Direct and indirect mortality impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, March 1, 2020 to January 1, 2022.

Excess mortality studies provide crucial information regarding the health burden of pandemics and other large-scale events. Here, we use time series approaches to separate the direct contribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection on mortality from the indirect consequences of the pandemic in the United States. We estimate excess deaths occurring above a seasonal baseline from March 1, 2020 to January 1, 2022, stratified by week, state, age, and underlying mortality condition (including COVID-19 and respiratory diseases; Alzheimer's disease; cancer; cerebrovascular diseases; diabetes; heart diseases; and external causes, which include suicides, opioid overdoses, and accidents). Over the study period, we estimate an excess of 1,065,200 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 909,800-1,218,000) all-cause deaths, of which 80% are reflected in official COVID-19 statistics. State-specific excess death estimates are highly correlated with SARS-CoV-2 serology, lending support to our approach. Mortality from 7 of the 8 studied conditions rose during the pandemic, with the exception of cancer. To separate the direct mortality consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection from the indirect effects of the pandemic, we fit generalized additive models (GAM) to age- state- and cause-specific weekly excess mortality, using covariates representing direct (COVID-19 intensity) and indirect pandemic effects (hospital intensive care unit (ICU) occupancy and measures of interventions stringency). We find that 84% (95% CI 65-94%) of all-cause excess mortality can be statistically attributed to the direct impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also estimate a large direct contribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection (≥67%) on mortality from diabetes, Alzheimer's, heart diseases, and in all-cause mortality among individuals over 65 years. In contrast, indirect effects predominate in mortality from external causes and all-cause mortality among individuals under 44 years, with periods of stricter interventions associated with greater rises in mortality. Overall, on a national scale, the largest consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic are attributable to the direct impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections; yet, the secondary impacts dominate among younger age groups and in mortality from external causes. Further research on the drivers of indirect mortality is warranted as more detailed mortality data from this pandemic becomes available.

Host heterogeneity and epistasis explain punctuated evolution of SARS-CoV-2.

Identifying drivers of viral diversity is key to understanding the evolutionary as well as epidemiological dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using rich viral genomic data sets, we show that periods of steadily rising diversity have been punctuated by sudden, enormous increases followed by similarly abrupt collapses of diversity. We introduce a mechanistic model of saltational evolution with epistasis and demonstrate that these features parsimoniously account for the observed temporal dynamics of inter-genomic diversity. Our results provide support for recent proposals that saltational evolution may be a signature feature of SARS-CoV-2, allowing the pathogen to more readily evolve highly transmissible variants. These findings lend theoretical support to a heightened awareness of biological contexts where increased diversification may occur. They also underline the power of pathogen genomics and other surveillance streams in clarifying the phylodynamics of emerging and endemic infections. In public health terms, our results further underline the importance of equitable distribution of up-to-date vaccines.

A Cross-Sectional Study of SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies and Risk Factors for Seropositivity in Staff in Day Care Facilities and Preschools in Denmark.

The aim of this study was to provide information about immunity against COVID-19 along with risk factors and behavior among employees in day care facilities and preschools (DCS) in Denmark. In collaboration with the Danish Union of Pedagogues, during February and March 2021, 47,810 members were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 antibody test (POCT) at work and were invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposure. Seroprevalence data from Danish blood donors (total Ig enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]) were used as a proxy for the Danish population. A total of 21,018 (45%) DCS employees completed the questionnaire and reported their POCT result {median age, 44.3 years (interquartile range [IQR], [32.7 to 53.6]); females, 84.1%}, of which 20,267 (96.4%) were unvaccinated and included in analysis. A total of 1,857 (9.2%) participants tested seropositive, significantly higher than a seroprevalence at 7.6% (risk ratio [RR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14 to 1.27) among 40,541 healthy blood donors (median age, 42 years [IQR, 28 to 53]; males, 51.3%). Exposure at work (RR, 2.9; 95% CI, 2.3 to 3.6) was less of a risk factor than exposure within the household (RR, 12.7; 95% CI, 10.2 to 15.8). Less than 25% of participants reported wearing face protection at work. Most of the participants expressed some degree of fear of contracting COVID-19 both at work and outside work. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was slightly higher in DCS staff than in blood donors, but possible exposure at home was associated with a higher risk than at work. DCS staff expressed fear of contracting COVID-19, though there was limited use of face protection at work. IMPORTANCE Identifying at-risk groups and evaluating preventive interventions in at-risk groups is imperative for the ongoing pandemic as well as for the control of future epidemics. Although DCS staff have a much higher risk of being infected within their own household than at their workplace, most are fearful of being infected with COVID-19 or bringing COVID-19 to work. This represents an interesting dilemma and an important issue which should be addressed by public health authorities for risk communication and pandemic planning. This study design can be used in a strategy for ongoing surveillance of COVID-19 immunity or other infections in the population. The findings of this study can be used to assess the need for future preventive interventions in DCS, such as the use of personal protective equipment.

