Pan-American Guidelines for the Treatment of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19: A Joint Evidence-Based Guideline of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) (preprint)

Background Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, therapeutic options for treating COVID-19 have been investigated at different stages of clinical manifestations. Considering the particular impact of COVID-19 in the Americas, this document aims to present recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of COVID-19 specific to this population.Method Fifteen experts, members of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (SBI) and the Pan-American Association of Infectious Diseases (API) make up the panel responsible for developing this guideline. Questions were formulated regarding prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19 in outpatient and inpatient settings. The outcomes considered in decision-making were mortality, hospitalisation, need for mechanical ventilation, symptomatic COVID-19 episodes, and adverse events. In addition, a systematic review of randomised controlled trials was conducted. The quality of evidence assessment and guideline development process followed the GRADE system.Results Nine technologies were evaluated, and ten recommendations were made, including the use of tixagevimab + cilgavimab in the prophylaxis of COVID-19, tixagevimab + cilgavimab, molnupiravir, nirmatrelvir + ritonavir, and remdesivir in the treatment of outpatients, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab in the treatment of hospitalised patients with severe COVID-19. The use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine and ivermectin was discouraged.Conclusion This guideline provides recommendations for treating patients in the Americas following the principles of evidence-based medicine. The recommendations present a set of drugs that have proven effective in the prophylaxis and treatment of COVID-19, emphasising the strong recommendation for the use of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in outpatients as the lack of benefit from the use of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

Age-dependent impairment in antibody responses elicited by a homologous CoronaVac booster dose (preprint)

The emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron sublineages resulted in drastically increased transmission rates and reduced protection from vaccine-induced immunity. To counteract these effects, multiple booster strategies were used in different countries, although data comparing their efficiency in improving protective immunity remains sparse, especially among vulnerable populations, including older adults. The inactivated CoronaVac vaccine was among the most widely distributed worldwide, particularly in China, and South America. However, whether homologous versus heterologous booster doses in those fully vaccinated with CoronaVac induce distinct humoral responses and whether these responses vary across age groups remain unknown. We analyzed plasma antibody responses from CoronaVac-vaccinated younger or older individuals in central and south America that received a homologous CoronaVac or heterologous BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 booster vaccines. We found that both IgG levels against SARS-CoV-2 spike or RBD, as well as neutralization titers against Omicron sublineages, were substantially reduced in participants that received homologous CoronaVac when compared to heterologous BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 booster. This effect was specifically prominent in recipients older than 50 years of age. In this group, CoronaVac booster induced low virus-specific IgG levels and failed to elevate their neutralization titers against any omicron sublineage. Our results point to significant inefficiency in mounting protective anti-viral humoral immunity in those who were primed with CoronaVac followed by CoronaVac booster, particularly among older adults, urging a heterologous regimen in high-risk populations fully vaccinated with CoronaVac. One Sentence SummaryHomologous CoronaVac boosters do not improve neutralization responses against current VOCs in older adults in contrast to heterologous regimens.

Effectiveness of Primary and Booster COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination against Infection Caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in People with a Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection (preprint)

Importance: The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness of a primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among previously infection people. Design: Test-negative case-control study. Setting: Yale New Haven Health System facilities serving southern Connecticut communities. Participants: Vaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022. Exposure: COVID-19 mRNA primary and booster vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: We conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 variant infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary vaccination during the period before and during booster eligibility (14-149 and [≥]150 days, respectively, after 2nd dose) and of booster vaccination ([≥]14 days after booster dose). To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people. Results: Overall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 6.1% and 7.8% had a prior infection. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (95% CI, 7.1-56.1%) and 28.5% (95% CI, 20.0-36.2%) for people with and without prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination was 45.8% (95% CI, 20.0-63.2%) and 56.9% (95% CI, 52.1-61.2%) in people with and without prior infection, respectively. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.56-1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.46-0.56). Conclusions and Relevance: Primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection in people without prior infection, it was not associated with additional protection among people with prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination.

