Early evidence of a higher incidence of COVID-19 in the air-polluted regions of eight severely affected countries

Riccardo Pansini, Davide Fornacca
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.20086496

Abstract

COVID-19 has spread in all continents in a span of just over three months, escalating into a pandemic that poses several humanitarian as well as scientific challenges. We here investigated the geographical character of the infection and correlate it with several annual satellite and ground indexes of air quality in: China, the United States, Italy, Iran, France, Spain, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Controlling for population size, we found more viral infections in those areas afflicted by high PM 2.5 and Nitrogen Dioxide values. Higher mortality was also correlated with relatively poor air quality. In Italy, the correspondence between the Po valley pollution and SARS-CoV-2 infections and induced mortality was the starkest, originating right in the most polluted European area. Air pollution appears to be for this disease a risk factor similar to smoking. This suggests the detrimental impact climate change will have on the trajectory of future respiratory epidemics.

Introduction

From the first detected outbreak of a new member of the coronavirus (CoV) family1 in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China2-4, SARS-CoV-25 has rapidly spread around the world6, with governments and institutions showing mixed results in its effective containment7,8. Certain regions have been much more adversely impacted in terms of the rate of infections and mortality rates than others, and the full reasons for this are not yet clear. This paper shows preliminary, yet compelling evidence of a correlation between air pollution and incidence of COVID-19 in eight countries.

Air pollution is notoriously known to cause health problems and, in particular, respiratory diseases, to individuals exposed for longer than several days per year9-13. Moreover, pollutants in the air which get absorbed systemically are significant underlying contributors to the emergence of respiratory viral infections14 including the previous SARS-CoV-115. Air pollution has been shown to be strongly associated with a high incidence of other respiratory infections9,12,14,16-23 and higher mortality rates10,11. In particular, PM 10 and PM 2.5 have been linked to respiratory disease hospitalisations for pneumonia and chronic pulmonary diseases16-22. The ACE2 receptors of bronchial, alveolar, interstitial and other pulmonary cells can undergo to a state of chronic cellular inflammation due to air pollution and, concurrently, SARS-CoV-224. There is some further experimental evidence that emissions from diesel and coal affect the lungs, causing pathological immune response and inflammations25,26, voiding past disputes27 that only high concentrations of these gasses are needed to cause pathologies.

A number of airborne microorganisms can directly infect other people’s mucosae or travel further into the air and onto surfaces causing delayed infections. The particles of several pollutants such as PMs and NO2 can act as a vector for the spread and extended survival in the air of bioaerosols28-33 including viruses34-38 such as measles, the avian flu H5N1, and the syncytial virus. A first hypothesis in this direction, not examined here, has arisen for SARS-CoV-2 in Northern Italy39,40.

The strong containment measures adopted firstly by the Chinese government have necessarily biased the natural virus spread41,42, not allowing the virus to distribute evenly across the country’s territory. Recent findings have shown that non-pharmaceutical interventions such as lockdowns significantly decreased the transmission of the virus in Europe43. What shall be noted, though, is that its appearance was recorded in a Chinese area affected by some of the highest air pollution in the world, and it showed a relatively high virulence there. In the case that, as in Italy44, the onset of the infection went undetected for weeks before the outbreaks became apparent, air pollution might have played a more relevant role in the exacerbation of the virus.

Some personal risk factors (also discussed in S.I.) have been associated with higher morbidity and mortality of COVID-19, including male gender and having hyperactivated airways receptors of both air pollution and smoking45-47. A high population density boosts the virus spread, but taken alone it should not be a reliable predictor for a higher virulence and a higher mortality48. Another evident predictor variable is transportation. The surrounding areas of transport hubs such as airports and large train stations should witness the appearance of the virus earlier than other less connected zones increasing its transmission42,49-52. (Further risk factors introduced in S.I.)

One factor that needs further investigation is the role of long-term exposure to air pollution in the spread of COVID-19 and possibly higher mortality rates. Long-term or chronic exposure, is a continuous or repeated contact with a toxic substance over a long period of time (months or years), and it is expressed by annual averaged data53. We therefore expand upon the very first study of this kind later followed by others, which we released in early-April, looking at this phenomenon in three countries54. By controlling for population size and density, here we investigate whether there is a correlation between long term exposure to air pollution and SARS-CoV-2 causing respiratory diseases in second order level administrations of eight countries: China, the United States, Italy, Iran, France, Spain, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Our hypotheses were: (1) is there a higher incidence of COVID-19 infections in areas chronically afflicted by poorer air quality?; and (2) is there a higher COVID-19 mortality rate in these highly polluted areas?

Methods

We selected eight countries particularly affected by the virus and evaluated the potential correlation between air quality metrics and infections at the finest granularity available. Results for each country were analysed separately, controlling both COVID-19 and air pollution variables for potential relationships with population densities as well as the presence of the bivariate virus / pollution spatial clusters. (More on this in S.I.)

Data collection and processing

The COVID-19 dataset (updated till the end of May) was compiled at the second-level administrative subdivision level (U.S.A. counties equivalent), updated until around the end of May; however, a few geographical and time adaptations were required for some contentious administrations which do not make public all the data (the details in S.I.).

Both infections and deaths due to COVID-19 were collected and normalised by population size per administration unit (100,000 residents). Population densities for each unit’s area were calculated at 1 square km resolution.

Air quality information was retrieved from long-term satellite observations and averaged at the administrative unit level. Additionally, ground measures for the United States, China and Italy were collected from various sources (see S.I.). Combining all these measures poses compilation challenges55. Satellite data hold several advantages over ground station data, such as regular and continuous data acquisition, quasi-global coverage, and spatially consistent measurement methodologies. On the other hand, ground stations offer real measures of single pollutants instead of deriving it from spectral information; however, they require more or less arbitrary estimations (such as interpolation) to fill spatial gaps. (More in S.I. discussion)

Table S1 in S.I. summarises the datasets used.

Data Analysis

Exploratory analysis of the variables was conducted with a focus on evaluating the air pollution distributions within each country. Due to the highly skewed distributions of both population-adjusted dependent variables, namely COVID-19 infections / 100,000 inhabitants, COVID-19 deaths / 100.000 inhabitants, and mortality rates (deaths / infections), we opted for a correlation metric based on ranks instead of raw values. Kendall tau correlation coefficients were employed for all statistical tests.

Because both virus spread and air pollution dynamics present obvious spatially-dependent dynamics, we identified potential clusters of adjacent administrations using Local Moran’s Bivariate statistic56,57.

These results are illustrated with thematic maps which better highlight the overlap between air quality and COVID-19 distributions within the eight assessed countries.

Results

Correlation between air pollution variables with COVID-19 infections and mortality

Significant positive correlations between air quality variables and COVID-19 infections, fatalities and mortality rate were found in China, the United States, Italy, Iran, France, and the U.K., but not fully in Spain and Germany (Tables 1-3). The strongest correlations were found in Italy, both for infections and deaths, while population size and densities did not explain COVID-19 incidence. In China, population densities showed a similar positive correlation with the virus infections and deaths than air pollution, while in the United States and U.K. population density has a stronger correlation than air pollution variables. In the U.K., air pollution showed a fair degree of correlation with deaths and mortality, but not with the infections. Despite its small sample size (df = 29), Iran shows a significant correlation with NO2 distribution and no incidence from population variables. The results for Spain and Germany showed different patterns. The spread of COVID-19 and its related fatalities in Spain could not be explained by differences in air pollution; however, the mortality rate varied with NO2 concentration. Moreover, population size and density were negatively correlated with the virus. In a distinct manner, population density explained weakly COVID-19 infections in Germany while the distribution of fine particulate matter was in some cases, weakly negatively correlated. Among the different pollutant analysed, O3 and SO2 measures from ground stations in China and the United States did not show significant correlations with COVID-19 or were negatively correlated, in contrast with the overall results from the other pollutants.

View this table:
Table 1

Correlation coefficients between COVID-19 infections per 100,000 inhabitants and air quality variables. Significant Kendall correlations (p-value < 0.05) are shown in bold; blue and red colour highlights indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively.