Persistent Symptoms and Sequelae After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection Not Requiring Hospitalization: Results From Testing Denmark, a Danish Cross-sectional Survey.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with persistent symptoms ("long COVID"). We assessed the burden of long COVID among nonhospitalized adults with polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: In the fall of 2020, a cross-sectional survey was performed in the adult Danish general population. This included a self-administered point-of-care test for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, the Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated symptom questions. Nonhospitalized respondents with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test ≥12 weeks before the survey (cases) were matched (1:10) to seronegative controls on age, sex, and body mass index. Propensity score-weighted odds ratios (ORs) and ORs for risk factors were estimated for each health outcome. Results: In total, 742 cases and 7420 controls were included. The attributable risk of at least 1 long-COVID symptom was 25.0 per 100 cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.2-27.4). Compared to controls, cases reported worse general health (OR, 5.9 [95% CI, 5.0-7.0]) and had higher odds for a broad range of symptoms, particularly loss of taste (OR, 11.8 [95% CI, 9.5-14.6]) and smell (OR, 11.2 [95% CI, 9.1-13.9]). Physical and Mental Component Summary scores were also significantly reduced with differences of -2.5 (95% CI, -3.1 to -1.8) and -2.0 (95% CI, -2.7 to -1.2), respectively. Female sex and severity of initial infection were major risk factors for long COVID. Conclusions: Nonhospitalized SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive individuals had significantly reduced physical and mental health, and 1 in 4 reported persistence of at least 1 long-COVID symptom.

Lockdowns exert selection pressure on overdispersion of SARS-CoV-2 variants☆

The SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain has caused pronounced superspreading events, reflecting a disease characterized by overdispersion, where about 10% of infected people cause 80% of infections. New variants of the disease have different person-to-person variability in viral load, suggesting for example that the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant is more infectious but relatively less prone to superspreading. Meanwhile, non-pharmaceutical mitigation of the pandemic has focused on limiting social contacts (lockdowns, regulations on gatherings) and decreasing transmission risk through mask wearing and social distancing. Using a mathematical model, we show that the competitive advantage of disease variants may heavily depend on the restrictions imposed. In particular, we find that lockdowns exert an evolutionary pressure which favours variants with lower levels of overdispersion. Our results suggest that overdispersion is an evolutionarily unstable trait, with a tendency for more homogeneously spreading variants to eventually dominate. Graphical

Lockdowns exert selection pressure on overdispersion of SARS-CoV-2 variants.

