Estimated number of lives directly saved by COVID-19 vaccination programs in the WHO European Region, December 2020 to March 2023 (preprint)

BackgroundBy March 2023, 54 countries, areas and territories (thereafter "CAT") reported over 2.2 million coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths to the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe (1). Here, we estimate how many lives were directly saved by vaccinating adults in the Region, from December 2020 through March 2023. MethodsWe estimated the number of lives directly saved by age-group, vaccine dose and circulating Variant of Concern (VOC) period, both regionally and nationally, using weekly data on COVID-19 mortality and COVID-19 vaccine uptake reported by 34 CAT, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) data from the literature. We calculated the percentage reduction in the number of expected and reported deaths. FindingsWe found that vaccines reduced deaths by 57% overall (CAT range: 15% to 75%), representing [~]1.4 million lives saved in those aged [≥]25 years (range: 0.7 million to 2.6 million): 96% of lives saved were aged [≥]60 years and 52% were aged [≥]80 years; first boosters saved 51%, and 67% were saved during the Omicron period. InterpretationOver nearly 2.5 years, most lives saved by COVID-19 vaccinationwere in older adults by first booster dose and during the Omicron period, reinforcing the importance of up-to-date vaccination among these most at-risk individuals. Further modelling work should evaluate indirect effects of vaccination and public health and social measures. FundingThis work was supported by a US Centers for Disease Control cooperative agreement (Grant number 6 NU511P000936-02-020), who had no role in data analysis or interpretation. DisclaimerThe authors affiliated with the World Health Organization (WHO) are alone responsible for the views expressed in this publication and they do not necessarily represent the decisions or policies of the WHO. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSSince first identified in late 2019, COVID-19 has caused disproportionately high mortality rates in older adults. With the rapid development and licensing of novel COVID-19 vaccines, immunization campaigns across the WHO European Region started in late 2020 and early 2021, initially targeting the most vulnerable and exposed populations, including older adults, people with comorbidities and healthcare professionals. Several studies have estimated the number of lives saved by COVID-19 vaccination, both at national and multi-country level in the earlier stages of the pandemic. However, only one multi-country study has assessed the number of lives saved beyond the first year of the pandemic, particularly when the Omicron variant of concern (VOC) circulated, a period when vaccination coverage was high in many countries, areas and territories (CAT), but COVID-19 transmission was at its highest. Added value of this studyHere we quantified the impact of COVID-19 vaccination in adults by age-group, vaccine dose and period of circulation of VOC, across diverse settings, using real world data reported by 34 CAT in the WHO European Region for the period December 2020 to April 2023. We estimated that COVID-19 vaccination programs were associated with a 57% reduction (CAT range: 15% to 75%) in the number of deaths among the [≥]25 years old, representing over 1.5 million lives saved (range: 0.7 million to 2.6 million) in 34 European CAT during the first 2.5 years following vaccine introduction. The first booster savedthe most lives (721,122 / 1,408,967, (57%) of all lives saved). The [≥]60 years old age group accounted for 96% of the total lives saved (1,349,617 / 1,408,967) whereas the [≥]80 years old age group represented 52% of the total lives saved (728,858 / 1,408,967 lives saved) and 67% of all lives were saved during the Omicron period (942,571 / 1,408,967). Implications of all the available evidenceOur results reinforce the importance of up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination, particularly among older age-groups. Communication campaigns supporting COVID-19 vaccination should stress the value of COVID-19 vaccination in saving lives to ensure vulnerable groups are up-to-date with vaccination ahead of periods of potential increased transmission.

Optimising health and economic impacts of COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation strategies in the WHO European Region (preprint)