Effectiveness of an Inactivated Covid-19 Vaccine with Homologous and Heterologous Boosters against Omicron in Brazil (preprint)

The effectiveness of inactivated vaccines (VE) against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 caused by omicron is unknown. We conducted a nationwide, test-negative, case-control study to estimate VE for homologous and heterologous (BNT162b2) booster doses in adults who received two doses of CoronaVac in Brazil in the Omicron context. Analyzing 1,386,544 matched-pairs, VE against symptomatic disease was 8.6% (95% CI, 5.6-11.5) and 56.8% (95% CI, 56.3-57.3) in the period 8-59 days after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. During the same interval, VE against severe Covid-19 was 73.6% (95% CI, 63.9-80.7) and 86.0% (95% CI, 84.5-87.4) after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. Waning against severe Covid-19 after 120 days was only observed after a homologous booster. Heterologous booster might be preferable to individuals with completed primary series inactivated vaccine.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S among individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in Brazil (preprint)

Background. COVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with prior infection is less clear. Methods. Utilizing national COVID-19 notification, hospitalization, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we performed a case-control study using a test-negative design to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S and BNT162b2) among individuals with laboratory-confirmed prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 cases with RT-PCR-negative controls presenting with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests performed at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity, and the odds of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. Findings. Among individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection [≥] 14 days from vaccine series completion was 39.4% (95% CI 36.1-42.6) for CoronaVac, 56.0% (95% CI 51.4-60.2) for ChAdOx1, 44.0% (95% CI 31.5-54.2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64.8% (95% CI 54.9-72.4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose compared with the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalization or death [≥] 14 days from vaccine series completion was 81.3% (95% CI 75.3-85.8) for CoronaVac, 89.9% (95% CI 83.5-93.8) for ChAdOx1, 57.7% (95% CI -2.6-82.5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89.7% (95% CI 54.3-97.7) for BNT162b2.

Change in COVID-19 risk over time following vaccination with CoronaVac: A test-negative case-control study (preprint)

Objective To estimate the change in odds of covid-19 over time following primary series completion of the inactivated whole virus vaccine, CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting Community testing for covid-19 in Sao Paulo state, Brazil. Participants Adults aged 18-120 years who were residents of Sao Paulo state, without a previous laboratory-confirmed covid-19 infection, who received two doses of CoronaVac, and underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 from 17 January to 30 September 2021. Main outcome measures RT-PCR-confirmed symptomatic covid-19 and associated hospital admissions and deaths. Cases were pair-matched to test-negative controls by age (in 5-year bands), municipality of residence, healthcare worker (HCW) status, and date of RT-PCR test ({+/-}3 days). Conditional logistic regression was adjusted for sex, number of covid-19-associated comorbidities, race, and previous acute respiratory infection. Results From 137,820 eligible individuals, 37,929 cases with symptomatic covid-19 and 25,756 test-negative controls with covid-19 symptoms were formed into 37,929 matched pairs. Adjusted odds ratios of symptomatic covid-19 increased with time since series completion, and this increase was greater in younger individuals, and among HCWs compared to non-HCWs. Adjusted odds ratios of covid-19 hospitalisation or death were significantly increased from 98 days since series completion, compared to individuals vaccinated 14-41 days previously: 1.40 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.79) from 98-125 days, 1.55 (1.16 to 2.07) from 126-153 days, 1.56 (1.12 to 2.18) from 154-181 days, and 2.12 (1.39-3.22) from 182 days. Conclusions In the general population of Sao Paulo state, Brazil, an increase in odds of moderate and severe covid-19 outcomes was observed over time following primary series completion with CoronaVac.

Report 46: Factors driving extensive spatial and temporal fluctuations in COVID-19 fatality rates in Brazilian hospitals (preprint)

The SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant spread rapidly across Brazil, causing substantial infection and death waves. We use individual-level patient records following hospitalisation with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 to document the extensive shocks in hospital fatality rates that followed Gamma’s spread across 14 state capitals, and in which more than half of hospitalised patients died over sustained time periods. We show that extensive fluctuations in COVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates also existed prior to Gamma’s detection, and were largely transient after Gamma’s detection, subsiding with hospital demand. Using a Bayesian fatality rate model, we find that the geographic and temporal fluctuations in Brazil’s COVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates are primarily associated with geographic inequities and shortages in healthcare capacity. We project that approximately half of Brazil’s COVID-19 deaths in hospitals could have been avoided without pre-pandemic geographic inequities and without pandemic healthcare pressure. Our results suggest that investments in healthcare resources, healthcare optimization, and pandemic preparedness are critical to minimize population wide mortality and morbidity caused by highly transmissible and deadly pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Note The following manuscript has appeared as ‘Report 46 - Factors driving extensive spatial and temporal fluctuations in COVID-19 fatality rates in Brazilian hospitals’ at https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk:8443/handle/10044/1/91875 . One sentence summary COVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates fluctuate dramatically in Brazil, and these fluctuations are primarily associated with geographic inequities and shortages in healthcare capacity.