The SARS-CoV-2 ancestral strain has caused pronounced superspreading events, reflecting a disease characterized by overdispersion, where about 10% of infected people cause 80% of infections. New variants of the disease have different person-to-person variability in viral load, suggesting for example that the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant is more infectious but relatively less prone to superspreading. Meanwhile, non-pharmaceutical mitigation of the pandemic has focused on limiting social contacts (lockdowns, regulations on gatherings) and decreasing transmission risk through mask wearing and social distancing. Using a mathematical model, we show that the competitive advantage of disease variants may heavily depend on the restrictions imposed. In particular, we find that lockdowns exert an evolutionary pressure which favours variants with lower levels of overdispersion. Our results suggest that overdispersion is an evolutionarily unstable trait, with a tendency for more homogeneously spreading variants to eventually dominate.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence among homeless people and shelter workers in Denmark: a nationwide cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) and associated shelter workers may be at higher risk of infection with "Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2" (SARS-CoV-2). The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 among PEH and shelter workers in Denmark. DESIGN AND METHODS: In November 2020, we conducted a nationwide cross-sectional seroprevalence study among PEH and shelter workers at 21 recruitment sites in Denmark. The assessment included a point-of-care test for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, followed by a questionnaire. The seroprevalence was compared to that of geographically matched blood donors considered as a proxy for the background population, tested using a total Ig ELISA assay. RESULTS: We included 827 participants in the study, of whom 819 provided their SARS-CoV-2 antibody results. Of those, 628 were PEH (median age 50.8 (IQR 40.9-59.1) years, 35.5% female) and 191 were shelter workers (median age 46.6 (IQR 36.1-55.0) years and 74.5% female). The overall seroprevalence was 6.7% and was similar among PEH and shelter workers (6.8% vs 6.3%, p = 0.87); and 12.2% among all participants who engaged in sex work. The overall participant seroprevalence was significantly higher than that of the background population (2.9%, p < 0.001). When combining all participants who reported sex work or were recruited at designated safe havens, we found a significantly increased risk of seropositivity compared to other participants (OR 2.23, 95%CI 1.06-4.43, p = 0.02). Seropositive and seronegative participants reported a similar presence of at least one SARS-CoV-2 associated symptom (49% and 54%, respectively). INTERPRETATIONS: The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was more than twice as high among PEH and associated shelter workers, compared to the background population. These results could be taken into consideration when deciding in which phase PEH are eligible for a vaccine, as part of the Danish national SARS-CoV-2 vaccination program rollout. FUNDING: TrygFonden and HelseFonden.

Risk of hospitalisation associated with infection with SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant versus delta variant in Denmark: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of the severity of the SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant (B.1.1.529) are crucial to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global dissemination. We estimated the risk of SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations after infection with omicron compared with the delta variant (B.1.617.2) in Denmark, a country with high mRNA vaccination coverage and extensive free-of-charge PCR testing capacity. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we included all RT-PCR-confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Denmark, with samples taken between Nov 21 (date of first omicron-positive sample) and Dec 19, 2021. Individuals were identified in the national COVID-19 surveillance system database, which included results of a variant-specific RT-PCR that detected omicron cases, and data on SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations (primary outcome of the study). We calculated the risk ratio (RR) of hospitalisation after infection with omicron compared with delta, overall and stratified by vaccination status, in a Poisson regression model with robust SEs, adjusted a priori for reinfection status, sex, age, region, comorbidities, and time period. FINDINGS: Between Nov 21 and Dec 19, 2021, among the 188 980 individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, 38 669 (20·5%) had the omicron variant. SARS-CoV-2-related hospitalisations and omicron cases increased during the study period. Overall, 124 313 (65·8%) of 188 980 individuals were vaccinated, and vaccination was associated with a lower risk of hospitalisation (adjusted RR 0·24, 95% CI 0·22-0·26) compared with cases with no doses or only one dose of vaccine. Compared with delta infection, omicron infection was associated with an adjusted RR of hospitalisation of 0·64 (95% CI 0·56-0·75; 222 [0·6%] of 38 669 omicron cases admitted to hospital vs 2213 [1·5%] of 150 311 delta cases). For a similar comparison by vaccination status, the RR of hospitalisation was 0·57 (0·44-0·75) among cases with no or only one dose of vaccine, 0·71 (0·60-0·86) among those who received two doses, and 0·50 (0·32-0·76) among those who received three doses. INTERPRETATION: We found a significantly lower risk of hospitalisation with omicron infection compared with delta infection among both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, suggesting an inherent reduced severity of omicron. Our results could guide modelling of the effect of the ongoing global omicron wave and thus health-care system preparedness. FUNDING: None.

