4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Global COVID-19 fatality analysis reveals Hubei-like countries potentially with severe outbreaks

      letter

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Highlights

          • CFR in Iran in the early stage of the outbreak is highest among all the countries.

          • CFRs in the USA and Italy are similar to Hubei Province in the early stage.

          • CFRs in South Korea are similar to outside Hubei, indicating less severity.

          • Our findings highlight the severity of outbreaks globally, particular in the USA.

          Graphical Abstract

          Related collections

          Most cited references2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Potential association between COVID-19 mortality and health-care resource availability

          The ongoing epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is devastating, despite extensive implementation of control measures. The outbreak was sparked in Wuhan, the capital city of Hubei province in China, and quickly spread to different regions of Hubei and across all other Chinese provinces. As recorded by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC), by Feb 16, 2020, there had been 70 641 confirmed cases and 1772 deaths due to COVID-19, with an average mortality of about 2·5%. 1 However, in-depth analysis of these data show clear disparities in mortality rates between Wuhan (>3%), different regions of Hubei (about 2·9% on average), and across the other provinces of China (about 0·7% on average). We postulate that this is likely to be related to the rapid escalation in the number of infections around the epicentre of the outbreak, which has resulted in an insufficiency of health-care resources, thereby negatively affecting patient outcomes in Hubei, while this has not yet been the situation for the other parts of China (figure A, B ). If we assume that average levels of health care are similar throughout China, higher numbers of infections in a given population can be considered an indirect indicator of a heavier health-care burden. Plotting mortality against the incidence of COVID-19 (cumulative number of confirmed cases since the start of the outbreak, per 10 000 population) showed a significant positive correlation (figure C), suggesting that mortality is correlated with health-care burden. Figure Mortality and incidence of COVID-19 in Hubei and other provinces of China Mortality (A) and cumulative number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 since the start of the outbreak per 10 000 population (B) in Hubei and other provinces of China. Horizontal lines represent median and IQR. p values were from Mann-Whitney U test. (C) Correlation between mortality and number of cases per 10 000 population (Spearman method). Data were obtained from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention to Feb 16, 2020. COVID-19=coronavirus disease 2019. In reality, there are substantial regional disparities in health-care resource availability and accessibility in China. 2 Such disparities might partly explain the low mortality rates—despite high numbers of cases—in the most developed southeastern coastal provinces, such as Zhejiang (0 deaths among 1171 confirmed cases) and Guangdong (four deaths among 1322 cases [0·3%]). The Chinese government has realised the logistical hurdles associated with medical supplies in the epicentre of the outbreak, and has strived to accelerate deliveries, mobilise the country's large and strong medical forces, and rapidly build new local medical facilities. These measures are essential for controlling the epidemic, protecting health workers on the front line, and mitigating the severity of patient outcomes. Acknowledging the potential association of mortality with health-care resource availability might help other regions of China, which are now beginning to struggle with this outbreak, to be better prepared. More importantly, as COVID-19 is already affecting at least 29 countries and territories worldwide, including one north African country, the situation in China could help to inform other resource-limited regions on how to prepare for possible local outbreaks. 3
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Emergence of a novel coronavirus causing respiratory illness from Wuhan, China

