| Literature DB >> 35292054 |
Miaolei Li1, Jian Zu2, Yue Zhang3, Le Ma4, Mingwang Shen5, Zongfang Li6,7, Fanpu Ji8,9,10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since December 14, 2020, New York City (NYC) has started the first batch of COVID-19 vaccines. However, the shortage of vaccines is currently an inevitable problem. Therefore, optimizing the age-specific COVID-19 vaccination is an important issue that needs to be addressed as a priority.Entities:
Keywords: Age-structured model; COVID-19; Contact matrix; Vaccination strategies
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35292054 PMCID: PMC8922400 DOI: 10.1186/s12985-022-01771-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Virol J ISSN: 1743-422X Impact factor: 4.099
Summary of different mathematical models used to describe the dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic
| Authors | Model framework | Strengths | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acuña-Zegarra et al. [ | This study used optimal control methods with mixed constraints to evaluate different vaccination strategies to minimize the burden of COVID-19 pandemic, which could help policy decision makers design vaccination plans for the homogeneous population | This study did not consider the age structure or heterogeneity of the population | |
| Libotte et al. [ | This study developed a method to solve the inverse problem to determine the parameters of the SIR model, and considered the single- and multi-objective optimization environment to determine the best vaccination strategy for the COVID-19 pandemic | This study did not consider the age structure or heterogeneity of the population | |
| Choi et al. [ | This study established an age-structured mathematical model and combined actual epidemiological data in Korea to evaluate vaccination strategies on the infection incidence and mortality for each age group under different levels of social distance | This study did not consider the priority vaccination for essential workers which had been planned by the Korean government | |
| Matrajt et al. [ | This study used a mathematical model of age structure and combined optimization algorithms to evaluate different combinations of vaccine effectiveness and vaccination coverage for four different indicators (minimize deaths, minimize symptomatic infections, maximum non-ICU and minimize ICU hospitalizations) | This study assumed that asymptomatic and symptomatic infections had the same immunity. However, asymptomatic individuals may have a weaker immune response | |
| Iboi et al. [ | This study evaluated the impact of vaccines on the control of COVID-19 in the United States based on a deterministic mathematical model, and derived the expression for the vaccine-induced herd immunity threshold | This study did not consider the age structure or heterogeneity of the population | |
| Shen et al. [ | This study established a deterministic mathematical model, and evaluated the required vaccine effectiveness and vaccination coverage rate to suppress the COVID-19 pandemic, when the social contact returned to pre-pandemic normal levels and the face mask use was reduced | This study did not consider the age structure or heterogeneity of the population | |
| Bubar et al. [ | This study used an age structured model to evaluate the impact of five COVID-19 vaccine priority strategies on cumulative incidence, mortality, and years of life lost | Due to the lack of direct measurement data, this study extrapolated the contact matrix to people over 80 | |
| Foy et al.[ | This study used an age structured model to investigate the impact of four age-based vaccination strategies on the infections and cumulative deaths, they concluded that allocating COVID-19 vaccines to older age groups (> 60 years) was the optimal in all scenarios considered regardless of vaccine efficacy, dispensation speed, force of infection | This study assumed that some model parameters that may vary with age and time, such as the latent period, the force of infection and the recovery rate to be constant due to the lack of clear data | |
| Buckner et al. [ | This study used an age structured model to solve for optimal strategies to allocate the limit COVID-19 vaccines to essential workers that minimizes the number of total deaths, years of life lost, or infections, they concluded that prioritizing the limit COVID-19 vaccines to older essential workers can better reduce mortality, and prioritizing the limit COVID-19 vaccines to younger essential workers can better control spread | This study did not consider the seasonality of contact rates for children in the scenarios where schools are modeled as closed. This may have limited impact on the optimal solutions |
Here, the description of different compartments were as follows: susceptible individuals ; exposed individuals ; symptomatic infected individuals ; asymptomatic infected individuals ; recovered individuals ; dead individuals ; vaccinated individuals ; infected individuals ; pre-symptomatic infectious individuals ; hospitalized individuals with mild symptoms ; hospitalized individuals with severe symptoms ; hospitalized individuals ; hospitalized individuals who require intensive care ; unvaccinated susceptible individuals ; vaccinated susceptible individuals ; early-exposed individuals (i.e., newly-infected individuals who are not yet infectious) ; pre-symptomatic infectious individuals (i.e., exposed individuals who are close to surviving the incubation period and are shedding virus) ; undiagnosed infections with mild symptoms ; undiagnosed infections with severe symptoms ; diagnosed infections with mild symptoms ; diagnosed infections with severe symptoms ; self-isolated individuals ; individuals vaccinated and protected , individuals vaccinated but unprotected .