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in social housing areas in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is thought to be more prevalent among ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic status. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies during the COVID-19 pandemic among citizens 15 years or older in Denmark living in social housing (SH) areas. METHODS: We conducted a study between January 8th and January 31st, 2021 with recruitment in 13 selected SH areas. Participants were offered a point-of-care rapid SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibody test and a questionnaire concerning risk factors associated with COVID-19. As a proxy for the general Danish population we accessed data on seroprevalence from Danish blood donors (total Ig ELISA assay) in same time period. RESULTS: Of the 13,279 included participants, 2296 (17.3%) were seropositive (mean age 46.6 (SD 16.4) years, 54.2% female), which was 3 times higher than in the general Danish population (mean age 41.7 (SD 14.1) years, 48.5% female) in the same period (5.8%, risk ratios (RR) 2.96, 95% CI 2.78-3.16, p > 0.001). Seropositivity was higher among males (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.05-1.22%, p = 0.001) and increased with age, with an OR seropositivity of 1.03 for each 10-year increase in age (95% CI 1.00-1.06, p = 0.031). Close contact with COVID-19-infected individuals was associated with a higher risk of infection, especially among household members (OR 5.0, 95% CI 4.1-6.2 p < 0,001). Living at least four people in a household significantly increased the OR of seropositivity (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6, p = 0.02) as did living in a multi-generational household (OR 1.3 per generation, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, p = 0.003). Only 1.6% of participants reported not following any of the national COVID-19 recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Danish citizens living in SH areas of low socioeconomic status had a three times higher SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence compared to the general Danish population. The seroprevalence was significantly higher in males and increased slightly with age. Living in multiple generations households or in households of more than four persons was a strong risk factor for being seropositive. Results of this study can be used for future consideration of the need for preventive measures in the populations living in SH areas.

Testing Denmark: a Danish Nationwide Surveillance Study of COVID-19.

"Testing Denmark" is a national, large-scale, epidemiological surveillance study of SARS-CoV-2 in the Danish population. Between September and October 2020, approximately 1.3 million people (age >15 years) were randomly invited to fill in an electronic questionnaire covering COVID-19 exposures and symptoms. The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was determined by point-of care rapid test (POCT) distributed to participants' home addresses. In total, 318,552 participants (24.5% invitees) completed the study and 2,519 (0.79%) were seropositive. Of the participants with a prior positive PCR test (n = 1,828), 29.1% were seropositive in the POCT. Although seropositivity increased with age, participants 61 years and over reported fewer symptoms and were tested less frequently. Seropositivity was associated with physical contact with SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals (risk ratio [RR] 7.43, 95% CI: 6.57-8.41), particular in household members (RR 17.70, 95% CI: 15.60-20.10). A greater risk of seropositivity was seen in home care workers (RR 2.09, 95% CI: 1.58-2.78) compared to office workers. A high degree of adherence with national preventive recommendations was reported (e.g., >80% use of face masks), but no difference were found between seropositive and seronegative participants. The seroprevalence result was somewhat hampered by a lower-than-expected performance of the POCT. This is likely due to a low sensitivity of the POCT or problems reading the test results, and the main findings therefore relate to risk associations. More emphasis should be placed on age, occupation, and exposure in local communities. IMPORTANCE To date, including 318,522 participants, this is the largest population-based study with broad national participation where tests and questionnaires have been sent to participants' homes. We found that more emphasis from national and local authorities toward the risk of infection should be placed on age of tested individuals, type of occupation, as well as exposure in local communities and households. To meet the challenge that broad nationwide information can be difficult to gather. This study design sets the stage for a novel way of conducting studies. Additionally, this study design can be used as a supplementary model in future general test strategy for ongoing monitoring of COVID-19 immunity in the population, both from past infection and from vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, however, with attention to the complexity of performing and reading the POCT at home.

Differences in social activity increase efficiency of contact tracing.

ABSTRACT: Digital contact tracing has been suggested as an effective strategy for controlling an epidemic without severely limiting personal mobility. Here, we use smartphone proximity data to explore how social structure affects contact tracing of COVID-19. We model the spread of COVID-19 and find that the effectiveness of contact tracing depends strongly on social network structure and heterogeneous social activity. Contact tracing is shown to be remarkably effective in a workplace environment and the effectiveness depends strongly on the minimum duration of contact required to initiate quarantine. In a realistic social network, we find that forward contact tracing with immediate isolation can reduce an epidemic by more than 70%. In perspective, our findings highlight the necessity of incorporating social heterogeneity into models of mitigation strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version supplementary material available at 10.1140/epjb/s10051-021-00222-8.

A comprehensive look at the COVID-19 pandemic death toll.

COVID-19 'excess mortality' has been estimated for more than 100 countries and shows a dramatic death toll in many countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic: key considerations for the epidemic and its control.

