A Bayesian estimate of the early COVID-19 infection fatality ratio in Brazil based on a random seroprevalence survey.
Brazil
COVID-19
IFR
SARS-CoV-2
Journal
International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases
ISSN: 1878-3511
Titre abrégé: Int J Infect Dis
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 9610933
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
06
04
2021
revised:
15
07
2021
accepted:
06
08
2021
pubmed:
15
8
2021
medline:
8
10
2021
entrez:
14
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A number of estimates of the infection fatality ratio (IFR) of SARS-CoV-2 in different countries have been published. In Brazil, the fragile political situation, together with socioeconomic and ethnic diversity, could result in substantially different IFR estimates. We infer the IFR in Brazil in 2020 by combining three datasets. We compute the prevalence via the population-based seroprevalence survey, EPICOVID19-BR. For the fatalities we obtain the absolute number using the public Painel Coronavírus dataset and the age-relative number using the public SIVEP-Gripe dataset. The time delay between the development of antibodies and subsequent fatality is estimated via the SIVEP-Gripe dataset. We obtain the IFR for each survey stage and 27 federal states. We include the effect of fading IgG antibody levels by marginalizing over the test detectability time window. We infer a country-wide average IFR (maximum posterior and 95% CI) of 1.03% (0.88-1.22%) and age-specific IFRs of 0.032% (0.023-0.041%) [< 30 years], 0.22% (0.18-0.27%) [30-49 years], 1.2% (1.0-1.5%) [50-69 years], and 3.0% (2.4-3.9%) [≥ 70 years]. We find that the fatality ratio in the country increased significantly at the end of June 2020, likely due to the increased strain on the health system. Our IFR estimate is based on data and does not rely on extrapolating models. This estimate sets a baseline value with which future medications and treatment protocols may be confronted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
A number of estimates of the infection fatality ratio (IFR) of SARS-CoV-2 in different countries have been published. In Brazil, the fragile political situation, together with socioeconomic and ethnic diversity, could result in substantially different IFR estimates.
METHODS
METHODS
We infer the IFR in Brazil in 2020 by combining three datasets. We compute the prevalence via the population-based seroprevalence survey, EPICOVID19-BR. For the fatalities we obtain the absolute number using the public Painel Coronavírus dataset and the age-relative number using the public SIVEP-Gripe dataset. The time delay between the development of antibodies and subsequent fatality is estimated via the SIVEP-Gripe dataset. We obtain the IFR for each survey stage and 27 federal states. We include the effect of fading IgG antibody levels by marginalizing over the test detectability time window.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We infer a country-wide average IFR (maximum posterior and 95% CI) of 1.03% (0.88-1.22%) and age-specific IFRs of 0.032% (0.023-0.041%) [< 30 years], 0.22% (0.18-0.27%) [30-49 years], 1.2% (1.0-1.5%) [50-69 years], and 3.0% (2.4-3.9%) [≥ 70 years]. We find that the fatality ratio in the country increased significantly at the end of June 2020, likely due to the increased strain on the health system.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our IFR estimate is based on data and does not rely on extrapolating models. This estimate sets a baseline value with which future medications and treatment protocols may be confronted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34390858
pii: S1201-9712(21)00648-2
doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.08.016
pmc: PMC8358085
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
190-195Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Références
JAMA. 2020 Aug 4;324(5):510-513
pubmed: 32609307
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013 Nov;19(11):1014-22
pubmed: 23800220
JAMA Intern Med. 2020 Oct 1;180(10):1336-1344
pubmed: 32609310
Nat Med. 2020 Aug;26(8):1200-1204
pubmed: 32555424
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jul;20(7):773
pubmed: 32171390
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Aug;8(8):e1018-e1026
pubmed: 32622400
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;20(6):669-677
pubmed: 32240634
Lancet Infect Dis. 2021 Apr;21(4):e69-e70
pubmed: 32679085
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Dec;101:138-148
pubmed: 33007452
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Dec;26(12):1663-1669
pubmed: 32822883
Science. 2020 Sep 4;369(6508):1255-1260
pubmed: 32703910
Sci Immunol. 2020 Oct 8;5(52):
pubmed: 33033172
Lancet Glob Health. 2020 Nov;8(11):e1390-e1398
pubmed: 32979314
JAMA. 2020 Apr 28;323(16):1574-1581
pubmed: 32250385
Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Jan 15;50(2):165-74
pubmed: 20021259
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Aug;258:113101
pubmed: 32521411
Lancet. 2020 Aug 1;396(10247):313-319
pubmed: 32534626
Nat Med. 2020 Jun;26(6):845-848
pubmed: 32350462
Am J Public Health. 2021 Aug;111(8):1542-1550
pubmed: 34185552
Lancet. 2020 May 9;395(10235):1461
pubmed: 32386576
Nature. 2021 Feb;590(7844):140-145
pubmed: 33137809
Biology (Basel). 2020 May 08;9(5):
pubmed: 32397286
Clin Infect Dis. 2021 Jan 27;72(2):249-253
pubmed: 33501969
PLoS Med. 2020 Jul 28;17(7):e1003189
pubmed: 32722715
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2015 Jul 16;9(7):e0003846
pubmed: 26181387
Ann Intern Med. 2020 May 5;172(9):577-582
pubmed: 32150748
Science. 2020 Jul 10;369(6500):208-211
pubmed: 32404476
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Dec;35(12):1123-1138
pubmed: 33289900
Int J Epidemiol. 1996 Dec;25(6):1107-16
pubmed: 9027513
China CDC Wkly. 2020 Feb 21;2(8):113-122
pubmed: 34594836
Sci Rep. 2021 Aug 2;11(1):15591
pubmed: 34341397
Nat Med. 2020 Aug;26(8):1196-1199
pubmed: 32641783
Lancet. 2020 Aug 22;396(10250):535-544
pubmed: 32645347
BMJ. 2020 May 22;369:m1985
pubmed: 32444460