Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Prioritize People for COVID-19 Vaccination When Vaccines Are in Short Supply

COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for a rapid tool supporting decision-makers in prioritizing patients in the immediate and overwhelming context of pandemics, where shortages in different healthcare resources are faced. We have proposed Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to create a system of criteria and weights to prioritize uses of COVID-19 vaccines in groups of people at significantly higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease or death, when vaccines are in short supply, for use in Tunisia. The prioritization criteria and the levels within each criterion were identified based on available COVID-19 evidence with a focus on the criteria selected by Tunisian scientific committees. To determine the weights for the criteria and levels, reflecting their relative importance, a panel of frontline physicians treating COVID-19 were invited to participate in an online survey using 1,000 minds MCDA software (www.1000minds.com) which implements the PAPRIKA (Potentially All Pairwise RanKings of all possible Alternatives) method. Ten criteria and twenty-three levels have been selected for prioritizing the uses of COVID-19 vaccines in groups of people at significantly higher risk of severe disease or death. Among the invited physicians, sixty have completed the survey. The obtained scores were, in decreasing order of importance (mean weights in parentheses, summing to 100%). Obesity (16.2%), Age (12.7%), Chronic pulmonary diseases (10.8%), Chronic cardiovascular conditions (10.3%), Bone marrow or organ transplantation (10.1%), Immunodeficiency or Immunosuppression (9.6%), Diabetes (9%), Renal failure (8.4%), evolutive cancer (6.9%), and high blood pressure (6%). MCDA-based prioritization scoring system comprising explicit criteria and weights provides an adaptable and multicriteria approach that can assist policy-makers to prioritize uses of COVID-19 vaccines.

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Prioritize People for COVID-19 Vaccination When Vaccines Are in Short Supply.

COVID-19 pandemic underscored the need for a rapid tool supporting decision-makers in prioritizing patients in the immediate and overwhelming context of pandemics, where shortages in different healthcare resources are faced. We have proposed Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to create a system of criteria and weights to prioritize uses of COVID-19 vaccines in groups of people at significantly higher risk of severe COVID-19 disease or death, when vaccines are in short supply, for use in Tunisia. The prioritization criteria and the levels within each criterion were identified based on available COVID-19 evidence with a focus on the criteria selected by Tunisian scientific committees. To determine the weights for the criteria and levels, reflecting their relative importance, a panel of frontline physicians treating COVID-19 were invited to participate in an online survey using 1,000 minds MCDA software (www.1000minds.com) which implements the PAPRIKA (Potentially All Pairwise RanKings of all possible Alternatives) method. Ten criteria and twenty-three levels have been selected for prioritizing the uses of COVID-19 vaccines in groups of people at significantly higher risk of severe disease or death. Among the invited physicians, sixty have completed the survey. The obtained scores were, in decreasing order of importance (mean weights in parentheses, summing to 100%). Obesity (16.2%), Age (12.7%), Chronic pulmonary diseases (10.8%), Chronic cardiovascular conditions (10.3%), Bone marrow or organ transplantation (10.1%), Immunodeficiency or Immunosuppression (9.6%), Diabetes (9%), Renal failure (8.4%), evolutive cancer (6.9%), and high blood pressure (6%). MCDA-based prioritization scoring system comprising explicit criteria and weights provides an adaptable and multicriteria approach that can assist policy-makers to prioritize uses of COVID-19 vaccines.

Incidence and risk factors of SARS-CoV-2 infection among workers in a public health laboratory in Tunisia.

The aim of this study was to measure the extent of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among workers at the Institut Pasteur de Tunis (IPT), a public health laboratory involved in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Tunisia, and to identify risk factors for infection in this occupational setting. A cross-sectional survey was conducted on IPT workers not vaccinated against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Participants completed a questionnaire that included a history of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immunoglobulin G antibodies against the receptor-binding domain of the spike antigen (anti-S-RBD IgG) and the nucleocapsid protein (anti-N IgG) of the SARS-CoV-2 virus were detected by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA). A multivariate analysis was used to identify factors significantly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A total of 428 workers were enrolled in the study. The prevalence of anti-S-RBD and/or anti-N IgG antibodies was 32.9% [28.7-37.4]. The cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (positive serology and/or previous positive RT-PCR test) was 40.0% [35.5-44.9], while the proportion with asymptomatic infection was 32.9%. One-third of the participants with RT-PCR-confirmed infection tested seronegative more than 90 days postinfection. Participants aged over 40 and laborers were more susceptible to infection (adjusted OR [AOR] = 1.65 [1.08-2.51] and AOR = 2.67 [1.45-4.89], respectively), while tobacco smokers had a lower risk of infection (AOR = 0.54 [0.29-0.97]). The SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among IPT workers was not significantly different from that detected concurrently in the general population. Hence, the professional activities conducted in this public health laboratory did not generate additional risk to that incurred outside the institute in day-to-day activities.