View this table:
Table 2

Correlation coefficients between COVID-19 fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants and air quality variables. Significant Kendall correlations (p-value < 0.05) are shown in bold; blue and red colour highlights indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively.

View this table:
Table 3

Correlation coefficients between COVID-19 mortality rates and air quality variables. Significant Kendall correlations (p-value < 0.05) are shown in bold; blue and red colour highlights indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively.

COVID-19 distribution, clusters and air quality maps

Figure 1 reports comparison maps of COVID-19 distributions with the satellite-based PM 2.5 concentrations for the eight analysed countries. These graphical representations also allow for a rapid assessment of the air pollution pattern in each country (basic descriptive statistics for each pollutant can be found in S.I., Table S2). While the PM 2.5 maps are continuous surfaces drawn following the same classification scheme across countries, the COVID-19 infections and fatalities maps required ad-hoc classification adaptations due to different population profiles and infection dynamics. In China, due to the very large population and an apparently effective policy for the containment of the virus, the number of cases per 100,000 residents were relatively low and highly concentrated in the epicentre of the outbreak (Wuhan and the Hubei province). A visual correlation between the two maps can be perceived, especially between the eastern and western parts of the country, and it’s clearly highlighted in the cluster map (Figure 2). The highly developed and polluted areas in the east of China represent outlier clusters due to the low COVID-19 cases compared to the Hubei province. In the United States, the virus noticeably appears to spread over several areas. PM 2.5 differences are not large, but their distribution looks adequately coincident with the fatalities. Similar to China, a longitudinal pattern is visible with low-fatalities / low-pollution clusters (LL) concentrated in the mid-western part of the country while high-fatality and high-pollution clusters (HH) are found in the east, along the Mississippi river and the states surrounding New York. However, a high number of outliers of both types (HL and LH) exist. The high correlation results found for Italy are clearly visible. The polluted areas of the Po valley are those heavily affected by COVID-19 infections. The clusters are clear and the number of outliers is very limited. While in Iran and France the correlations are only lightly perceivable, the clusters maps show a north-south regionalization pattern similar to Italy. The maps of Spain confirm the absence or weak correlation shown in Tables 1-3, apparently going against our general hypotheses. Nevertheless, PM 2.5 levels in Spain are minimal, as well as their variation, as indicated by the low range and inter-quartile range (Table S2 in S.I.). The U.K. map of PM 2.5 shows well the higher concentrations around urban areas and the overall south-eastern area where COVID-19 mortality is higher too. However, also a few counties/NHS in the north of Scotland are particularly affected by the virus infections, becoming outliers in the clusters map. Finally, COVID-19 mortality in Germany is low and no apparent distribution pattern can be detected, being quite well spread. Similarly, PM 2.5 concentrations are fairly high all over the country, with peaks in the eastern districts, where a few HH clusters and LH outliers are found. The high number of non-significant clusters and both types of outliers confirm this tendency to a homogenous distribution of COVID-19 and air pollution.

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 1

Maps comparisons of satellite-derived PM 2.5 distributions and COVID-19 infections, fatalities (per 100,000 inhabitants), or mortality rates (deaths / infections) in eight countries (see S.I. for information about dates). Maps of different countries should not be compared due to different classification schemes and spatial scales. Administrative units’ boundaries were seldom adapted to the COVID-19 data available (e.g. merged districts of Galicia, Catalunia and Pais Vasco in Spain).

Figure 2
Figure 2

Maps of clustered, adjacent administrations resulting from Local Moran Bivariate analysis. Four types of significant spatial relationship exist. HH in filled red: High COVID-19 (fatalities, deaths, or mortality rates) and High PM2.5; HL in empty red: High COVID-19 and Low PM2.5; LH in empty blue: Low COVID-19 and High PM2.5; LL in filled blue: Low COVID-19 and Low PM2.5. While HH and LL filled coloured clusters support the COVID-19/air pollution correlation hypothesis, HL and LH empty colours represent outliers. Note that the COVID-19 variables used in each country are those of Figure 1.

Discussion

This study is the first to investigate long-term air pollution exposure measured by satellite and ground sensors for eight countries as a potential and highly likely risk factor for the incidence and mortality rates of COVID-19. It provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infections are most often found in highly polluted and densely populated areas. In some cases (Italy and Iran), air pollution independent from population density explained the distribution pattern of the virus. In addition, in these areas affected by a mixture of air pollutants, the virus kills more frequently than elsewhere. In the questionable case that the figures provided by these eight states in relation to the number of infections and deaths are inaccurate58, our analyses and conclusions would not need to be reframed. In fact, if that was the case, this error would most likely be concentrated in just one or very few administrations, or it would be evenly spread across administrations, not affecting the general significance of the correlations.

In Chinese cities59 and, more in detail, in the Hubei province, brand new time analyses give preliminary evidence of a correlation between high levels of NO2 and 12-day delayed virus outbreaks60 and other PM covariates61,62. With this paper, we therefore add the long-term exposure effects for China. As shown in the maps, China bears extremely high rates of air pollution, concentrated in the east. However, COVID-19 cases occurred mainly in the constrained area of Hubei. All evidence suggests that the enforced lockdown was the major factor controlling the virus spread. It is peculiar that the onset of the pandemic still appeared in one of the most polluted areas of the globe…

In the United States, an increase of a mere 1 μg/m3 in PM 2.5 was recently found responsible for an 8% higher mortality rate by COVID-19, a rate relatively higher than other 11 demographic co-variables tested63. With our paper, we add PM 10, NO2, and CO measures from ground stations. Our analysis for the United States was run over more than 3000 administrative units, many of which were still relatively unaffected by the virus (as of 21 May 2020), despite being the country featuring the highest COVID-19 numbers.

We found that in Italy, the correspondence between poor air quality and SARS-CoV-2 appearance as well as its induced mortality was the starkest. The area with the largest number of infections and deaths in Italy is the Po Valley, which is also the foremost place of polluted air in Europe64. This result was first hypothesised65 and later confirmed by another study66 and a remarkable further one67 which included five demographic co-variables.. The fact the population density does not play a role in the incidence of COVID-19 in Italy and Iran is a unique finding in our investigation, which strongly supports the common hypotheses of all these other, similar studies, and questions the common criticism, stating that air polluted areas are also those more densely populated (see table S3). Other factors must be attributed for such a severe incidence in Italy, including its very large aging population. Not to forget that the aged population is also the one which got exposed to air pollutants for the longest time. Such pollutants cause, in turn, other comorbidities and COVID-19 vulnerabilities such as cardiocirculatory diseases.

Unfortunately, information on COVID-19 infections were available for Iran at the first administration level only till 22 March 2020. France provides up-to-date information about fatalities only. Despite these limitations, Iran and France show highly clustered COVID-19/pollution distributions, in the same manner as the Italian case, resulting in significant positive correlation that confirm our hypotheses.

The absence of correlation found in Spain should be attributed to high levels of air quality, within the green Air Quality Index standard range, and ensuing minimal differences among its provinces. Moreover, the regions most affected by the virus seem to be those less densely populated, a peculiarity still not provided by the literature and requiring future investigation. In Germany, also, a clear correlation could not be detected because, inversely, pollution is widely spread across its districts. For these two countries, we therefore back up another report68 which finds high levels of NO2 associated with COVID-19 mortality in Spain and Germany. To note, though, that it is always necessary to control for population densities in these types of analysis69.

Finally, in the U.K., where containment measures were implemented late, fatalities and mortality rates, but not cases alone, were correlated with air pollution, suggesting that when affected by the disease, a weakened respiratory system due to prolonged stress by air pollution increases the risk of mortality.

Despite the highly significant correlations of these findings that we collected over three time periods in March54, April70 and, as reported here, end of May, their interpretation has to be necessary cautious. The virus spread in most countries is still ongoing71 and is being contained44. Causation should not be inferred by correlational data alone. There are also confounding factors such as how the virus infection was determined in patients by different countries. However, the larger the geographical areas are affected by the pandemic, the lower these elements play a role. Finally, it should be noted that by accounting for yearly averaged air quality indexes, we accounted for the long-term exposure to these pollutants, therefore keeping on the conservative side. These correlations would become even stronger, in fact, when limiting the analysis to the more polluted winter months, given how they invariably bear lower air quality.

