scholarly journals Understanding the Potential Impact of Different Drug Properties On SARS-CoV-2 Transmission and Disease Burden: A Modelling Analysis

Author(s):  
Charles Whittaker ◽  
Oliver J Watson ◽  
Carlos Alvarez-Moreno ◽  
Nasikarn Angkasekwinai ◽  
Adhiratha Boonyasiri ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods Using a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care, we explore the public-health impact of different potential therapeutics, under a range of scenarios varying healthcare capacity, epidemic trajectories; and drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. Results The impact of drugs like dexamethasone (delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalisation) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. Conclusions Advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date have been focussed on hospitalised-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics delivered earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Whittaker ◽  
Oliver Watson ◽  
Carlos Alvarez-Moreno ◽  
Nasikarn Angkasekwinai ◽  
Adhiratha Boonyasiri ◽  
...  

Background The unprecedented public health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has motivated a rapid search for potential therapeutics, with some key successes. However, the potential impact of different treatments, and consequently research and procurement priorities, have not been clear. Methods and Findings We develop a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, COVID-19 disease and clinical care to explore the potential public-health impact of a range of different potential therapeutics, under a range of different scenarios varying: i) healthcare capacity, ii) epidemic trajectories; and iii) drug efficacy in the absence of supportive care. In each case, the outcome of interest was the number of COVID-19 deaths averted in scenarios with the therapeutic compared to scenarios without. We find the impact of drugs like dexamethasone (which are delivered to the most critically-ill in hospital and whose therapeutic benefit is expected to depend on the availability of supportive care such as oxygen and mechanical ventilation) is likely to be limited in settings where healthcare capacity is lowest or where uncontrolled epidemics result in hospitals being overwhelmed. As such, it may avert 22% of deaths in high-income countries but only 8% in low-income countries (assuming R=1.35). Therapeutics for different patient populations (those not in hospital, early in the course of infection) and types of benefit (reducing disease severity or infectiousness, preventing hospitalisation) could have much greater benefits, particularly in resource-poor settings facing large epidemics. Conclusions There is a global asymmetry in who is likely to benefit from advances in the treatment of COVID-19 to date, which have been focussed on hospitalised-patients and predicated on an assumption of adequate access to supportive care. Therapeutics that can feasibly be delivered to those earlier in the course of infection that reduce the need for healthcare or reduce infectiousness could have significant impact, and research into their efficacy and means of delivery should be a priority.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e004275
Author(s):  
Caitlin M Pley ◽  
Anna L McNaughton ◽  
Philippa C Matthews ◽  
José Lourenço

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has resulted in a myriad of interventions with the urgent aim of reducing the public health impact of this virus. However, a wealth of evidence both from high-income and low-income countries is accruing on the broader consequences of such interventions on economic and public health inequalities, as well as on pre-existing programmes targeting endemic pathogens. We provide an overview of the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on hepatitis B virus (HBV) programmes globally, focusing on the possible consequences for prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Ongoing disruptions to infrastructure, supply chains, services and interventions for HBV are likely to contribute disproportionately to the short-term incidence of chronic hepatitis B, providing a long-term source of onward transmission to future generations that threatens progress towards the 2030 elimination goals.


2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 1150-1173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard F. Hector ◽  
George W. Rutherford ◽  
Clarisse A. Tsang ◽  
Laura M. Erhart ◽  
Orion McCotter ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 659-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Lazjuk ◽  
P Verger ◽  
B Gagnière ◽  
Zh Kravchuk ◽  
I Zatsepin ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Breslau ◽  
Bradley D. Stein ◽  
Bing Han ◽  
Shoshanna Shelton ◽  
Hao Yu

The dependent coverage expansion (DCE), a component of the Affordable Care Act, required private health insurance policies that cover dependents to offer coverage for policyholders’ children through age 25. This review summarizes peer-reviewed research on the impact of the DCE on the chain of consequences through which it could affect public health. Specifically, we examine the impact of the DCE on insurance coverage, access to care, utilization of care, and health status. All studies find that the DCE increased insurance coverage, but evidence regarding downstream impacts is inconsistent. There is evidence that the DCE reduced high out-of-pocket expenditures and frequent emergency room visits and increased behavioral health treatment. Evidence regarding the impact of the DCE on health is sparse but suggestive of positive impacts on self-rated health and health behavior. Inferences regarding the public health impact of the DCE await studies with greater methodological diversity and longer follow-up periods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document