Literature DB >> 35011781

Relative Reproduction Number of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) Compared with Delta Variant in South Africa.

Hiroshi Nishiura1, Kimihito Ito2, Asami Anzai1, Tetsuro Kobayashi1, Chayada Piantham2, Alfonso J Rodríguez-Morales3,4,5.   

Abstract

The world identified the rapidly increasing incidence of the causative variant of SARS-CoV-2 Pangolin B [...].

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 35011781      PMCID: PMC8745053          DOI: 10.3390/jcm11010030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


1. Introduction

The world identified the rapidly increasing incidence of the causative variant of SARS-CoV-2 Pangolin B.1.1.529 in the Gauteng province, South Africa. With as many as thirty-two notable mutations in spike protein in late November, Omicron subsequently and swiftly replaced the circulating Delta and other variants [1]. The recognition of a variant is considered to have taken place two months later than its emergence. The remarkable global spread was notable, involving 50 countries with genome surveillance capacity as of 8 December 2021. Before replacing the Delta variant, the epidemic in South Africa was steadily downward. Considering that vaccination coverage was smaller than 30%, it was likely that a substantial fraction of the remainder of the population acquired infection naturally. Why was Omicron successful in causing a new epidemic? Understanding the transmissibility sheds light on the mechanism behind this observation. Here, we present our modelling result from an analysis of genome surveillance data in Gauteng province, South Africa, using an existing estimation technique [2].

2. Modelling Replacement

Genome surveillance data of Gauteng province as registered to Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data (GISAID) was downloaded as of the end of November 2021 (Supplementary Table S1). We assumed that the effective reproduction number of the Omicron variant, Romicron(t) was given by multiplying a constant factor k to that of Delta variant, Rdelta(t), i.e., We assumed a relationship Romicron(t) = kRdelta(t). As we have studied in the past [2], the fraction of genome surveillance results showing what Omicron was responsible for at a given calendar time t, qv(t) was modelled as where q1(t) and q2(t) are fractions of Delta and other variants at calendar time t, g(s) is the probability density function of the generation time (assumed as independent of the variant with a mean of 4.7 days [3]), and k2 is the relative effective reproduction number of other variants compared with the Delta variant. Multinomial distribution was employed for maximum likelihood estimation of unknown parameters. Figure 1A shows the comparison between predicted and observed fractions of Omicron, Delta, and other variants for 16 September–30 November 2021. Romicron(t) of Omicron was estimated to be 4.2 times (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1, 9.1) greater than that of the Delta variant. The effective reproduction number of other variants was estimated as 1.3 times (95% CI: 0.7, 2.0) times greater. Alternatively, estimating the relative exponential growth rate from 18 October–30 November 2021, the Omicron variant was 3.3 times (95% CI: 2.0, 7.8) more transmissible than the Delta variant.
Figure 1

Transmissibility assessment of Omicron variant. (A) Estimated temporal changes in SARS-CoV-2 variant relative frequencies of Delta (Green), Omicron (Red), and other variants (Purple) circulating in Gauteng, South Africa, 16 September to 22 November 2021. Marks represent observed data, while lines are from predicted model. (B) The relationship between the protective effect of acquired immunity and the relative transmissibility of Omicron variant compared with Delta variant. ω represents the immune fraction in South Africa. Rdelta/Romicron is the ratio of the basic reproduction number of Delta variant to that of Omicron, i.e., 1.5 indicating that Delta is more transmissible in a naïve population, 1.0 equally transmissible, and 0.5 indicating that the intrinsic transmissibility of Omicron is twice as large as that of Delta variant.

3. Transmissibility or Escape from Immune Response

What does that mean? Figure 1B illustrates how the transmission advantages of Omicron were achieved. Let ω be the fraction immune at the beginning of the ongoing epidemic in South Africa. is the time-dependent relative risk reduction due to acquired immunity against the Delta variant. We have where R0, is the basic reproduction number of Delta variant which may be on the order of five or six during winter season. A similar argument applies to the Omicron variant. Then, the immune protection against Omicron variant, , induced by acquired immunity in the present-day South Africa is estimated as Exploring the plausible range, is likely to be very small, e.g., in the order of 10–20%. Namely, the transmission advantage of Omicron over Delta is likely gained by the mechanism of Omicron to escape from existing immunity in the population. A reduced level of neutralization against the Omicron variant among previously vaccinated individuals has been reported [4], and moreover, an increased frequency of reinfections has been demonstrated [1]. Of course, our exercise does not refute the actual elevation of the transmissibility of Omicron compared with the Delta variant. However, at least the order elevation of four times entirely due to increased transmissibility is unlikely.