The response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has been characterized by draconian measures and far too many important unknowns, such as the true mortality risk, the role of children as transmitters and the development and duration of immunity in the population. More than a year into the pandemic much has been learned and insights into this novel type of pandemic and options for control are shaping up. Using a historical lens, we review what we know and still do not know about the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. A pandemic caused by a member of the coronavirus family is a new situation following more than a century of influenza A pandemics. However, recent pandemic threats such as outbreaks of the related and novel deadly coronavirus SARS in 2003 and of MERS since 2012 had put coronaviruses on WHOs blueprint list of priority diseases. Like pandemic influenza, SARS-CoV-2 is highly transmissible (R0 ~ 2.5). Furthermore, it can fly under the radar due to a broad clinical spectrum where asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infected persons also transmit the virus-including children. COVID-19 is far more deadly than seasonal influenza; initial data from China suggested a case fatality rate of 2.3%-which would have been on par with the deadly 1918 Spanish influenza. But, while the Spanish influenza killed young, otherwise healthy adults, it is the elderly who are at extreme risk of dying of COVID-19. We review available seroepidemiological evidence of infection rates and compute infection fatality rates (IFR) for Denmark (0.5%), Spain (0.85%), and Iceland (0.3%). We also deduce that population age structure is key. SARS-CoV-2 is characterized by superspreading, so that ~10% of infected individuals yield 80% of new infections. This phenomenon turns out to be an Achilles heel of the virus that may explain our ability to effectively mitigate outbreaks so far. How will this pandemic come to an end? Herd immunity has not been achieved in Europe due to intense mitigation by non-pharmaceutical interventions; for example, only ~8% of Danes were infected across the 1st and 2nd wave. Luckily, we now have several safe and effective vaccines. Global vaccine control of the pandemic depends in great measure on our ability to keep up with current and future immune escape variants of the virus. We should thus be prepared for a race between vaccine updates and mutations of the virus. A permanent reopening of society highly depends on winning that race.

COVID-19 Superspreading Suggests Mitigation by Social Network Modulation.

Although COVID-19 has caused severe suffering globally, the efficacy of nonpharmaceutical interventions has been greater than typical models have predicted. Meanwhile, evidence is mounting that the pandemic is characterized by superspreading. Capturing this phenomenon theoretically requires modeling at the scale of individuals. Using a mathematical model, we show that superspreading drastically enhances mitigations which reduce the overall personal contact number and that social clustering increases this effect.

Overdispersion in COVID-19 increases the effectiveness of limiting nonrepetitive contacts for transmission control.

Increasing evidence indicates that superspreading plays a dominant role in COVID-19 transmission. Recent estimates suggest that the dispersion parameter k for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is on the order of 0.1, which corresponds to about 10% of cases being the source of 80% of infections. To investigate how overdispersion might affect the outcome of various mitigation strategies, we developed an agent-based model with a social network that allows transmission through contact in three sectors: "close" (a small, unchanging group of mutual contacts as might be found in a household), "regular" (a larger, unchanging group as might be found in a workplace or school), and "random" (drawn from the entire model population and not repeated regularly). We assigned individual infectivity from a gamma distribution with dispersion parameter k We found that when k was low (i.e., greater heterogeneity, more superspreading events), reducing random sector contacts had a far greater impact on the epidemic trajectory than did reducing regular contacts; when k was high (i.e., less heterogeneity, no superspreading events), that difference disappeared. These results suggest that overdispersion of COVID-19 transmission gives the virus an Achilles' heel: Reducing contacts between people who do not regularly meet would substantially reduce the pandemic, while reducing repeated contacts in defined social groups would be less effective.

Monitoring the mortality impact of COVID-19 in Europe: What can be learned from 2009 influenza H1N1p mortality studies?