Vaccine effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S against symptomatic COVID-19 and clinical outcomes in Brazil: a test-negative study design (preprint)

We used a test-negative design to estimate the vaccine effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen) against symptomatic COVID-19 and clinical outcomes in Mato-Grosso do Sul, Brazil. We analyzed 11,817 RT-PCR tests. The mean age was 37 (SD=17) years, 2,308 (20%) of individuals more or equal than 50 years and almost two-thirds of the population was Brown/Pardo. Adjusted effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 after 28 days of the single dose was 50.9% (95% CI, 35.5-63.0). Adjusted effectiveness against clinical outcomes was 72.9% (95% CI, 35.1-91.1) for hospitalization, 92.5% (95% CI, 54.9-99.6) for ICU admission, 88.7% (95% CI, 17.9-99.5) for mechanical ventilation and 90.5% (95% CI, 31.5-99.6) for death. Despite lacking precision on some estimates, a single dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine continues to protect specially for severe forms of COVID-19 in the context of new variants.

Genomic epidemiology reveals how restriction measures shaped the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Brazil (preprint)

Brazil has experienced some of the highest numbers of COVID-19 infections and deaths globally and made Latin America a pandemic epicenter from May 2021. Although SARS-CoV-2 established sustained transmission in Brazil early in the pandemic, important gaps remain in our understanding of local virus transmission dynamics. Here, we describe the genomic epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 using near-full genomes sampled from 27 Brazilian states and an adjacent country - Paraguay. We show that the early stage of the pandemic in Brazil was characterised by the co-circulation of multiple viral lineages, linked to multiple importations predominantly from Europe, and subsequently characterized by large local transmission clusters. As the epidemic progressed, the absence of effective restriction measures led to the local emergence and international spread of Variants of Concern (VOC) and under monitoring (VUM), including the Gamma (P.1) and Zeta (P.2) variants. In addition, we provide a preliminary genomic overview of the epidemic in Paraguay, showing evidence of importation from Brazil. These data reinforce the need for the implementation of widespread genomic surveillance in South America as a toolkit for pandemic monitoring and providing a means to follow the real-time spread of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants with possible implications for public health and immunization strategies.

SARS-CoV-2 Seroprevalence and Accuracy Diagnostic Evaluation During a Covid-19 Outbreak in a Major Penitentiary Complex in Brazil, June-July 2020: A Population-Based Study (preprint)

