UK Variant Likely 30-70% more lethal, new research results

There is growing evidence that the UK variant, known as B.1.1.7, is more likely to be fatal, leading to more hospitalizations and cases compared to wild-type strains of the virus, based on past data. published on the British government website.

The new research complied with data and studies from multiple institutions and found “more intensive” cases of Covid-19 compared to non-variables. The study noted that B.1.1.7 cases were 30-70% more lethal compared to the original wild type strains.

Concerns about increased mortality of B.1.1.7 first surfaced in January when the British government’s New and New Respiratory Risk Advisory Group (NERVTAG) revealed data showing higher mortality compared to wild-type strains. .

Initial data assessed by the researchers, based on a linked community test and mortality data, were all based on the same data, and therefore the same biases. However, more recent analysis of more recent data has allowed analysts to control it for “additional opponents increasing confidence in the society of the [variant of concern] with increased disease severity, ”the authors write.

Another multiple study looked at the impact of the B.1.1.7 change on hospitals. In particular, Public Health Scotland used S-gene target failure as an indicator to identify various Covid-19 cases. Researchers noted that the risk in hospital was higher among cases of S-gene target failure compared with advanced S-gene cases. In addition, data from the National Intensive Care Research and Research Center (ICNARC) and QRESEARCH also found a higher risk for admission to ICU for variable versus noninvasive cases.

But not all researchers agreed that the variant led to a more dangerous disease and increased risk of death. Data from the COVID-19 Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN), found no evidence to suggest changes associated with higher hospital mortality rates. A study from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) indicated that while the risk ratio suggested a higher risk of fatalities, “the number of deaths is too low for a reliable decision.”

“All of the data used has potential limitations but together these analyzes indicate that B.1.1.7 appears to be associated with an increased risk for hospitalization. and death compared to infection with non-B.1.1.7 viruses, “the authors.

“The 1.1.7 variant has not been proven to be more lethal but even this assumption should challenge efforts to accelerate vaccinations to keep up with the spread of the more widespread transition,” said Amesh Adalja, MD, Physician of Infectious Diseases, and Associate Professor of Adjunct, Center for Global Health, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

As the US continues its efforts to increase the speed of vaccinations, with over 2 million vaccines administered for 2 consecutive days (5th and 6th February), Peter Hotez, MD, PhD , Professor and Dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, and co – director of the Texas Children ‘s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development warned in a Washington Post Op-Ed last month, that we need to significantly increase the pace – with the goal of vaccinating 3 million people a day to reach herd immunity by mid – summer. Biden ‘s administration target of 100 million vaccines in 100 days is now at more than 52 million doses administered as of today, reflecting the pace of efforts currently underway. In the past week, an average of 1.64 million doses per day have been given according to the CDC’s Covid-19 Vaccine Detector.

But another expert, Dr. Angela Rasmussen, an expert with the Center for Global Health and Safety at Georgetown University, suggests that the B.1.1.7 variant may not have the slightest impact on vaccine efficacy. “Fortunately, vaccines should not be unduly affected, as B.1.1.7 does not appear to be effectively immune to immunization. This to me reinforces the importance of getting the vaccine ASAP, staying at home when possible and being diligent about reducing exposure when you can’t. ”

Rasmussen also states that “some B.1.1.7 series have received E484K mutations [first seen in the south African (B.1.3.5.1 variant)] which is bad news, but we do not have data yet. As we continue to learn how vaccines can protect against various changes, it is important to take every step to avoid exposure and avoid transmission, ”said Rasmussen.

“This, combined with getting the vaccine as soon as possible, will reduce the risk of more mobile and possibly more viable changes being gained,” she said.

However, there is growing concern about the ability of the South African variant (B1.3.5.1) to escape immunity provided by mRNA vaccines manufactured by Pfizer and Moderna as well as the AstraZeneca. -Oxford and Novavax. Data to date suggest that vaccines work against variants, but are less effective. Novavax, a Maryland-based biotechnology company, said, “data show that prior infection with Covid-19 may not fully protect against subsequent infection with a South African escape variant , ”But his vaccine provided“ great protection. ” based on a report by the Washington Post.

To date, variant B.1.3.5.1 has been identified in 17 patients in 8 states according to the CDC. In addition, a recent report of the first known patient to be reversed by the South African difference in France has raised additional concerns as the patient remains critically ill in the UK. ICU.

The issue, reported in the journal Clinical infectious diseases, represents the first recorded re-enrollment case involving the B.1.3.5.1. variable. The authors of the article explained that while such recurrence cases are rare they are likely to be disregarded. As a result, they recommend future studies looking at cross-immunity between variables and how well vaccines perform against them (vaccine efficacy).

The WHO also said on Friday that it had received reports from South Africa regarding reports of people being infected with a new version of the virus, not to mention the outbreak in France. WHO Chief Expert Soumya Swaminathan said the study of reactions is currently in the field of active study.

Meanwhile, researchers in France detailed that the man currently ill in the ICU had a fever and shortness of breath the first time he was caught with Covid-19 in September. . After recovering he tested negative 2 times in December. It is unclear at this stage, based on their report, what the original variance was.