We run these analyses considering eight countries in their second-order administrations’ level. If controlling for several other predictors like demographic variables is something advisable to perform at a single-country level, so to cross-check for the interdependence with other predictors, including them at an international scale poses an apparent technical limitation72. National or federal health systems have different capacities and provide care in their distinct ways. This in turn influences case detections, intensive care capacity and fatality rates. Cofactors such as earliest location of the pathogen, population mobility and patient socioeconomic status or ethnicity may not be accounted reliably between such diverse countries spanning from Asia to the western world, because they are interdependent and only in part nested within countries or administrations, even when included as random factors as in a comprehensive generalized mixed model. Yet the epidemics, which has turned into a pandemic, might have catered for this limitation; the larger its extent, the more prominent a common factor like air pollution has become, while other secondary predictors will level out across places.

Three additional countries were reported to follow this same trend between PM 2.5 and the virus: the Netherlands73, controlling for some other medical risk factors; Japan74, finding a positive correlation in the elderly; and also India, which holds a similar trend (Sakthi J. Sundar R., in prep.). To note, finally, that CO2 and SO emissions keep being correlated with this disease throughout 126 countries when analysed with the “Our World in Data” database75. Ambient, outdoor air pollution, causing an estimated 4.2 million deaths yearly worldwide76, is indeed a worthwhile risk cofactor to be hypothesized in connection with a new respiratory disease, without necessarily having to analyse some of the other cofactors.

Since there is now some first evidence that the cross of the virus from animals to humans may have happened earlier than the end of 201977 and further south than in the Chinese city of Wuhan78, we can speculate that air pollution could have allowed the new epidemics to become recognised due to an influx of patients with weak respiratory systems showing higher morbidity and mortality than influenza. The same seems to have happened in Europe, since the virus moved from central Europe to the most polluted region of the continent, in northern Italy44,79.

Further research in the field of genetics will ascertain whether virulence has evolved in the air polluted places of those countries where a gradient of air pollution is present. The initial location of the pathogen, travelling and super-spread events are deemed to be foremost factors governing the epidemics (further discussed in S.I.). Later on, other factors such as pollution may become major predictors for harsh infections to manifest. In relation to short-term exposure to peaks of pollutions, the capacity of air pollutants to act as viral vectors should be investigated further. Particulate matter in fact does act as a medium for the aerial transport of SARS-CoV-239,80. Aggregates of particulate matter with this virus have been collected in the worst affected northern Italian city of Bergamo81. If the viral load carried by the aggregates is enough to cause morbidity, pollution would directly act as a vector, broadening the harm done by the human to human contagions.

To conclude, these findings are sufficiently significant to encourage future research, to always consider air pollution as a contributing risk factor for COVID-19. These results inform epidemiologists and policy makers on how to prevent future, more frequent and lethal viral outbreaks by curbing air pollution and, ultimately, meeting climate goals82. Can the fossil fuel economy really carry on unabated once we resume the lockdowns? Institutions need to endorse these interventions and speed up reforms more seriously83-85, together with endorsing collateral and more comprehensive measures86 playing a role in epidemics and zoonoses87,88, such as impeding biodiversity loss89-92, decreasing intensive livestock farming, and alleviating poverty93,94. This new coronavirus shall be an opportunity given to the governments to revive sustainable development goals.

Data Availability

The compiled datasets are available at https://github.com/DavideFornacca/COVID19/tree/master/8_countries.

Author Contributions

Concept and design: RP.

Data acquisition and statistical analysis: DF.

Interpretation: DF and RP.

Drafting of the manuscript: RP.

Critical revision of the manuscript: RP and DF.

Competing Interests

No funding was obtained for performing this study. The authors declare no competing interests.

Supporting information

Supplement to Introduction

Several risk factors have been implicated with the fast spread of SARS-CoV-2, including super spread events1,2. Its further spread to different countries has been attributed to air travellers3-11. A number of personal risk factors have further been implicated with higher morbidity and mortality rates of Covid-19, including male gender and smoking status. In particular, smoking has been associated with a higher morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in men than in women12.

The temperate-climate latitudes have been identified as the probable areas to be mostly affected by COVID-1913 due to a limited exposure to UV light in winter. The sole temperature14,15 or humidity16 appear to play less of a role17. Indeed, other human coronaviruses (HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-NL63, and HCoV-OC43) appear between December and April, and are undetectable in summer months in temperate regions, leading to winter seasonality behaviour.

The very first appearance of this virus cannot be directly correlated with one of these predictors, since, like the other SARS coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 is alleged to have transferred host from the originating bats to humans18. However, it still appeared in a Chinese area affected by some of the highest air pollution in the world, and it showed a relatively high virulence there.

Supplement to Methods

We selected the eight countries according to the following elements. China (including Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau) was chosen because of its large size and now advanced stage of its epidemic, well into the recovery phase. The second choice was Italy, at the time of writing among the most heavily affected countries of the world, and just passed the peak of contagion. The area with the largest number of infections and deaths in Italy is the Po Valley, which is also the foremost place of polluted air in Europe19. The third country investigated was the conterminous United States, which currently has the highest number of cases worldwide, yet is still behind in the pandemic curve due to its later arrival as compared to Asia and Europe. Among the countries where the virus spread earlier, we included Iran which heavily suffers from severe air pollution due to the ubiquitous use of gas methane, refineries and heavy traffic. France and Spain were selected because of the high COVID-19 figures, but minor air pollution issues than Italy. Lastly, Germany and the United Kingdom represented suitable candidates to feed into the analysis, because of the relatively reduced lockdown measures adopted by those states20.

For Iran, the state made public the data of infections at a first level resolution only, until 22 March 2020. The Chinese dataset includes the 17 April update with a 50% increase in deaths in Wuhan city21. Fatalities in Italy were available only at the regional level, therefore two different datasets were compiled. The autonomous communities of Catalonia, Galicia, and Pais Vasco in Spain provided figures at the first administration level only22, so we considered them at the same level as provinces. For France, COVID-19 deaths only were available at the department level. Finally, in the U.K., the data for Scotland was organized following the National Health Service (NHS) subdivisions rather than the second order administration scale.

Global Annual PM 2.5, Grids from MODIS, MISR and SeaWiFS Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) with GWR, v1 (1998 – 2016), were obtained from NASA’s Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center23,24. From the same repository, we retrieved the Global 3-Year Running Mean, Ground-Level NO2 Grids from GOME, SCIAMACHY and GOME-2, v1 (1996 – 2012)23,24.

For both products, the annual grids were first reduced to an average multi-year image and afterwards, the mean of all grid cells covering every administrative unit was calculated.

The latest available annual means of measured PM 2.5 and PM 10 values were retrieved from the World Health Organization Global Ambient Air Quality Database of 201825 and used for the Italian case study because of extensive coverage. For China, we used aggregated monthly air quality data for the years 2014 to 2016, made available by the Center for Geographic Analysis Dataverse of the University of Harvard26. For the conterminous U.S.A., summary data on several pollutants for the year 2019 was retrieved from the United States Environmental Protection Agency27. To every administrative unit, we assigned the air quality value from its related station. If more than one point fell within a given unit, the mean was calculated. No ground measures for the other countries were included in our study.

View this table:
Table S1

Detailed information on the datasets used for the viral and pollution analyses.

Supplement to Results

View this table:
Table S2

Descriptive statistics for the air pollution variables in the eight analysed countries.

View this table:
Table S3

Correlation coefficients between population density and air pollution variables in the eight analysed countries. Significant correlations (p-value < 0.05) are shown in bold; blue and red colour highlights indicate positive and negative correlations, respectively.