BackgroundCountries in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region differ in terms of the COVID-19 vaccine roll-out speed. We evaluated the health and economic impact of different age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies across this demographically and socio-economically diverse region. MethodsWe fitted country-specific age-stratified compartmental transmission models to reported COVID-19 mortality in the WHO European Region to inform the immunity level before vaccine roll-out. Building upon broad recommendations from the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunisation (SAGE), we examined four strategies that prioritise: all adults (V+), younger (20-59 year-olds) followed by older adults (60+) (V20), older followed by younger adults (V60), and the oldest adults (75+) (V75) followed by incremental expansion to successively younger five-year age groups. We explored four roll-out scenarios based on projections or recent observations (R1-4) - the slowest scenario (R1) covers 30% of the total population by December 2022 and the fastest (R4) 80% by December 2021. Five decision-making metrics were summarised over 2021-22: mortality, morbidity, and losses in comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy (cLE), comorbidity- and quality-adjusted life years (cQALY), and the value of human capital (HC). Six sets of infection-blocking and disease-reducing vaccine efficacies were considered. FindingsThe optimal age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies were sensitive to country characteristics, decision-making metrics and roll-out speeds. Overall, V60 consistently performed better than or comparably to V75. There were greater benefits in prioritising older adults when roll-out is slow and when VE is low. Under faster roll-out, V+ was the most desirable option. InterpretationA prioritisation strategy involving more age-based stages (V75) does not necessarily lead to better health and economic outcomes than targeting broad age groups (V60). Countries expecting a slow vaccine roll-out may particularly benefit from prioritising older adults. FundingWorld Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Medical Research Council (United Kingdom), the National Institute of Health Research (United Kingdom), the European Commission, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (United Kingdom), Wellcome Trust Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed and medRxiv for articles published in English from inception to 9 Jun 2021, with the search terms: ("COVID-19" OR "SARS-CoV-2") AND ("priorit*) AND ("model*") AND ("vaccin*") and identified 66 studies on vaccine prioritization strategies. Of the 25 studies that compared two or more age-based prioritisation strategies, 12 found that targeting younger adults minimised infections while targeting older adults minimised mortality; an additional handful of studies found similar outcomes between different age-based prioritisation strategies where large outbreaks had already occurred. However, only two studies have explored age-based vaccine prioritisation using models calibrated to observed outbreaks in more than one country, and no study has explored the effectiveness of vaccine prioritisation strategies across settings with different population structures, contact patterns, and outbreak history. Added-value of this studyWe evaluated various age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies for 38 countries in the WHO European Region using various health and economic outcomes for decision-making, by parameterising models using observed outbreak history, known epidemiologic and vaccine characteristics, and a range of realistic vaccine roll-out scenarios. We showed that while targeting older adults was generally advantageous, broadly targeting everyone above 60 years might perform better than or comparably to a more detailed strategy that targeted the oldest age group above 75 years followed by those in the next younger five-year age band. Rapid vaccine roll-out has only been observed in a small number of countries. If vaccine coverage can reach 80% by the end of 2021, prioritising older adults may not be optimal in terms of health and economic impact. Lower vaccine efficacy was associated with greater relative benefits only under relatively slow roll-out scenarios considered. Implication of all the available evidenceCOVID-19 vaccine prioritization strategies that require more precise targeting of individuals of a specific and narrow age range may not necessarily lead to better outcomes compared to strategies that prioritise populations across broader age ranges. In the WHO European Region, prioritising all adults equally or younger adults first will only optimise health and economic impact when roll-out is rapid, which may raise between-country equity issues given the global demand for COVID-19 vaccines.

What do we know about SARS-CoV-2 transmission? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the secondary attack rate, serial interval, and asymptomatic infection (preprint)

Background Current SARS-CoV-2 containment measures rely on the capacity to control person-to-person viral transmission. Effective prioritization of these measures can be determined by understanding SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses of three parameters: (i) secondary attack rate (SAR) in various settings, (ii) clinical onset serial interval (SI), and (iii) the proportion of asymptomatic infection. Methods and Findings We searched PubMed, medRxiv, and bioRxiv databases between January 1, 2020, and May 15, 2020, for articles describing SARS-CoV-2 attack rate, SI, and asymptomatic infection. Studies were included if they presented original data for estimating point estimates and 95% confidence intervals of the three parameters. Random effects models were constructed to pool SAR, mean SI, and asymptomatic proportion. Risk ratios were used to examine differences in transmission risk by setting, type of contact, and symptom status of the index case. Publication and related bias were assessed by funnel plots and Egger's meta-regression test for small-study effects. Our search strategy for SAR, SI, and asymptomatic infection identified 459, 572, and 1624 studies respectively. Of these, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria for SAR, 18 studies for SI, and 66 studies for asymptomatic infection. We estimated the pooled household SAR at 15.4% (95% CI: 12.2%, 18.7%) compared to 4.0% (95% CI: 2.8%, 5.2%) in non-household settings. We observed variation across settings; however, the small number of studies limited power to detect associations and sources of heterogeneity. SAR of symptomatic index cases is significantly higher than cases that were symptom-free at diagnosis (RR 2.55, 95% CI: 1.47, 4.45). Adults appear to be more susceptible to transmission than children (RR 1.40, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.96). The pooled mean SI is estimated at 4.87 days (95% CI: 3.98, 5.77). The pooled proportion of cases who had no symptoms at diagnosis is 25.9% (95% CI: 18.8%, 33.1%). Conclusions Based our pooled estimates, 10 infected symptomatic persons living with 100 contacts would result in 15 additional cases in <5 days. To be effective, quarantine of contacts should occur within 3 days of symptom onset. If testing and tracing relies on symptoms, one-quarter of cases would be missed. As such, while aggressive contact tracing strategies may be appropriate early in an outbreak, as it progresses, control measures should transition to account for SAR variability across settings. Targeted strategies focusing on high-density enclosed settings may be effective without overly restricting social movement.