4. Remaining Key Questions

As demonstrated here, Omicron has a substantial transmission potential to penetrate the existing herd protection due to mass vaccination in many countries and regions [5]. Key questions to be yet answered include (1) the vaccine effectiveness against Omicron, especially among countries that used different types of vaccine (e.g., messenger RNA vaccine) and (2) the clinical severity of infection across a broad spectrum of age and underlying health conditions.
  3 in total

1.  Highly mutated SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant sparks significant concern among global experts - What is known so far?

Authors:  Sujan Poudel; Angela Ishak; Javier Perez-Fernandez; Efrain Garcia; Darwin A León-Figueroa; Luccio Romaní; D Katterine Bonilla-Aldana; Alfonso J Rodriguez-Morales
Journal:  Travel Med Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 6.211

2.  Predicted dominance of variant Delta of SARS-CoV-2 before Tokyo Olympic Games, Japan, July 2021.

Authors:  Kimihito Ito; Chayada Piantham; Hiroshi Nishiura
Journal:  Euro Surveill       Date:  2021-07

3.  Serial interval of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infections.

Authors:  Hiroshi Nishiura; Natalie M Linton; Andrei R Akhmetzhanov
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 3.623

  3 in total
  51 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.  The Lancet Commission on lessons for the future from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Sachs; Salim S Abdool Karim; Lara Aknin; Joseph Allen; Kirsten Brosbøl; Francesca Colombo; Gabriela Cuevas Barron; María Fernanda Espinosa; Vitor Gaspar; Alejandro Gaviria; Andy Haines; Peter J Hotez; Phoebe Koundouri; Felipe Larraín Bascuñán; Jong-Koo Lee; Muhammad Ali Pate; Gabriela Ramos; K Srinath Reddy; Ismail Serageldin; John Thwaites; Vaira Vike-Freiberga; Chen Wang; Miriam Khamadi Were; Lan Xue; Chandrika Bahadur; Maria Elena Bottazzi; Chris Bullen; George Laryea-Adjei; Yanis Ben Amor; Ozge Karadag; Guillaume Lafortune; Emma Torres; Lauren Barredo; Juliana G E Bartels; Neena Joshi; Margaret Hellard; Uyen Kim Huynh; Shweta Khandelwal; Jeffrey V Lazarus; Susan Michie
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 202.731

3.  Estimating New Cases Among Athletes During the Winter Olympics Based on a Dynamic Model - Beijing, China, February 2022.

Authors:  Zonghao Zhang; Xiaotong Huang; Chuanqing Xu; Xiaojing Wang; Songbai Guo
Journal:  China CDC Wkly       Date:  2022-07-29

4.  Development of a Test System to Detect the Omicron Variant of SARS-CoV-2 and the Frequency of Its Detection in Patients.

Authors:  M L Filipenko; I P Oskorbin; D V Shamovskaya; E A Kharpov; A A Stepanov; V V Romanov; V V Kuznetsov; U A Boyarskikh; A A Kechin; E V Pechkovsky; A B Krivoruchko; A M Ivanov; N E Kushlinskii; V V Vlasov
Journal:  Bull Exp Biol Med       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 0.737

5.  SARS-CoV-2 exposures of healthcare workers from primary care, long-term care facilities and hospitals: a nationwide matched case-control study.

Authors:  Martin Belan; Tiffany Charmet; Laura Schaeffer; Sarah Tubiana; Xavier Duval; Jean-Christophe Lucet; Arnaud Fontanet; Gabriel Birgand; Solen Kernéis
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 13.310

6.  Increased Secondary Attack Rates among the Household Contacts of Patients with the Omicron Variant of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Japan.

Authors:  Tsuyoshi Ogata; Hideo Tanaka; Emiko Tanaka; Natsumi Osaki; Etsuko Noguchi; Yukino Osaki; Ayane Tono; Koji Wada
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 4.614

7.  Infectious Aerosol Capture Mask as Environmental Control to Reduce Spread of Respiratory Viral Particles.

Authors:  Joshua L Santarpia; Nicholas W Markin; Vicki L Herrera; Daniel N Ackerman; Danielle N Rivera; Gabriel A Lucero; Steven J Lisco
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 5.818

8.  Mutation induced infection waves in diseases like COVID-19.

Authors:  Fabian Jan Schwarzendahl; Jens Grauer; Benno Liebchen; Hartmut Löwen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 4.996

9.  Assessing Vaccination Prioritization Strategies for COVID-19 in South Africa Based on Age-Specific Compartment Model.

Authors:  Chao Zuo; Zeyang Meng; Fenping Zhu; Yuzhi Zheng; Yuting Ling
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-06-15

10.  Autoregressive count data modeling on mobility patterns to predict cases of COVID-19 infection.

Authors:  Jing Zhao; Mengjie Han; Zhenwu Wang; Benting Wan
Journal:  Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.821

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.