Summary: The pandemic of COVID-19 has presented as a threat to prison systems worldwide, as overcrowding, limited possibility of social distancing and sanitary restrictions favouring viral spread. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies in prison settings are important tools to understand transmission and to develop control measures. We aimed to estimate the overall SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and evaluated the accuracy of an antibody rapid test compared to a reference serological assay during a COVID-19 outbreak in a prison complex housing over 13,000 inmates in Brasília. Methods: We conducted a repeated serosurvey of IgM/IgG SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among inmates between June 17-July 1 (baseline) and July 8-22, 2020 (21-days follow-up). We obtained a randomized, stratified representative sample of each prison unit. Inmates who accepted to be part of the study were interviewed through a standardised questionnaire covering sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Blood samples were collected from each participant for the evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies with a lateral-flow immunochromatographic assay (LFIA). Inmates with negative results in the first serosurvey were interviewed and tested for a second time to evaluate recent symptoms history and serological status 21 days later. Samples were also retested using a chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay (CLIA) to compare SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and 21-days incidence, as well as to estimate the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) and determine the diagnostic accuracy of the LFIA test.Findings: We identified 485 eligible individuals and enrolled 460 participants (94.8%), distributed across four prison units. Baseline and 21-days follow-up seroprevalence were estimated at 52.0% (95%CI 44.9-59.0) and 56.7% (95%CI 48.2-65.3) with the LFIA test; and 80.7% (95%CI 74.1-87.3) and 81.1% (95%CI 74.4-87.8) with the CLIA test, with an overall IFR of 0.02%. There were 78.2% (95%CI 66.7-89.7) symptomatic inmates among the positive cases, and the main symptoms included changes in taste or smell, headache, and fever. Sensitivity and specificity of LFIA test were estimated at 43.4% and 83.3% for IgM; 46.5% and 91.5% for IgG; and 59.1% and 77.3% for combined tests. There was a fair agreement between LFIA and CLIA results (Kappa score 0.23).Interpretation: We found rapid viral spread and high seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies within the prison complex. The occurrence of asymptomatic infection highlights the importance of periodic mass testing in addition to case-finding of symptomatic inmates, however the field performance of LFIA tests should be validated. We recommend that vaccination strategies consider the inclusion of persons deprived of liberty and prison staff in priority groups.Funding: EN, GASR, RH, WNA acknowledge the Brazilian Ministry of Education (MEC) for support the COVID-19 response by University of Brasília (#23106.028855/2020-74). RH, WMR and WNA acknowledge the Federal District Research Foundation (FAP-DF) for grants that supported this research (# 00193-00000495/2020-72). GASR, JHC, WMR, WNA acknowledge the National Research Council (CNPq) for grants that supported this research (# 402957/2020-2)Declaration of Interest: None to declare. Ethical Approval: The study was part of an epidemiological investigation conducted by the Brazilian Field Epidemiology Training Program/Ministry of Health as a response to a public health emergency, and it is supported by the national law 8.080/1990. Moreover, all participants provided informed consent and ethics approval was obtained under the CONEP protocol number 37007220.1.0000.0008.

Effectiveness of the ChAdOx1 vaccine in the elderly during SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Brazil (preprint)

BackgroundA two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1 coronavirus disease 19 (Covid-19) vaccine with an inter-dose interval of three months has been implemented in many countries with restricted vaccine supply. However, there is limited evidence for the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 by dose in elderly populations in countries with high prevalence of the Gamma variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2). MethodsWe conducted a test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 vaccine in adults aged 60 years or older during a Gamma-variant-associated epidemic in Sao Paulo state, Brazil, between 17 January and 2 July 2021. Cases and matched test-negative controls were individuals, identified from surveillance databases, who experienced an acute respiratory illness and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the effectiveness by dose against RT-PCR-confirmed Covid-19, Covid-19 hospitalization, and Covid-19-related death. Results61,164 individuals were selected into matched case-control pairs. Starting [≥]28 days after the first dose, adjusted effectiveness of a single dose of ChAdOx1 was 33.4% (95% CI, 26.4 to 39.7) against Covid-19, 55.1% (95% CI, 46.6 to 62.2) against hospitalization, and 61.8% (95% CI, 48.9 to 71.4) against death. Starting [≥]14 days after the second dose, the adjusted effectiveness of the two-dose schedule was 77.9% (95% CI, 69.2 to 84.2) against Covid-19, 87.6% (95% CI, 78.2 to 92.9) against hospitalization, and 93.6% (95% CI, 81.9 to 97.7) against death. ConclusionsCompletion of the ChAdOx1 vaccine schedule afforded significantly increased protection over a single dose against mild and severe Covid-19 outcomes in elderly individuals during widespread Gamma variant transmission.

Understanding the Potential Impact of Different Drug Properties On SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and Disease Burden: A Modelling Analysis (preprint)

Background The unprecedented public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods and Findings We develop a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care to explore the potential public-health impact of a range of different potential therapeutics, under a range of different scenarios varying: i) healthcare capacity, ii) epidemic trajectories; and iii) drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. In each case, the outcome of interest was the number of COVID-19 deaths averted in scenarios with the therapeutic compared to scenarios without. We find the impact of drugs like dexamethasone (which are delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalisation) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. Conclusions There is a global asymmetry in who is likely to benefit from advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date, which have been focussed on hospitalised-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics that can feasibly be delivered to those earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.