Supplement to Discussion

The possibly large proportion of asymptomatic cases has been implied as an important factor in the fast spread of the virus and will necessarily lead to a biased mortality rate. Different government policies with regards to testing have led to vastly different estimates across countries28,10, and a COVID-19 overall mortality rate has not been established yet. Asymptomatic cases could be as high as about 50% of total cases, as estimated by simulations29.

Satellite NO2 and PM 2.5 on their own are suitable representatives for general air quality30, since they are more consistent than ground station data, providing finer detail, consistency, accuracy, with virtually no errors of counterfeits. Despite limited by cloud cover, they are to a certain extent less prone to biases from other conditions14 of wind and greenhouse effect of temperature inversion, in turn also related to air pollution. In spite of this, we found some consistency between ground and satellite data for those countries for which we could obtain fine-grained ground measures. The satellite databases employed in this study represent annual means, which we further averaged over the full time-series. This only partially represents the real emission of pollutants during the year and do not make evident seasonal variations and other fluctuations. However, our aim was to highlight differences in air quality within a country’s region and show the correlation with the virus. Therefore, threshold values of air pollution cannot be inferred from this study.

States have responded by trying to mitigate the spread of the virus through imposing widespread lockdowns. This has led to a decrease in air pollution31-35, which in the top faring country in this regard, China, it prevented the equivalent savings of CO2 emitted in one year by France36, and it likely prevented the deaths of 4,000 children under 5 and 73,000 adults over 7037. However, the winter months and low temperature caused people to keep at least domestic heating systems on, maintaining a certain amount of emissions. In Europe38 and in China39 a consistent reduction in air pollution was recorded by satellites due to reduced anthropogenic activities during the lockdowns, although it occurred gradually40,41, also due to weather conditions unfavourable to air quality. Forest fires also decreased by 4.54%42.

The quarantines certainly decreased the role that commuting has in the virus spread. Nonetheless, reduced anthropogenic activities and reduced mobility lose correlational significance over time, after the first stages of the infection43,44. Instead, the correlation we found with low air quality remains significant throughout the different epidemic stages.

Acknowledgements

Lei Shi and Xiao Wen commented on the study. Livia Ottisova improved and revised the manuscript. Chun Chen and Michele Mignini commented on statistics. Rafael Moreno Ripoll and Mehrdad Samavati helped to obtain the data for Spain and Iran. RP did this work while in isolation in the Italian Po valley, due to the ongoing pandemic.

