The effect of SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 on symptomatology, re-infection and transmissibility
Graham, M. S.; Sudre, C. H.; May, A.; Antonelli, M.; Murray, B.; Varsavsky, T.; Klaser, K.; Canas, L. D. S.; Molteni, E.; Modat, M.; Drew, D. A.; Nguyen, L. A.; Polidori, L.; Selvachandran, S.; Hu, C.; Capdevila Pujol, J.; The COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) consortium, ; Hammers, A.; Chan, A. T.; Wolf, J.; Spector, T.; Steves, C.; Ourselin, S.
Show abstract
BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 was first identified in December 2020 in England. It is not known if the new variant presents with variation in symptoms or disease course, if previously infected individuals may become reinfected with the new variant, or how the variants increased transmissibility affects measures to reduce its spread. MethodsUsing longitudinal symptom reports from 36,920 users of the COVID Symptom Study app testing positive for Covid-19 between 28 September and 27 December 2020, we performed an ecological study to examine the association between the regional proportion of B.1.1.7 and reported symptoms, disease course, rates of reinfection, and transmissibility. FindingsWe found no evidence for changes in reported symptoms or disease duration associated with B.1.1.7. We found a likely reinfection rate of 0.7% (95% CI 0.6-0.8), but no evidence that this was higher compared to older strains. We found an increase in R(t) by a factor of 1.35 (95% CI 1.02-1.69). Despite this, we found that R(t) fell below 1 during regional and national lockdowns, even in regions with high proportions of B.1.1.7. InterpretationThe lack of change in symptoms indicates existing testing and surveillance infrastructure do not need to change specifically for the new variant, and the reinfection findings suggest that vaccines are likely to remain effective against the new variant. FundingZoe Global Limited, Department of Health, Wellcome Trust, EPSRC, NIHR, MRC, Alzheimers Society. Research in contextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSTo identify existing evidence on SARS-CoV-2 variant B.1.1.7 we searched PubMed and Google Scholar for articles between 1 December 2020 and 1 February 2021 using the keywords Covid-19 AND B.1.1.7, finding 281 results. We did not find any studies that investigated B.1.1.7-associated changes in the symptoms experienced, their severity and duration, but found one study showing B.1.1.7 did not change the ratio of symptomatic to asymptomatic infections. We found six articles describing laboratory-based investigations of the responses of B.1.1.7 to vaccine-induced immunity to B.1.1.7, but no work investigating what this means for natural immunity and the likelihood of reinfection outside of the lab. We found five articles demonstrating the increased transmissibility of B.1.1.7. Added value of this studyTo our knowledge, this is the first study to explore changes in symptom type and duration, as well as community reinfection rates, associated with B.1.1.7. The work uses self-reported symptom logs from 36,920 users of the COVID Symptom Study app reporting positive test results between 28 September and 27 December 2020. We find that B.1.1.7 is not associated with changes in the symptoms experienced in Covid-19, nor their duration. Building on existing lab studies, our work suggests that natural immunity developed from previous infection provides similar levels of protection to B.1.1.7. We add to the emerging consensus that B.1.1.7 exhibits increased transmissibility. Implications of all the available evidenceOur findings suggest that existing criteria for obtaining a Covid-19 test in the community need not change for the rise of B.1.1.7. The fact that immunity developed from infection by wild type variants protects against B.1.1.7 provides an indication that vaccines will remain effective against B.1.1.7. R(t) fell below 1 during the UKs national lockdown, even in regions with high levels of B.1.1.7, but further investigation is required to establish the factors that enabled this, to facilitate countries seeking to control the spread of B.1.1.7.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Identifying optimal combinations of symptoms to trigger diagnostic work-up of suspected COVID-19 cases in vaccine trials: analysis from a community-based, prospective, observational cohort 94%
- Healthcare-associated COVID-19 in England: a national data linkage study 94%
- Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG in healthcare workers and other staff at North Bristol NHS Trust: a sociodemographic analysis 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- SARS-CoV-2 incidence, transmission and reinfection in a rural and an urban setting: results of the PHIRST-C cohort study, South Africa, 2020-2021 92%
- Post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection: risk factors and illness profile in a prospective, observational community-based case-control study 92%
- Non-communicable disease and the risk of infection death: a UK Biobank prospective cohort study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Shift work is associated with positive COVID-19 status in hospitalised patients 91%
- Geo-social gradients in predicted COVID-19 prevalence and severity in Great Britain: results from 2,266,235 users of the COVID-19 Symptoms Tracker app 91%
- Drive-through testing for SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic health and social care workers and household members: an observational cohort study in Tayside, Scotland 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Characterising heterogeneity and sero-reversion in antibody responses to mild SARS⍰CoV-2 infection: a cohort study using time series analysis and mechanistic modelling 93%
- Older biological age is associated with adverse COVID-19 outcomes: A cohort study in UK Biobank 92%
- Epidemiological Investigation of New SARS-CoV-2 Variant of Concern 202012/01 in England 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.