Effectiveness of the CoronaVac vaccine in the elderly population during a P.1 variant-associated epidemic of COVID-19 in Brazil: A test-negative case-control study (preprint)

ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of the inactivated whole-virus vaccine, CoronaVac, against symptomatic COVID-19 in the elderly population of Sao Paulo State, Brazil during widespread circulation of the Gamma variant. DesignTest negative case-control study. SettingHealth-care facilities in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Participants43,774 adults aged 70 years or older who were residents of Sao Paulo State and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing from January 17 to April 29, 2021. 26,433 cases with symptomatic COVID-19 and 17,622 symptomatic, test negative controls were selected into 7,950 matched pairs, according to age, sex, self-reported race, municipality of residence, prior COVID-19 status and date of RT-PCR testing. InterventionVaccination with a two-dose regimen of CoronaVac. Main outcome measuresRT-PCR confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 and COVID-19 associated hospitalizations and deaths. ResultsAdjusted vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 18.2% (95% CI, 0.0 to 33.2) in the period 0-13 days after the second dose and 41.6% (95% CI, 26.9 to 53.3) in the period [≥]14 days after the second dose. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisations was 59.0% (95% CI, 44.2 to 69.8) and against deaths was 71.4% (95% CI, 53.7 to 82.3) in the period [≥]14 days after the second dose. Vaccine effectiveness [≥]14 days after the second dose declined with increasing age for the three outcomes, and among individuals aged 70-74 years it was 61.8% (95% CI, 34.8 to 77.7) against symptomatic disease, 80.1% (95% CI, 55.7 to 91.0) against hospitalisations and 86.0% (95% CI, 50.4 to 96.1) against deaths. ConclusionsVaccination with CoronaVac was associated with a reduction in symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalisations and deaths in adults aged 70 years or older in a setting with extensive Gamma variant transmission. However, significant protection was not observed until completion of the two-dose regimen, and vaccine effectiveness declined with increasing age amongst this elderly population. Summary boxesO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSRandomised controlled trials (RCT) have yielded varying estimates (51 to 84%) for the effectiveness of the inactivated whole-virus vaccine, CoronaVac, against symptomatic COVID-19. Current evidence is limited on whether CoronaVac is effective against severe disease or death caused by the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, Gamma, or in the setting of extensive Gamma variant circulation. More evidence is needed for the real-world effectiveness of CoronaVac and other inactivated vaccines among elderly individuals, a population that was underrepresented in RCTs of these vaccines. What this study addsA two-dose regimen of CoronaVac provides significant protection against symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalisations and deaths among adults [≥]70 years of age in the setting of widespread Gamma variant transmission. Significant protection did not occur until [≥]14 days after administration of the second dose of CoronaVac. The effectiveness of CoronaVac declines with increasing age in the elderly population.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac among healthcare workers in the setting of high SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Manaus, Brazil: A test-negative case-control study (preprint)

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported. Methods We performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Findings For the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case- control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate. Interpretation Evidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented. Funding Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus Research in Context Evidence before this study We searched PubMed for articles published from inception of the pandemic until April 3, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms “P.1” AND “vaccine” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Additionally, we searched for “CoronaVac” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Early studies have found plasma from convalescent COVID-19 patients and sera from vaccinated individuals have reduced neutralisation of the SARS-CoV-2 variant, Gamma or P.1, compared with strains isolated earlier in the pandemic. Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1, and CoronaVac are the only vaccines for which such data has been published to date. No studies reported effectiveness of any vaccine on reducing the risk of infection or disease among individuals exposed to P.1 or in settings of high P.1 transmission. Added value of this study This study finds that vaccination with CoronaVac was 49.4% (95% CI 13.2 to 71.9) effective at preventing COVID-19 in a setting with likely high prevalence of the Gamma Variant of Concern. However, an analysis of effectiveness by dose was underpowered and failed to find significant effectiveness of the two-dose schedule of CoronaVac (estimated VE 37.1%, 95% CI -53.3 to 74.2). Implications of all the available evidence These findings are suggestive for the effectiveness of CoronaVac in healthcare workers in the setting of widespread P.1 transmission but must be strengthened by observational studies in other settings and populations. Based on this evidence, there is a need to implement sustained non-pharmaceutical interventions even as vaccination campaigns continue.