OBJECTIVES: Understanding the proportion of pandemic deaths captured as 'laboratory-confirmed' deaths is crucial. We assessed the ability of laboratory-confirmed deaths to capture mortality in the EU during the 2009 pandemic, and examined the likelihood that these findings are applicable to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: We present unpublished results from the Global Pandemic Mortality (GLaMOR) project, in which country-specific mortality estimates were made for the 2009 influenza H1N1p pandemic. These estimates were compared with laboratory-confirmed deaths during the 2009 pandemic to estimate the ability of surveillance systems to capture pandemic mortality. RESULTS: For the 2009 influenza H1N1p pandemic, we estimated that the proportion of true pandemic deaths captured by laboratory-confirmed deaths was approximately 67%. Several differences between the two pandemics (e.g. age groups affected) make it unlikely that this capture rate will be equally high for SARS-CoV-2. CONCLUSION: The surveillance of laboratory-confirmed deaths in the EU during the 2009 pandemic was more accurate than previously assumed. We hypothesize that this method is less reliable for SARS-CoV-2. Near-real-time excess all-cause mortality estimates, routinely compiled by EuroMOMO, probably offer a better indicator of pandemic mortality. We urge more countries to join this project and that national-level absolute mortality numbers are presented.

Doubling Time of the COVID-19 Epidemic by Chinese Province.

COVID-19 epidemic doubling time by Chinese province was increasing from January 20 through February 9, 2020. The harmonic mean of the arithmetic mean doubling time estimates ranged from 1.4 (Hunan, 95% CI, 1.2-2.0) to 3.1 (Xinjiang, 95% CI, 2.1-4.8), with an estimate of 2.5 days (95% CI, 2.4-2.6) for Hubei.

Estimation of Excess Deaths Associated With the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States, March to May 2020.

Importance: Efforts to track the severity and public health impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States have been hampered by state-level differences in diagnostic test availability, differing strategies for prioritization of individuals for testing, and delays between testing and reporting. Evaluating unexplained increases in deaths due to all causes or attributed to nonspecific outcomes, such as pneumonia and influenza, can provide a more complete picture of the burden of COVID-19. Objective: To estimate the burden of all deaths related to COVID-19 in the United States from March to May 2020. Design, Setting, and Population: This observational study evaluated the numbers of US deaths from any cause and deaths from pneumonia, influenza, and/or COVID-19 from March 1 through May 30, 2020, using public data of the entire US population from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). These numbers were compared with those from the same period of previous years. All data analyzed were accessed on June 12, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Increases in weekly deaths due to any cause or deaths due to pneumonia/influenza/COVID-19 above a baseline, which was adjusted for time of year, influenza activity, and reporting delays. These estimates were compared with reported deaths attributed to COVID-19 and with testing data. Results: There were approximately 781 000 total deaths in the United States from March 1 to May 30, 2020, representing 122 300 (95% prediction interval, 116 800-127 000) more deaths than would typically be expected at that time of year. There were 95 235 reported deaths officially attributed to COVID-19 from March 1 to May 30, 2020. The number of excess all-cause deaths was 28% higher than the official tally of COVID-19-reported deaths during that period. In several states, these deaths occurred before increases in the availability of COVID-19 diagnostic tests and were not counted in official COVID-19 death records. There was substantial variability between states in the difference between official COVID-19 deaths and the estimated burden of excess deaths. Conclusions and Relevance: Excess deaths provide an estimate of the full COVID-19 burden and indicate that official tallies likely undercount deaths due to the virus. The mortality burden and the completeness of the tallies vary markedly between states.

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 with SARS-CoV and influenza pandemics.

The objective of this Personal View is to compare transmissibility, hospitalisation, and mortality rates for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with those of other epidemic coronaviruses, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and pandemic influenza viruses. The basic reproductive rate (R0) for SARS-CoV-2 is estimated to be 2·5 (range 1·8-3·6) compared with 2·0-3·0 for SARS-CoV and the 1918 influenza pandemic, 0·9 for MERS-CoV, and 1·5 for the 2009 influenza pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 causes mild or asymptomatic disease in most cases; however, severe to critical illness occurs in a small proportion of infected individuals, with the highest rate seen in people older than 70 years. The measured case fatality rate varies between countries, probably because of differences in testing strategies. Population-based mortality estimates vary widely across Europe, ranging from zero to high. Numbers from the first affected region in Italy, Lombardy, show an all age mortality rate of 154 per 100 000 population. Differences are most likely due to varying demographic structures, among other factors. However, this new virus has a focal dissemination; therefore, some areas have a higher disease burden and are affected more than others for reasons that are still not understood. Nevertheless, early introduction of strict physical distancing and hygiene measures have proven effective in sharply reducing R0 and associated mortality and could in part explain the geographical differences.