            Dear Editor, In previous reports, workers have characterized the presentation of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) 1 and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) 2 to aid clinical teams in the recognition, diagnosis and management of these cases. Now with the emergence of a novel coronavirus (CoV) from Wuhan, China (tentatively named as 2019-nCoV by The World Health Organization – WHO), 3 , 4 similar clinical, diagnostic and management guidance are required. Available information at the time of writing indicates that the virus has now spread beyond China and infection has been confirmed in individuals without direct contact with the index Wuhan wet market (Huanan South China Seafood Market), where the sale of game meat from live animals was also available. This suggests that human-to-human transmission is not only possible but very likely. A full genome phylogenetic analysis of this 2019-nCoV indicates that it is closely related to bat SARS-like CoV (Fig. 1 ), compatible with a zoonotic origin for this virus, similar to SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. 5 Fig. 1 A maximum likelihood tree using full genome coronavirus sequences (30–40 kbp in length) from GenBank was constructed using Fast Tree (v2.1) under a GTR model of evolution. Initial alignment was performed using the online multiple alignment program (MAFFT v.7: https://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/) with further manual editing. The final tree was displayed and annotated in FigTree v1.4.4. Large groups of similar sequences belong to HCoV OC43, HKU1, NL63, 229E ad SARS CoV have been collapsed for clarity. Figures on the branches are Shimodaira-Hasegawa-like support values, ranging from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating that the branch topologies (or ‘splits’) are more likely to be real. The Wuhan 2019-nCoV (GenBank Accession no. MN908947) is shown in red along with its closest relative bat SARS-like CoVs. Fig 1 Two cases have now been confirmed to date in Thailand. The first was a 61-year old Chinese woman travelling with 5 family members in a 16-member tour group. She developed symptoms of fever, chills, headache and sore throat on 5 January 2020 and flew from Wuhan directly to Thailand on 8 January, where she was diagnosed and isolated. She reported regular visits to wet markets in Wuhan but not the index wet market from where most cases were reported. 6 The second case confirmed in Thailand was that of a 74-year old Chinese woman, who was laboratory-confirmed to be infected with the 2019-nCoV on 17 January 2020. This second case was not linked epidemiologically to the first case, and she had not visited any market in Wuhan. So far both cases are recovering well in the negative pressure isolation facilities at the Bamrasnaradura Institute in Thailand, and may be discharged soon. 7 , 8 In addition, one case of 2019-nCoV was confirmed in a male patient in his thirties in Japan who was staying in Wuhan during late December 2019 to early January 2020, and developed fever on 3 January. Although he had not visited any wet or live animal markets during his stay in Wuhan, he did report close contact with someone with pneumonia. On return to Japan on 6 January he visited a local clinic where he tested negative for influenza. Despite this, his symptoms of fever, cough, and sore throat continued, so he attended a local hospital on 10 January where he was admitted and found to have abnormal infiltrates on his chest X-ray. He remained febrile until 14 January and was eventually tested as positive for 2019-nCoV on 15 January. 9 He became afebrile on the same day and was discharged home where he remains stable. This was the second 2019-nCoV case to be confirmed outside of China (being identified between the two cases from Thailand). Thus, clinically, the symptoms of 2019-nCoV infection appear very non-specific and may be very similar to influenza, including fever, cough, fatigue, sore throat, runny nose, headache and shortness of breath, with possible ground glass shadowing on the chest X-ray. Importantly, such symptoms appear to persist longer in cases of 2019-nCoV infection than in most cases of uncomplicated influenza. Similar to SARS and MERS, there is still no specific, licensed antiviral treatment for CoVs and the clinical management is mainly supportive. Infection control guidance will be likely based on existing guidance for SARS and MERS, perhaps with some additional heightened precautions due to the largely unknown nature of this new virus. Also similar to the SARS and MERS cases, there is likely a lot of variability in the clinical presentation, including mild or asymptomatic cases that may never present to healthcare services. Larger population level seroprevalence studies to test for past infection or exposure are required to determine how many such cases may exist. Whether “super-spreaders” who are associated with multiple secondary infections, as has occurred most prominently with SARS but also MERS, will be (or indeed may have already been) a feature of the epidemiology of this virus is not yet known. No pediatric 2019-nCoV infections have been diagnosed so far, and infections in other vulnerable patient groups, such as transplant and other immunocompromised patients, pregnant women and those with chronic diseases (diabetes, liver, kidney, heart disease, etc.) and extremes of the body-mass index (BMI), are yet to be reported. Further data are awaited on such cases. Based on the current and limited data available and the likelihood that many milder or asymptomatic cases have not presented to healthcare services, it is too early to compare case-fatality rates with SARS or MERS. So far, there have been two deaths out of a total of 48 cases reported from Wuhan and overseas, 7 which have been in older patients with various comorbidities. Most recently, a mathematical modelling study from Imperial College (London, UK) suggests that the number of unrecognized, undiagnosed cases could be as high as 4400–4500, though ∼1700 may be more realistic – assuming that the model assumptions are reasonably accurate. 10 This situation is evolving and more updates will be forthcoming. SARS was the first emerging infectious disease of the 21st century and it came and went quickly despite a tremendous global impact. MERS in contrast remains largely confined to the Middle East with occasional exported cases and has smouldered since 2012. We clearly have a lot to learn about these zoonotic bat coronaviruses (see Fig. 1), but hopefully the scientific, medical and public health worlds are now much better prepared this time round to deal with this new emerging threat.
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Contributors
              Journal
              J Infect
              J. Infect
              The Journal of Infection
              The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
              0163-4453
              1532-2742
              14 April 2020
              14 April 2020
              Affiliations
              [a ]Provincial University Key Laboratory of Cellular Stress Response and Metabolic Regulation, College of Life Sciences, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou City, Fujian Province 350117, China
              [b ]Department of Orthopaedic, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu City, Sichuan, Province, China
              Author notes
              [#]

              These authors contributed to this work equally.

              Article
              S0163-4453(20)30157-2
              10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.029
              7194645
              32302605
              887cb651-ee0c-4625-82e7-a5cf374400fd
              © 2020 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

              Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

              History
              : 18 March 2020
              Categories
              Article

              Infectious disease & Microbiology
              covid-19,sars-cov-2,coronavirus,epidemic,crude fatality ratio,mortality

              Comments

              Comment on this article