Footnotes

  • Digital supplement Supplementary information.docx

References

  1. ↵
    Cui, J., Li, F. & Shi, Z.-L. 2019. Origin and evolution of pathogenic coronaviruses. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 17, 181-192, 10.1038/s41579-018-0118-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Perlman, S. 2020. Another decade, another coronavirus. N Engl J Med, 382, 760–762, 10.1056/NEJMe2001126.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. Zhu, N., Zhang, D., Wang, W., Li, X., Yang, B., Song, J., Zhao, X., Huang, B., Shi, W. & Lu, R. J. N. E. J. o. M. 2020. A novel coronavirus from patients with pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med, 382, 727–733, 10.1056/NEJMoa2001017.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    WHO. 2020. Pneumonia of unknown cause – China. Access date: 21/04/2020, https://www.who.int/csr/don/05-january-2020-pneumonia-of-unkown-cause-china/en/.
  5. ↵
    Wu, F., Zhao, S., Yu, B., Chen, Y.-M., Wang, W., Song, Z.-G., Hu, Y., Tao, Z.-W., Tian, J.-H., Pei, Y.-Y., Yuan, M.-L., Zhang, Y.-L., Dai, F.-H., Liu, Y., Wang, Q.-M., Zheng, J.-J., Xu, L., Holmes, E. C. & Zhang, Y.-Z. 2020. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature, 579, 265-269, 10.1038/s41586-020-2008-3.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Mattiuzzi, C. & Lippi, G. 2020. Which lessons shall we learn from the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak? Annals of translational medicine, 8, 48–48, 10.21037/atm.2020.02.06.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    McCloskey, B. & Heymann, D. L. 2020. SARS to novel coronavirus - old lessons and new lessons. Epidemiology and infection, 148, e22–e22, 10.1017/S0950268820000254.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Nay, O. 2020. Can a virus undermine human rights? The Lancet Public Health, 5, e238–e239, 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30092-X.
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    Di, Q., Wang, Y., Zanobetti, A., Wang, Y., Koutrakis, P., Choirat, C., Dominici, F. & Schwartz, J. D. 2017. Air pollution and mortality in the Medicare population. New England Journal of Medicine, 376, 2513–2522.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    Krewski, D. 2009. Evaluating the effects of ambient air pollution on life expectancy. N Engl J Med, 360, 413–415, 10.1056/NEJMe0809178.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    Lelieveld, J., Evans, J. S., Fnais, M., Giannadaki, D. & Pozzer, A. 2015. The contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a global scale. Nature, 525, 367–371.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. W.M. Foster &
    2. D. L. Costa
    Tager, I. 2005. Chronic Exposure and Susceptibility to Oxidant Air Pollutants. In: Lung Biology In Health Disease (Ed. by W.M. Foster & D. L. Costa), pp. 259
  13. ↵
    Ebenstein, A., Fan, M., Greenstone, M., He, G. & Zhou, M. 2017. New evidence on the impact of sustained exposure to air pollution on life expectancy from China’s Huai River Policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 10384, 10.1073/pnas.1616784114.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    Silva, D. R., Viana, V. P., Müller, A. M., Livi, F. P., Dalcin, P. & r, d. T. 2014. Respiratory viral infections and effects of meteorological parameters and air pollution in adults with respiratory symptoms admitted to the emergency room. Influenza and other respiratory viruses, 8, 42–52.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    Cui, Y., Zhang, Z.-F., Froines, J., Zhao, J., Wang, H., Yu, S.-Z. & Detels, R. 2003. Air pollution and case fatality of SARS in the People’s Republic of China: an ecologic study. Environmental Health, 2, 15, 10.1186/1476-069X-2-15.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    Cipolla, M., Sorgenti, M., Gentile, C. & Bishara, M. M. 2018. Air Pollution and Lung Diseases. In: Clinical Handbook of Air Pollution-Related Diseases, pp. 327–339: Springer
  17. Bayram, H., Sapsford, R. J., Abdelaziz, M. M. & Khair, O. A. 2001. Effect of ozone and nitrogen dioxide on the release of proinflammatory mediators from bronchial epithelial cells of nonatopic nonasthmatic subjects and atopic asthmatic patients in vitro. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 107, 287–294.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. Johannson, K. A., Vittinghoff, E., Lee, K., Balmes, J. R., Ji, W., Kaplan, G. G., Kim, D. S. & Collard, H. R. 2014. Acute exacerbation of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis associated with air pollution exposure. European Respiratory Journal, 43, 1124–1131.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. Ko, F. W., Tam, W., Wong, T. W., Chan, D. P., Tung, A. H., Lai, C. K. & Hui, D. S. 2007. Temporal relationship between air pollutants and hospital admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Hong Kong. Thorax, 62, 780–785.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. Thillai, M., Moller, D. R. & Meyer, K. C. 2017. Clinical Handbook of Interstitial Lung Disease: CRC Press
  21. Zhang, Y., Ding, Z., Xiang, Q., Wang, W., Huang, L. & Mao, F. 2020. Short-term effects of ambient PM1 and PM2.5 air pollution on hospital admission for respiratory diseases: Case-crossover evidence from Shenzhen, China. Int J Hyg Environ Health, 224, 113418, 10.1016/j.ijheh.2019.11.001.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. ↵
    Zhang, Y., Wang, S. G., Xia, Y., Shang, K. Z., Cheng, Y. F., Xu, L., Ning, G. C., Zhao, W. J. & Li, N. R. 2015. Association between ambient air pollution and hospital emergency admissions for respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in Beijing: a time series study. J Biomedical Environmental Sciences, 28, 352–363.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    Shinya, K., Ebina, M., Yamada, S., Ono, M., Kasai, N. & Kawaoka, Y. 2006. Influenza virus receptors in the human airway. Nature, 440, 435–436, 10.1038/440435a.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    Milne, S., Yang, C. X., Timens, W., Bossé, Y. & Sin, D. D. 2020. SARS -CoV-2 receptor ACE2 gene expression and RAAS inhibitors. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 8, e50–e51, 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30224-1.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    Harrod, K. S., Jaramillo, R. J., Rosenberger, C. L., Wang, S. Z., Berger, J. A., McDonald, J. D. & Reed, M. D. 2003. Increased susceptibility to RSV infection by exposure to inhaled diesel engine emissions. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol, 28, 451–463, 10.1165/rcmb.2002-0100OC.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  26. ↵
    Lambert, A. L., Mangum, J. B., DeLorme, M. P. & Everitt, J. I. 2003. Ultrafine carbon black particles enhance respiratory syncytial virus-induced airway reactivity, pulmonary inflammation, and chemokine expression. Toxicological Sciences, 72, 339–346.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    Chen, T.-M., Kuschner, W. G., Gokhale, J. & Shofer, S. 2007. Outdoor Air Pollution: Nitrogen Dioxide, Sulfur Dioxide, and Carbon Monoxide Health Effects. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 333, 249–256, https://doi.org/10.1097/MAJ.0b013e31803b900f.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. ↵
    1. W.M. Foster &
    2. D. L. Costa
    Burge, H. A. 2005. Biological Airborne Pollutants. In: Lung Biology In Health Disease (Ed. by W.M. Foster & D. L. Costa), pp. 329
  29. Wong, G., Ko, F., Lau, T., Li, S., Hui, D., Pang, S., Leung, R., Fok, T. & Lai, C. 2001. Temporal relationship between air pollution and hospital admissions for asthmatic children in Hong Kong. Clinical Experimental Allergy, 31, 565–569.
    OpenUrl
  30. Smets, W., Moretti, S., Denys, S. & Lebeer, S. 2016. Airborne bacteria in the atmosphere: presence, purpose, and potential. Atmospheric Environment, 139, 214–221.
    OpenUrl
  31. Dong, L., Qi, J., Shao, C., Zhong, X., Gao, D., Cao, W., Gao, J., Bai, R., Long, G. & Chu, C. 2016. Concentration and size distribution of total airborne microbes in hazy and foggy weather. Science of the Total Environment, 541, 1011–1018.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. Wei, K., Zou, Z., Zheng, Y., Li, J., Shen, F., Wu, C.-y., Wu, Y., Hu, M. & Yao, M. 2016. Ambient bioaerosol particle dynamics observed during haze and sunny days in Beijing. Science of the Total Environment, 550, 751–759.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  33. ↵
    Li, Y., Fu, H., Wang, W., Liu, J., Meng, Q. & Wang, W. 2015. Characteristics of bacterial and fungal aerosols during the autumn haze days in Xi’an, China. Atmospheric Environment, 122, 439–447.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  34. ↵