Fig. 1Flow diagram of the age-structured mathematical model for COVID-19 in NYC. The total population in NYC were divided into 5 age groups (0–17, 18–44, 45–64, 65–74 and 75–100 years). The sub-population in each age group in NYC were further divided into eight compartments: susceptible individuals ; vaccinated individuals ; exposed individuals ; infected but asymptomatic individuals ; infected and symptomatic individuals ; confirmed individuals who stayed at home ; hospitalized cases and recovered cases . The details of the force of infection were provided in the Supplementary Text 1 (model formulation). The susceptible individuals would become vaccinated individuals when they were vaccinated. The vaccination coverage rate was and we assumed the vaccination coverage rate was a logistic function, i.e., , where was the maximum vaccination coverage rate, was the initial vaccination coverage rate and was the growth rate of vaccination in NYC. The effectiveness of vaccine for COVID-19 was . The incubation period of exposed individuals was . The recovery rate of asymptomatic infections in the free environment, confirmed cases and hospitalized cases were , , and , respectively. The proportion of symptomatic infections in age group was , the transfer rate from symptomatic individuals to confirmed cases in age group was , the transfer rate from confirmed cases to hospitalized cases in age group was , and the death rate in age group was . Here, we assumed that and were exponentially decreasing functions. More details were provided in the Additional file 1: Text 1 (model formulation)
Fig. 2AThe reduced cumulative number of deaths in NYC if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rate for only one age group was gradually increased and would reach to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively. (a) The vaccination coverage rate was 40%. (b) The vaccination coverage rate was 60%. (c) The vaccination coverage rate was 80%. B The reduced cumulative number of deaths per increased 100,000 vaccinated individuals in only one age group if the vaccination coverage rate was increased to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively
Fig. 3A The reduced cumulative number of new infections in NYC if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rate for only one age group was gradually increased and would reach to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively. (a) The vaccination coverage rate was 40%. (b) The vaccination coverage rate was 60%. (c) The vaccination coverage rate was 80%. B The reduced cumulative number of new infections per increased 100,000 vaccinated individuals in only one age group if the vaccination coverage rate was increased to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively
Fig. 4A The reduced cumulative number of deaths in NYC if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rates in 0–44, 18–64 and 65–100 age groups would gradually reach to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively. (a) The vaccination coverage rate was 40%. (b) The vaccination coverage rate was 60%. (c) The vaccination coverage rate was 80%. B The reduced cumulative number of deaths per increased 100,000 vaccinated individuals in 0–44, 18–64 and 65–100 age groups if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rate for 0–44, 18–64 and 65–100 age groups were gradually increased to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively
Fig. 5A The reduced cumulative number of new infections in NYC if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rates in 0–44, 18–64 and 65–100 age groups would gradually reach to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively. (a) The vaccination coverage rate was 40%. (b) The vaccination coverage rate was 60%. (c) The vaccination coverage rate was 80%. B The reduced cumulative number of new infections per increased 100,000 vaccinated individuals in the two groups if starting from March 1, 2021, the vaccination coverage rate for 0–44, 18–64 and 65–100 age groups were gradually increased to 40%, 60%, and 80% by June 1, 2021, respectively
Fig. 6The reduced cumulative numbers of deaths (A) and new infections (B) in NYC if we reallocated vaccines to the 0–17 and 75–100 age groups starting from March 1, 2021, such that the proportions of vaccinated individuals in the 0–17 and 75–100 age groups on June 1, 2021 were reallocated according to the following four scenarios: (1) 0–17 age group 20% and 75–100 age group 80%; (2) 0–17 age group 40% and 75–100 age group 60%; (3) 0–17 age group 60% and 75–100 age group 40%; (4) 0–17 age group 80% and 75–100 age group 20%
Fig. 7The normalized reduced cumulative numbers of deaths and new infections in NYC if we reallocated vaccines to the 0–17 and 75–100 age groups starting from March 1, 2021, such that the proportions of vaccinated individuals in the 0–17 and 75–100 age groups on June 1, 2021 were reallocated according to the following four scenarios: (1) 0–17 age group 20% and 75–100 age group 80%; (2) 0–17 age group 40% and 75–100 age group 60%; (3) 0–17 age group 60% and 75–100 age group 40%; (4) 0–17 age group 80% and 75–100 age group 20%