of all COVID-19 cases including those with unknown or missing variant information as well as the logistic regression models comparing all non-VOC cases and those with missing/unknown information (possibly including unconfirmed B.1.1.7 cases), indicating also potential higher mortality associated with B.1.351 and P.1. Data were included until week 10/2021 and this may have been too soon after the introduction of these VOC into EU/EEA countries to detect higher mortality as observed in countries not included in this analysis for B.1.1.7 [8-10]. Also, information about hospitalisation, ICU admission and outcome may not have been available for the most recently infected cases. Although testing for variant viruses in December 2020 mainly targeted travellers from affected countries and their contacts, only a minority of cases in our analysis for whom data was available for the study period were reported as importations. Testing of contacts of travellers or targeted testing in schools or workplaces generally or in response to outbreaks could also explain higher detection rates in younger age groups. Finally, the pooling of SGTF cases with B.1.1.7 cases could have led to some misclassification, despite evidence of high correlation between these cases. However, a small minority of 130 such cases had information on hospitalisation, which makes it unlikely that they had substantially impacted the severity outcomes.

Conclusion

We show an increased risk for hospitalisations and ICU admission associated with the SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7/SGTF, B.1.351 and P.1, also in middle-aged individuals, which underlines the necessity to rapidly reach high levels of vaccine coverage and adhere to public health measures to reduce SARS-CoV-2 incidence and prevent severe cases. Enhanced testing and contact tracing implemented with a special focus on cases with VOC are also measures to reduce spread.
  4 in total

1.  Efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Covid-19 Vaccine against the B.1.351 Variant.

Authors:  Shabir A Madhi; Vicky Baillie; Clare L Cutland; Merryn Voysey; Anthonet L Koen; Lee Fairlie; Sherman D Padayachee; Keertan Dheda; Shaun L Barnabas; Qasim E Bhorat; Carmen Briner; Gaurav Kwatra; Khatija Ahmed; Parvinder Aley; Sutika Bhikha; Jinal N Bhiman; As'ad E Bhorat; Jeanine du Plessis; Aliasgar Esmail; Marisa Groenewald; Elizea Horne; Shi-Hsia Hwa; Aylin Jose; Teresa Lambe; Matt Laubscher; Mookho Malahleha; Masebole Masenya; Mduduzi Masilela; Shakeel McKenzie; Kgaogelo Molapo; Andrew Moultrie; Suzette Oelofse; Faeezah Patel; Sureshnee Pillay; Sarah Rhead; Hylton Rodel; Lindie Rossouw; Carol Taoushanis; Houriiyah Tegally; Asha Thombrayil; Samuel van Eck; Constantinos K Wibmer; Nicholas M Durham; Elizabeth J Kelly; Tonya L Villafana; Sarah Gilbert; Andrew J Pollard; Tulio de Oliveira; Penny L Moore; Alex Sigal; Alane Izu
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Tracking SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 dissemination: insights from nationwide spike gene target failure (SGTF) and spike gene late detection (SGTL) data, Portugal, week 49 2020 to week 3 2021.

Authors:  Vítor Borges; Carlos Sousa; Luís Menezes; António Maia Gonçalves; Miguel Picão; José Pedro Almeida; Margarida Vieita; Rafael Santos; Ana Rita Silva; Mariana Costa; Luís Carneiro; Pedro Casaca; Pedro Pinto-Leite; André Peralta-Santos; Joana Isidro; Sílvia Duarte; Luís Vieira; Raquel Guiomar; Susana Silva; Baltazar Nunes; João P Gomes
Journal:  Euro Surveill       Date:  2021-03

3.  Increased mortality in community-tested cases of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7.

Authors:  Karla Diaz-Ordaz; Ruth H Keogh; Nicholas G Davies; Christopher I Jarvis; W John Edmunds; Nicholas P Jewell
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-03-15       Impact factor: 69.504

4.  Risk of mortality in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern 202012/1: matched cohort study.

Authors:  Robert Challen; Ellen Brooks-Pollock; Jonathan M Read; Louise Dyson; Krasimira Tsaneva-Atanasova; Leon Danon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2021-03-09
  4 in total
  87 in total

Review 1.  Biological Properties of SARS-CoV-2 Variants: Epidemiological Impact and Clinical Consequences.

Authors:  Reem Hoteit; Hadi M Yassine
Journal:  Vaccines (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-09

Review 2.  Two Years into the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned.

Authors:  Severino Jefferson Ribeiro da Silva; Jessica Catarine Frutuoso do Nascimento; Renata Pessôa Germano Mendes; Klarissa Miranda Guarines; Caroline Targino Alves da Silva; Poliana Gomes da Silva; Jurandy Júnior Ferraz de Magalhães; Justin R J Vigar; Abelardo Silva-Júnior; Alain Kohl; Keith Pardee; Lindomar Pena
Journal:  ACS Infect Dis       Date:  2022-08-08       Impact factor: 5.578

Review 3.  Early spontaneous breathing for acute respiratory distress syndrome in individuals with COVID-19.

Authors:  Friedrich Hohmann; Lisa Wedekind; Felicitas Grundeis; Steffen Dickel; Johannes Frank; Martin Golinski; Mirko Griesel; Clemens Grimm; Cindy Herchenhahn; Andre Kramer; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Onnen Moerer; Nancy Olbrich; Volker Thieme; Astrid Vieler; Falk Fichtner; Jacob Burns; Sven Laudi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-06-29

Review 4.  Fluvoxamine for the treatment of COVID-19.

Authors:  John Lz Nyirenda; Mario Sofroniou; Ingrid Toews; Agata Mikolajewska; Cornelius Lehane; Ina Monsef; Aesha Abu-Taha; Andy Maun; Miriam Stegemann; Christine Schmucker
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-09-14

5.  The precariousness of political management of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the search for scientific answers: Calling for prudence in public health emergencies.

Authors:  Tiago Correia
Journal:  Int J Health Plann Manage       Date:  2021-05-24

6.  SARS-CoV-2 Spreads through Cell-to-Cell Transmission.

Authors:  Cong Zeng; John P Evans; Tiffany King; Yi-Min Zheng; Eugene M Oltz; Sean P J Whelan; Linda Saif; Mark E Peeples; Shan-Lu Liu
Journal:  bioRxiv       Date:  2021-06-01

7.  Risk of hospital admission for patients with SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7: cohort analysis.

Authors:  Tommy Nyberg; Katherine A Twohig; Ross J Harris; Shaun R Seaman; Joe Flannagan; Hester Allen; Andre Charlett; Daniela De Angelis; Gavin Dabrera; Anne M Presanis
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2021-06-15

8.  Collapse of the public health system and the emergence of new variants during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil.

Authors:  Severino Jefferson Ribeiro da Silva; Lindomar Pena
Journal:  One Health       Date:  2021-06-29

9.  Trajectories of hospitalisation for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 in Norway, December 2020 - April 2021.

Authors:  Robert Whittaker; Anja Bråthen Kristofferson; Elina Seppälä; Beatriz Valcarcel Salamanca; Lamprini Veneti; Margrethe Larsdatter Storm; Håkon Bøås; Nina Aasand; Umaer Naseer; Karoline Bragstad; Reidar Kvåle; Karan Golestani; Siri Feruglio; Line Vold; Karin Nygård; Eirik Alnes Buanes
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2021-07-27       Impact factor: 6.072

10.  Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19.

Authors:  Kelly Ansems; Felicitas Grundeis; Karolina Dahms; Agata Mikolajewska; Volker Thieme; Vanessa Piechotta; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Miriam Stegemann; Carina Benstoem; Falk Fichtner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-08-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.