    Cao, C., Jiang, W., Wang, B., Fang, J., Lang, J., Tian, G., Jiang, J. & Zhu, T. F. 2014. Inhalable microorganisms in Beijing’s PM2. 5 and PM10 pollutants during a severe smog event. Environmental science and technology, 48, 1499–1507.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  35. Ye, Q., Fu, J.-f., Mao, J.-h. & Shang, S.-q. 2016. Haze is a risk factor contributing to the rapid spread of respiratory syncytial virus in children. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23, 20178–20185.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  36. Chen, P.-S., Tsai, F. T., Lin, C. K., Yang, C.-Y., Chan, C.-C., Young, C.-Y. & Lee, C.-H. 2010. Ambient influenza and avian influenza virus during dust storm days and background days. Environmental health perspectives, 118, 1211–1216.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. Chen, G., Zhang, W., Li, S., Williams, G., Liu, C., Morgan, G. G., Jaakkola, J. J. & Guo, Y. 2017. Is short-term exposure to ambient fine particles associated with measles incidence in China? A multi-city study. Environmental research, 156, 306–311.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. ↵
    Peng, L., Zhao, X., Tao, Y., Mi, S., Huang, J. & Zhang, Q. 2020. The effects of air pollution and meteorological factors on measles cases in Lanzhou, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1–10.
  39. ↵
    Contini, D. & Costabile, F. 2020. Does Air Pollution Influence COVID-19 Outbreaks? Atmosphere, 11, 377, 10.3390/atmos11040377.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  40. ↵
    Setti, L., Passarini, F., De Gennaro, G., Barbieri, P., Pallavicini, A., Ruscio, M., Piscitelli, P., Colao, A. & Miani, A. 2020. Searching for SARS-COV-2 on Particulate Matter: A Possible Early Indicator of COVID-19 Epidemic Recurrence. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17, 2986, doi:10.3390/ijerph17092986.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  41. ↵
    Wu, J. T., Leung, K., Bushman, M., Kishore, N., Niehus, R., de Salazar, P. M., Cowling, B. J., Lipsitch, M. & Leung, G. M. 2020. Estimating clinical severity of COVID-19 from the transmission dynamics in Wuhan, China. Nature Medicine, doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0822-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    Kraemer, M. U. G., Yang, C.-H., Gutierrez, B., Wu, C.-H., Klein, B., Pigott, D. M., du Plessis, L., Faria, N. R., Li, R., Hanage, W. P., Brownstein, J. S., Layan, M., Vespignani, A., Tian, H., Dye, C., Pybus, O. G. & Scarpino, S. V. 2020. The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, eabb4218, doi:10.1126/science.abb4218.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  43. ↵
    Flaxman, S., Mishra, S., Gandy, A., Unwin, H. J. T., Mellan, T. A., Coupland, H., Whittaker, C., Zhu, H., Berah, T., Eaton, J. W., Monod, M., Perez-Guzman, P. N., Schmit, N., Cilloni, L., Ainslie, K. E. C., Baguelin, M., Boonyasiri, A., Boyd, O., Cattarino, L., Cooper, L. V., Cucunubá, Z., Cuomo-Dannenburg, G., Dighe, A., Djaafara, B., Dorigatti, I., van Elsland, S. L., FitzJohn, R. G., Gaythorpe, K. A. M., Geidelberg, L., Grassly, N. C., Green, W. D., Hallett, T., Hamlet, A., Hinsley, W., Jeffrey, B., Knock, E., Laydon, D. J., Nedjati-Gilani, G., Nouvellet, P., Parag, K. V., Siveroni, I., Thompson, H. A., Verity, R., Volz, E., Walters, C. E., Wang, H., Wang, Y., Watson, O. J., Winskill, P., Xi, X., Walker, P. G. T., Ghani, A. C., Donnelly, C. A., Riley, S. M., Vollmer, M. A. C., Ferguson, N. M., Okell, L. C., Bhatt, S. & Imperial College, C.-R. T. 2020. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature, doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    Cereda, D., Tirani, M., Rovida, F., Demicheli, V., Ajelli, M., Poletti, P., Trentini, F., Guzzetta, G., Marziano, V., Barone, A., Magoni, M., Deandrea, S., Diurno, G., Lombardo, M., Faccini, M., Pan, A., Bruno, R., Pariani, E., Grasselli, G., Piatti, A., Gramegna, M., Baldanti, F., Melegaro, A. & Merler, S. 2020. The early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in Lombardy, Italy. arXiv e-prints, 2003.09320.
  45. ↵
    Xia, Y., Jin, R., Zhao, J., Li, W. & Shen, H. 2020. Risk of COVID-19 for cancer patients. The Lancet Oncology, doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30150-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  46. Olds, J. L. & Kabbani, N. 2020. Is nicotine exposure linked to cardiopulmonary vulnerability to COVID-19 in the general population? FEBS J., doi:10.1111/febs.15303.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. ↵
    WHO. 2020. Smoking and COVID-19. Access date: 04/06/2020, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/smoking-and-covid-19, WHO reference number: WHO/2019-nCoV/Sci_Brief/Smoking/2020.1.
  48. ↵
    Stier, A. J., Berman, M. G. & Bettencourt, L. M. A. 2020. COVID-19 attack rate increases with city size. arXiv:2003.10376 [q-bio.PE].
  49. ↵
    Arenas, A., Cota, W., Gomez-Gardenes, J., Gómez, S., Granell, C., Matamalas, J. T., Soriano-Panos, D. & Steinegger, B. 2020. A mathematical model for the spatiotemporal epidemic spreading of COVID19. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.03.21.20040022.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. Soriano-Paños, D., Arias-Castro, J.H., Reyna-Lara, A., Martínez, H. J., Meloni, S. & Gómez -Gardeñes, J. 2020. Vector-borne epidemics driven by human mobility. Physical Review Research, 2, 013312, doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.013312.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  51. Bogoch, I. I., Watts, A., Thomas-Bachli, A., Huber, C., Kraemer, M. U. G. & Khan, K. 2020. Potential for global spread of a novel coronavirus from China. Journal of Travel Medicine, 27, doi:10.1093/jtm/taaa011.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. ↵
    De Salazar, P. M., Niehus, R., Taylor, A., Buckee, C. O. & Lipsitch, M. 2020. Using predicted imports of 2019-nCoV cases to determine locations that may not be identifying all imported cases. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.02.04.20020495.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. ↵
    Kyle, A. D., Woodruff, T. J., Buffler, P. A. & Davis, D. L. 2002. Use of an Index to Reflect the Aggregate Burden of Long-Term Exposure to Criteria Air Pollutants in the United States. Environmental health perspectives, 110, 95–102, 10.2307/3455238.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. ↵
    Pansini, R. & Fornacca, D. 2020. Initial evidence of higher morbidity and mortality due to SARS-CoV-2 in regions with lower air quality. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.04.04.20053595.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. ↵
    Zhou, C., Su, F., Pei, T., Zhang, A., Du, Y., Luo, B., Cao, Z., Wang, J., Yuan, W., Zhu, Y., Song, C., Chen, J., Xu, J., Li, F., Ma, T., Jiang, L., Yan, F., Yi, J., Hu, Y., Liao, Y. & Xiao, H. 2020. COVID-19: Challenges to GIS with Big Data. Geography and Sustainability, 1, 77–87, doi:10.1016/j.geosus.2020.03.005.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  56. ↵
    Wartenberg, D. 2010. Multivariate Spatial Correlation: A Method for Exploratory Geographical Analysis. geographical analysis, 17, 263–283, doi:10.1111/J.1538-4632.1985.TB00849.X.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  57. ↵
    Anselin, L., Syabri, I. & Smirnov, O. 2002. Visualizing multivariate spatial correlation with dynamically linked windows. In: Proceedings, CSISS Workshop on New Tools for Spatial Data Analysis, Santa Barbara, CA
  58. ↵
    Qiao, L., Lau, S.-f. & Mudie, L. 2020. Estimates show Wuhan death toll far higher than official figure. Access date: 30/03/2020, https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/wuhan-deaths-03272020182846.html.
  59. ↵
    Zhu, Y., Xie, J., Huang, F. & Cao, L. 2020. Association between short-term exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 infection: Evidence from China. Science of the Total Environment, 727, 138704, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138704.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  60. ↵
    Yao, Y., Pan, J., Liu, Z., Meng, X., Wang, W., Kan, H. & Wang, W. 2020. Ambient nitrogen dioxide pollution and spread ability of COVID-19 in Chinese cities. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.03.31.20048595.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. ↵
    Yao, Y., Pan, J., Wang, W., Liu, Z., Kan, H., Meng, X. & Wang, W. 2020. Spatial Correlation of Particulate Matter Pollution and Death Rate of COVID-19. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.04.07.20052142.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. ↵
    Wang, B., Liu, J., Fu, S., Xu, X., Li, L., Ma, Y., Zhou, J., Yao, J., Liu, X., Zhang, X., He, X., Yan, J., Shi, Y., Ren, X., Niu, J., Luo, B. & zhang, K. 2020. An effect assessment of Airborne particulate matter pollution on COVID-19: A multi-city Study in China. medRxiv, 2020.2004.2009.20060137, doi:10.1101/2020.04.09.20060137.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  63. ↵
