Back

Increased infections, but not viral burden, with a new SARS-CoV-2 variant

Walker, A. S.; Vihta, K. D.; Gethings, O.; Pritchard, E.; Jones, J.; House, T.; Bell, I.; Bell, J.; Newton, J.; Farrar, J.; Diamond, I.; Studley, R.; Rourke, E.; Hay, J.; Hopkins, S.; Crook, D. W.; Peto, T.; Matthews, P.; Eyre, D. W.; Stoesser, N. W.; Pouwels, K.; the COVID-19 Infection Survey team,

2021-01-15 infectious diseases
10.1101/2021.01.13.21249721 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundA new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01, was identified in the UK in December-2020. Direct estimates of its potential to enhance transmission are limited. MethodsNose and throat swabs from 28-September-2020 to 2-January-2021 in the UKs nationally representative surveillance study were tested by RT-PCR for three genes (N, S and ORF1ab). Those positive only on ORF1ab+N, S-gene target failures (SGTF), are compatible with B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01. We investigated cycle threshold (Ct) values (a proxy for viral load), percentage of positives, population positivity and growth rates in SGTF vs non-SGTF positives. Results15,166(0.98%) of 1,553,687 swabs were PCR-positive, 8,545(56%) with three genes detected and 3,531(23%) SGTF. SGTF comprised an increasing, and triple-gene positives a decreasing, percentage of infections from late-November in most UK regions/countries, e.g. from 15% to 38% to 81% over 1.5 months in London. SGTF Ct values correspondingly declined substantially to similar levels to triple-gene positives. Population-level SGTF positivity remained low (<0.25%) in all regions/countries until late-November, when marked increases with and without self-reported symptoms occurred in southern England (to 1.5-3%), despite stable rates of non-SGTF cases. SGTF positivity rates increased on average 6% more rapidly than rates of non-SGTF positives (95% CI 4-9%) supporting addition rather than replacement with B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01. Excess growth rates for SGTF vs non-SGTF positives were similar in those up to high school age (5% (1-8%)) and older individuals (6% (4-9%)). ConclusionsDirect population-representative estimates show that the B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01 SARS-CoV-2 variant leads to higher infection rates, but does not seem particularly adapted to any age group.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
22.5%
2
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
4
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.8%
5
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
6
New England Journal of Medicine
50 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
7
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 33%
4.8%
8
The Lancet Microbe
43 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.6%
9
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.9%
10
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.6%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.9%
12
The Lancet Regional Health - Europe
32 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
14
Emerging Infectious Diseases
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
16
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
17
EBioMedicine
39 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
18
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.9%
19
Thorax
32 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
20
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
21
Microbial Genomics
204 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
23
Epidemiology and Infection
84 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
24
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
25
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%