Humoral and Cellular Immunogenicity of Six Different Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in Adults: A Comparative Study in Tunisia (North Africa).

BACKGROUND: The mass vaccination campaign against SARS-CoV-2 was started in Tunisia on 13 March 2021 by using progressively seven different vaccines approved for emergency use. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the humoral and cellular immunity in subjects aged 40 years and over who received one of the following two-dose regimen vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, namely mRNA-1273 or Spikevax (Moderna), BNT162B2 or Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech), Gam-COVID-Vac or Sputnik V (Gamaleya Research Institute), ChAdOx1-S or Vaxzevria (AstraZeneca), BIBP (Sinopharm), and Coronavac (Sinovac). MATERIAL AND METHODS: For each type of vaccine, a sample of subjects aged 40 and over was randomly selected from the national platform for monitoring COVID-19 vaccination and contacted to participate to this study. All consenting participants were sampled for peripheral blood at 3-7 weeks after the second vaccine dose to perform anti-S and anti-N serology by the Elecsys® (Lenexa, KS, USA) anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays (Roche® Basel, Switzerland). The CD4 and CD8 T cell responses were evaluated by the QuantiFERON® SARS-CoV-2 (Qiagen® Basel, Switzerland) for a randomly selected sub-group. RESULTS: A total of 501 people consented to the study and, of them, 133 were included for the cellular response investigations. Both humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 antigens differed significantly between all tested groups. RNA vaccines induced the highest levels of humoral and cellular anti-S responses followed by adenovirus vaccines and then by inactivated vaccines. Vaccines from the same platform induced similar levels of specific anti-S immune responses except in the case of the Sputnik V and the AstraZeneca vaccine, which exhibited contrasting effects on humoral and cellular responses. When analyses were performed in subjects with negative anti-N antibodies, results were similar to those obtained within the total cohort, except for the Moderna vaccine, which gave a better cellular immune response than the Pfizer vaccine and RNA vaccines, which induced similar cellular immune responses to those of adenovirus vaccines. CONCLUSION: Collectively, our data confirmed the superiority of the RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, in particular that of Moderna, for both humoral and cellular immunogenicity. Our results comparing between different vaccine platforms in a similar population are of great importance since they may help decision makers to adopt the best strategy for further national vaccination programs.

COVID-19 in Tunisia (North Africa): Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the General Population of the Capital City Tunis.

Seroprevalence studies are essential to get an accurate estimate of the actual SARS-CoV-2 diffusion within populations. We report on the findings of the first serosurvey conducted in Tunis prior to the implementation of mass vaccination and analyzed factors associated with seropositivity. A household cross sectional survey was conducted (March-April 2021) in Tunis, spanning the end of the second wave and the beginning of the third wave of COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to the spike (S-RBD) or the nucleocapsid (N) proteins were detected by in-house ELISA tests. The survey included 1676 individuals from 431 households. The mean age and sex ratio were 43.3 ± 20.9 years and 0.6, respectively. The weighted seroprevalence of anti-N and/or anti-S-RBD IgG antibodies was equal to 38.0% (34.6-41.5). In multivariate analysis, age under 10, no tobacco use, previous diagnosis of COVID-19, a history of COVID-19 related symptoms and contact with a COVID-19 case within the household, were independently associated with higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence. More than one third of people living in Tunis obtained antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Further studies are needed to monitor changes in these figures as Tunisian population is confronted to the subsequent epidemic waves and to guide the vaccine strategy.

Rapid diagnostic tests : Pros, cons and potential use in the COVID-19 management in Tunisia.

OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is a major public health issue. In a context of limited diagnostic capacity with the reference technique (real-time RT-PCR), many manufacturers have developed rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). Although very promising in theory, these tests have raised many questions. This article is a rapid review that synthesizes data regarding different types of available RDTs, their performance, their limits and their potential indications in Tunisia as proposed by a multidisciplinary group of experts. METHODS: A literature review was carried out on the websites of international organizations, governmental bodies and on INAHTA database, completed by a search of relevant scientific articles up to 1 June 2020. The synthesis of the data was submitted to a panel of experts to propose recommendations for the Tunisian context. RESULTS: RDTs based on the detection of antigens and antibodies have sensitivity and specificity related issues. Few validation reports are published in the scientific literature. Pending more evidence on their performance and validity, several international organizations recommend their use only for research purposes. TDRs based on antibody detection are not appropriate for the early diagnosis of COVID-19. However, validated and specific tests could provide complementary diagnostic information to reference tests. CONCLUSION: Pending further evidence, the panel recommends the use of RDTs mainly for research purposes at the community level.