    Wu, X., Nethery, R. C., Sabath, B. M., Braun, D. & Dominici, F. 2020. Exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 mortality in the United States. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.04.05.20054502.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  64. ↵
    EEA. 2019. European Environment Agency - Air quality in Europe - 2018. Access date, http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/air-quality-in-europe-2018/.
  65. ↵
    Conticini, E., Frediani, B. & Caro, D. 2020. Can atmospheric pollution be considered a co-factor in extremely high level of SARS-CoV-2 lethality in Northern Italy? Environmental Pollution, 114465, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114465.
  66. ↵
    Fattorini, D. & Regoli, F. 2020. Role of the chronic air pollution levels in the Covid-19 outbreak risk in Italy. Environmental Pollution, 264, 114732, doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114732.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  67. ↵
    Pluchino, A., Inturri, G., Rapisarda, A., Biondo, A. E., Le Moli, R., Zappala’, C., Giuffrida, N., Russo, G. & Latora, V. 2020. A Novel Methodology for Epidemic Risk Assessment: the case of COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. In: arXiv e-prints, pp. 2004.02739
  68. ↵
    Ogen, Y. 2020. Assessing nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels as a contributing factor to coronavirus (COVID-19) fatality. Science of the Total Environment, 726, 138605, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138605.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  69. ↵
    Chudnovsky, A. A. 2020. Letter to editor regarding Ogen Y 2020 paper: “Assessing nitrogen dioxide (NO2) levels as a contributing factor to coronavirus (COVID-19) fatality”. Sci Total Environ, 139236, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139236.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. ↵
    Pansini, R. & Fornacca, D. 2020. Higher virulence of COVID-19 in the air-polluted regions of eight severely affected countries. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.04.30.20086496.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. ↵
    Loli Piccolomini, E. & Zama, F. 2020. Preliminary analysis of COVID-19 spread in Italy with an adaptive SEIRD model. In: arXiv e-prints, pp. arXiv:2003.09909
  72. ↵
    Milan, S. T., Emiliano. 2020. A widening data divide: COVID-19 and the Global South. Access date: 31/05/2020, https://data-activism.net/2020/04/bigdatasur-a-widening-data-divide-covid-19-and-the-global-south/.
  73. ↵
    Andree, B. P. J. 2020. Incidence of COVID-19 and Connections with Air Pollution Exposure : Evidence from the Netherlands. Access date: 05/05/2020, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/462481587756439003/Incidence-of-COVID-19-and-Connections-with-Air-Pollution-Exposure-Evidence-from-the-Netherlands.
  74. ↵
    Nawahda, A. 2020. The Rises of Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) death rate in Japan with high PM2.5. Access date, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341333433_The_Rises_of_Coronavirus_Disease_COVID-19_death_rate_in_Japan_with_high_PM25, 10.21203/rs.3.rs-27475/v1.
  75. ↵
    Notari, A. & Torrieri, G. 2020. COVID-19 transmission risk factors. arXiv preprint, 03651.
  76. ↵
    Organization, W. H. 2016. Ambient air pollution: A global assessment of exposure and burden of disease. Access date, https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/250141/9789241511353-eng.pdf.
  77. ↵
    Andersen, K. G., Rambaut, A., Lipkin, W. I., Holmes, E. C. & Garry, R. F. 2020. The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine, 10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9.
  78. ↵
    Forster, P., Forster, L., Renfrew, C. & Forster, M. 2020. Phylogenetic network analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 9241, doi:10.1073/pnas.2004999117.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  79. ↵
    Giovanetti, M., Angeletti, S., Benvenuto, D. & Ciccozzi, M. 2020. A doubt of multiple introduction of SARS-CoV-2 in Italy: a preliminary overview. J Med Virol, n/a, doi:10.1002/jmv.25773.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  80. ↵
    Setti, L., Passarini, F., de Gennaro, G., Di Gilio, A., Palmisani, J., Buono, P., Fornari, G., Perrone, M. G., Piazzalunga, A., Barbieri, P., Rizzo, E. & Miani, A. 2020. Evaluation of the potential relationship between Particulate Matter (PM) pollution and COVID-19 infection spread in Italy. http://www.simaonlus.it/wpsima/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/COVID_19_position-paper_ENG.pdf.
  81. ↵
    Setti, L., Passarini, F., De Gennaro, G., Barbieri, P., Perrone, M. G., Borelli, M., Palmisani, J., Di Gilio, A., Torboli, V., Fontana, F., Clemente, L., Pallavicini, A., Ruscio, M., Piscitelli, P. & Miani, A. 2020. SARS-Cov-2 RNA Found on Particulate Matter of Bergamo in Northern Italy: First Evidence. Environmental research, 109754, 10.doi:1016/j.envres.2020.109754.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  82. ↵
    1. J. S. J. Mackenzie, Martyn &
    2. P. R. Daszak,
    3. Juergen A.
    Patz, J. A. & Hahn, M. B. 2012. Climate Change and Human Health: A One Health Approach. In: One Health: The Human–Animal–Environment Interfaces in Emerging Infectious Diseases (Ed. by J. S. J. Mackenzie, Martyn & P. R. Daszak, Juergen A.), pp. 141–171. Heidelberg: Springer, doi:10.1007/82_2012_274.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. ↵
    Poland, G. A. 2020. SARS-CoV-2: a time for clear and immediate action. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30250-4.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  84. Herrero, M. & Thornton, P. 2020. What can COVID-19 teach us about responding to climate change? The Lancet Planetary Health, 4, e174, doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30085-1.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  85. ↵
    Phillips, C. A., Caldas, A., Cleetus, R., Dahl, K. A., Declet-Barreto, J., Licker, R., Merner, L. D., Ortiz-Partida, J. P., Phelan, A. L., Spanger-Siegfried, E., Talati, S., Trisos, C. H. & Carlson, C. J. 2020. Compound climate risks in the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0804-2.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. ↵
    1. J. e. a. Zinsstag
    Okello, A., Vandersmissen, A. & Welburn, S. C. 2015. One Health into action: integrating global health governance with national priorities in a globalized world. In: One Health, the theory practice of integrated health approaches. (Ed. by J. e. a. Zinsstag), pp. 283–303. Wallingford: CAB International
  87. ↵
    Atlas, R. M. & Maloy, S. 2014. One Health: people, animals, and the environment: ASM Press, doi:10.1128/9781555818432.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  88. ↵
    Editorial. 2020. Prevent and predict. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4, 283–283, doi:10.1038/s41559-020-1150-5.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  89. ↵
    Keesing, F., Belden, L. K., Daszak, P., Dobson, A., Harvell, C. D., Holt, R. D., Hudson, P., Jolles, A., Jones, K. E., Mitchell, C. E., Myers, S. S., Bogich, T. & Ostfeld, R. S. 2010. Impacts of biodiversity on the emergence and transmission of infectious diseases. Nature, 468, 647–652, doi:10.1038/nature09575.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  90. Johnson, C. K., Hitchens, P. L., Pandit, P. S., Rushmore, J., Evans, T. S., Young, C. C. W. & Doyle, M. M. 2020. Global shifts in mammalian population trends reveal key predictors of virus spillover risk. PRSB, 287, 20192736, doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.2736.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  91. Nabi, G., Siddique, R., Ali, A. & Khan, S. 2020. Preventing bat-born viral outbreaks in future using ecological interventions. Environmental research, 185, 109460, doi:10.1016/j.envres.2020.109460.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  92. ↵
    Morand, S., Owers, K. & Bordes, F. 2014. Biodiversity and emerging zoonoses. In: Confronting Emerging Zoonoses, pp. 27–41: Springer, doi:10.1007/978-4-431-55120-1_3.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. ↵
    Bedford, J., Farrar, J., Ihekweazu, C., Kang, G., Koopmans, M. & Nkengasong, J. 2019. A new twenty-first century science for effective epidemic response. Nature, 575, 130–136, doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1717-y.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  94. ↵
    Ahmed, F., Ahmed, N. e., Pissarides, C. & Stiglitz, J. 2020. Why inequality could spread COVID-19. The Lancet Public Health, 5, e240, doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30085-2.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