Understanding the Potential Role of Therapeutics in Preventing Deaths Due to COVID-19: A Modelling Analysis (preprint)

Background: The unprecedented public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of current and proposed treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods: First, we used a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care pathways to explore the potential impact of dexamethasone - the main treatment currently for hospitalised COVID-19 patients - under scenarios varying: i) healthcare capacity, ii) epidemic trajectories; and iii) the efficacy of dexamethasone in the absence of supportive care. We then fit the model to the observed epidemic trajectory to-date in 165 countries and analysed the potential future impact of dexamethasone in different countries, regions, and country-income strata. Finally, we constructed hypothetical profiles of novel therapeutics based on current trials, and compared the potential impact of each under different circumstances. In each case, the outcome of interest was the number of COVID-19 deaths averted in scenarios with the therapeutic compared to scenarios without. Findings: We find the potential benefit dexamethasone is severely limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). However, therapeutics for different patient populations (in particular, those not in hospital and early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (in particular, reducing disease severity or infectiousness) could have much greater benefits. Such therapeutics would have particular value in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics, even if the efficacy or achievable coverage of such therapeutics is lower in comparison to other types. Interpretation: People in low-income countries will benefit the least from advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date, which have focussed on hospitalised-patients with adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics that can feasibly be delivered to those earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have much greater impact. Such therapeutics may be feasible and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority. Funding: None to declare. Declaration of Interest: None to declare.

Monitoring Social Distancing and SARS-CoV-2 Transmission in Brazil Using Cell Phone Mobility Data (preprint)

BACKGROUND: In the absence of vaccines and effective pharmacological interventions to reduce with the COVID-19 transmission, social distancing measures have been implemented to mitigate the impact on healthcare systems and secure time to prepare the public health response. METHODS: We assessed the relationship between mobility data collected by mobile phone and time-dependent reproduction number R(t) using severe acute respiratory illness cases reported by 102 Brazilian cities with COVID-19 confirmed cases until April 15, grouped by demographic density (low, intermediate and high). FINDINGS: The mean social distancing index from February 1 to April 15 was 43.6% (27.2% to 63.7%), and no significant difference observed comparing the groups of demographic density (p-value = 0.809). The social distancing index measure obtained from mobility data was able to predict future values of R(t) in all groups of demographic density. Furthermore, using SARI cases, cross-correlation analyses showed that isolation was highly correlated with R(t) (ccfINTERPRETATION: The early implementation of social distancing measures greatly reduced the COVID-19 spread. A major advantage to our approach is that the social distancing index data is available on a daily basis, in contrast with R(t) measurement, which is subject to significant delays. This index metric can be monitored in real time to assess adherence to social distancing measures and help guide, with real time data, the public health policy decision making process.FUNDING: FADQ and JC were granted a fellowship for research productivity from the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq, process/contract identification: 312656/2019-0 and 310551/2018-8, respectively.DECLARATION OF INTERESTS: Authors declare no competing interests.ETHICS APPROVAL STATEMENT: This study followed Brazilian and International legislation for conducting human research. This research project was approved by the National Research Ethics Committee (Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa, CONEP) in Brazil, Register number (CAAE): 11946619.5.0000.5421.

Genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 reveals community transmission of a major lineage during the early pandemic phase in Brazil (preprint)

Despite all efforts to control the COVID-19 spread, the SARS-CoV-2 reached South America within three months after its first detection in China, and Brazil became one of the hotspots of COVID-19 in the world. Several SARS-CoV-2 lineages have been identified and some local clusters have been described in this early pandemic phase in Western countries. Here we investigated the genetic diversity of SARS-CoV-2 during the early phase (late February to late April) of the epidemic in Brazil. Phylogenetic analyses revealed multiple introductions of SARS-CoV-2 in Brazil and the community transmission of a major B.1.1 lineage defined by two amino acid substitutions in the Nucleocapsid and ORF6. This SARS-CoV-2 Brazilian lineage was probably established during February 2020 and rapidly spread through the country, reaching different Brazilian regions by the middle of March 2020. Our study also supports occasional exportations of this Brazilian B.1.1 lineage to neighboring South American countries and to more distant countries before the implementation of international air travels restrictions in Brazil.

Monitoring social distancing and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Brazil using cell phone mobility data (preprint)

Social distancing measures have emerged as the predominant intervention for containing the spread of COVID-19, but evaluating adherence and effectiveness remains a challenge. We assessed the relationship between aggregated mobility data collected from mobile phone users and the time-dependent reproduction number R(t), using severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) cases reported by Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. We found that the proportion of individuals staying home all day (isolation index) had a strong inverse correlation with R(t) (rho