References

  1. ↵
    Hu, K., Zhao, Y., Wang, M., Zeng, Q., Wang, X., Wang, M., Zheng, Z., Li, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, T., Zeng, S., Jiang, Y., Liu, D., Yu, W., Hu, F., Qin, H., Hao, J., Yuan, J., Shang, R., Jiang, M., Ding, X., Zhang, B., Shi, B. & Zhang, C. 2020. Identification of a super-spreading chain of transmission associated with COVID-19. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.03.19.20026245.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    Lloyd-Smith, J. O., Schreiber, S. J., Kopp, P. E. & Getz, W. M. 2005. Superspreading and the effect of individual variation on disease emergence. Nature, 438, 355–359.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    Findlater, A. & Bogoch, I. I. 2018. Human Mobility and the Global Spread of Infectious Diseases: A Focus on Air Travel. Trends in Parasitology, 34, 772–783, doi:10.1016/j.pt.2018.07.004.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. Hoehl, S., Rabenau, H., Berger, A., Kortenbusch, M., Cinatl, J., Bojkova, D., Behrens, P., Böddinghaus, B., Götsch, U., Naujoks, F., Neumann, P., Schork, J., Tiarks -Jungk, P., Walczok, A., Eickmann, M., Vehreschild, M. J. G. T., Kann, G., Wolf, T., Gottschalk, R. & Ciesek, S. 2020. Evidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Returning Travelers from Wuhan, China. New England Journal of Medicine, 382, 1278–1280, doi:10.1056/NEJMc2001899.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. Jung, S.-m., Akhmetzhanov, A. R., Hayashi, K., Linton, N. M., Yang, Y., Yuan, B., Kobayashi, T., Kinoshita, R. & Nishiura, H. 2020. Real-time estimation of the risk of death from novel coronavirus (COVID-19) infection: Inference using exported cases. Journal of clinical medicine, 9, 523, doi:10.3390/jcm9020523.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. McCloskey, B. & Heymann, D. L. 2020. SARS to novel coronavirus - old lessons and new lessons. Epidemiology and infection, 148, e22–e22, doi:10.1017/S0950268820000254.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. Ng, O.-T., Marimuthu, K., Chia, P.-Y., Koh, V., Chiew, C. J., De Wang, L., Young, B. E., Chan, M., Vasoo, S., Ling, L.-M., Lye, D. C., Kam, K.-q., Thoon, K.-C., Kurupatham, L., Said, Z., Goh, E., Low, C., Lim, S.-K., Raj, P., Oh, O., Koh, V. T. J., Poh, C., Mak, T.-M., Cui, L., Cook, A. R., Lin, R. T. P., Leo, Y.-S. & Lee, V. J. M. 2020. SARS-CoV-2 Infection among Travelers Returning from Wuhan, China. New England Journal of Medicine, doi:10.1056/NEJMc2003100.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. Niehus, R., De Salazar, P. M., Taylor, A. & Lipsitch, M. 2020. Quantifying bias of COVID-19 prevalence and severity estimates in Wuhan, China that depend on reported cases in international travelers. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.02.13.20022707.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. Read, J. M., Bridgen, J. R., Cummings, D. A., Ho, A. & Jewell, C. P. J. m. 2020. Novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV: early estimation of epidemiological parameters and epidemic predictions.
  10. ↵
    Verity, R., Okell, L. C., Dorigatti, I., Winskill, P., Whittaker, C., Imai, N., Cuomo-Dannenburg, G., Thompson, H., Walker, P., Fu, H., Dighe, A., Griffin, J., Cori, A., Baguelin, M., Bhatia, S., Boonyasiri, A., Cucunuba, Z. M., Fitzjohn, R., Gaythorpe, K. A. M., Green, W., Hamlet, A., Hinsley, W., Laydon, D., Nedjati-Gilani, G., Riley, S., van-Elsand, S., Volz, E., Wang, H., Wang, Y., Xi, X., Donnelly, C., Ghani, A. & Ferguson, N. 2020. Estimates of the severity of COVID-19 disease. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.03.09.20033357.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Wells, C. R., Sah, P., Moghadas, S. M., Pandey, A., Shoukat, A., Wang, Y., Wang, Z., Meyers, L. A., Singer, B. H. & Galvani, A. P. 2020. Impact of international travel and border control measures on the global spread of the novel 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 7504, doi:10.1073/pnas.2002616117.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    Xia, Y., Jin, R., Zhao, J., Li, W. & Shen, H. 2020. Risk of COVID-19 for cancer patients. The Lancet Oncology, doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30150-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    Sajadi, M. M., Habibzadeh, P., Vintzileos, A., Shokouhi, S., Miralles-Wilhelm, F. & Amoroso, A. 2020. Temperature and latitude analysis to predict potential spread and seasonality for COVID-19. SSRN, 3550308.
  14. ↵
    Ficetola, G. F. & Rubolini, D. 2020. Climate affects global patterns of COVID-19 early outbreak dynamics. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.03.23.20040501.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    Lipsitch, M. 2020. Seasonality of SARS-CoV-2: Will COVID-19 go away on its own in warmer weather? Access date: 23/03/2020, https://ccdd.hsph.harvard.edu/will-covid-19-go-away-on-its-own-in-warmer-weather/.
  16. ↵
    Luo, W., Majumder, M. S., Liu, D., Poirier, C., Mandl, K. D., Lipsitch, M. & Santillana, M. 2020. The role of absolute humidity on transmission rates of the COVID-19 outbreak. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.02.12.20022467.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    O’Reilly, K. M., Auzenbergs, M., Jafari, Y., Liu, Y., Flasche, S. & Lowe, R. 2020. Effective transmission across the globe: the role of climate in COVID-19 mitigation strategies. The Lancet Planetary Health, 4, e172, doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30106-6.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  18. ↵
    Andersen, K. G., Rambaut, A., Lipkin, W. I., Holmes, E. C. & Garry, R. F. 2020. The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Nature Medicine, doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    EEA. 2019. European Environment Agency - Air quality in Europe - 2018. Access date, http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/air-quality-in-europe-2018/.
  20. ↵
    Cohen, J. & Kupferschmidt, K. 2020. Countries test tactics in ‘war’ against COVID-19. Science, 367, 1287, doi:10.1126/science.367.6484.1287.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    Xinhua. 2020. Full Text: Q&A on the Revisions to the Numbers of Confirmed Cases and Fatalities of COVID-19 in Wuhan. Access date: 17/04/2020, http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-04/17/c_138984721.htm.
  22. ↵
    Legido-Quigley, H., Mateos-García, J. T., Campos, V. R., Gea -Sánchez, M., Muntaner, C. & McKee, M. The resilience of the Spanish health system against the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Public Health, 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30060-8.
  23. ↵
    van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R. V., Brauer, M., Hsu, N. C., Kahn, R. A., Levy, R. C., Lyapustin, A., Sayer, A. M. & Winker, D. M. 2016. Global Estimates of Fine Particulate Matter Using a Combined Geophysical-Statistical Method with Information from Satellites. Environ Sci Technol, 50, 3762, doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b05833.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. ↵
    van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R. V., Brauer, M., Hsu, N. C., Kahn, R. A., Levy, R. C., Lyapustin, A., Sayer, A. M. & Winker, D. M. 2018. Global Annual PM2.5 Grids from MODIS, MISR and SeaWiFS Aerosol Optical Depth (AOD) with GWR, 1998-2016. Access date: 10/04/2020, https://doi.org/10.7927/H4ZK5DQS,doi:10.7927/H4ZK5DQS.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    WHO. 2018. WHO Global Ambient Air Quality Database (update 2018). Access date: 28/03/2020, https://www.who.int/airpollution/data/cities/en/.
  26. ↵
    Berman, L. 2017. China AQI Archive (Feb 2014 - Feb 2016). Access date, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/GHOXXO, doi:10.7910/DVN/GHOXXO.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  27. ↵
    EPA. 2019. Environmental Protection Agency - Air Data: Air Quality Data Collected at Outdoor Monitors Across the US. Access date, https://aqs.epa.gov/aqsweb/airdata/download_files.html#Annual.
  28. ↵
    Famulare, M. 2020. 2019-nCoV: preliminary estimates of the confirmed-case-fatality-ratio and infection-fatality-ratio, and initial pandemic risk assessment. Access date: 30/02/2020, https://institutefordiseasemodeling.github.io/nCoV-public/analyses/first_adjusted_mortality_estimates_and_risk_assessment/2019-nCoV-preliminary_age_and_time_adjusted_mortality_rates_and_pandemic_risk_assessment.html.
  29. ↵
    Li, R., Pei, S., Chen, B., Song, Y., Zhang, T., Yang, W. & Shaman, J. 2020. Substantial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV2). Science, eabb3221, doi:10.1126/science.abb3221.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    Vallero, D. A. 2014. Fundamentals of air pollution: Academic press
  31. ↵
    Chen, K., Wang, M., Huang, C., Kinney, P. L. & Anastas, P. T. 2020. Air pollution reduction and mortality benefit during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. The Lancet Planetary Health, doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(20)30107-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  32. Dutheil, F., Baker, J. S. & Navel, V. 2020. COVID-19 as a factor influencing air pollution? Environmental Pollution, 263, 114466, doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114466.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. Le Quéré, C., Jackson, R. B., Jones, M. W., Smith, A. J. P., Abernethy, S., Andrew, R. M., De-Gol, A. J., Willis, D. R., Shan, Y., Canadell, J. G., Friedlingstein, P., Creutzig, F. & Peters, G. P. 2020. Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement. Nature Climate Change, doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0797-x.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. Tollefson, J. How the coronavirus pandemic slashed carbon emissions — in five graphs. Nature, doi:10.1038/d41586-020-01497-0.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  35. ↵
    Venter, Z. S., Aunan, K., Chowdhury, S. & Lelieveld, J. 2020. COVID-19 lockdowns cause global air pollution declines with implications for public health risk. medRxiv, doi:10.1101/2020.04.10.20060673.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    Liu, Z., Deng, Z., Ciais, P., Lei, R., Davis, S. J., Feng, S., Zheng, B., Cui, D., Dou, X., He, P., Zhu, B., Lu, C., Ke, P.-y., Sun, T., Wang, Y., Yue, X., Wang, Y., Lei, Y., Zhou, H., Cai, Z., Wu, Y., Guo, R., Han, T., Xue, J., Boucher, O., Chevallier, F., Boucher, E., Wei, Y.-m., Zhang, Q., Guan, D., Gong, P., Kammen, D. M., He, K. & Schellnhuber, H. J. 2020. COVID-19 causes record decline in global CO2 emissions. arXiv, 2004.13614.
  37. ↵
    Burke, M. 2020. COVID-19 reduces economic activity, which reduces pollution, which saves lives. Access date: 29/03/2020, http://www.g-feed.com/2020/03/covid-19-reduces-economic-activity.html.
  38. ↵
    ESA. 2020. European Space Agency - Coronavirus lockdown leading to drop in pollution across Europe. Access date: 29/03/2020, https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-5P/Coronavirus_lockdown_leading_to_drop_in_pollution_across_Europe.
  39. ↵
    ESA. 2020. European Space Agency - COVID-19: nitrogen dioxide over China. Access date: 29/03/2020, https://earth.esa.int/web/guest/content/-/article/covid-19-nitrogen-dioxide-over-china.
  40. ↵
    ARPAV. 2020. Inquinamento dell’aria in Veneto. Perche’ la riduzione del traffico per l’emergenza COVID non incide sulle polveri. Access date: 29/03/2020, https://www.arpa.veneto.it/arpavinforma/comunicati-stampa/archivio/comunicati-2020/inquinamento-dellaria-in-veneto.-perche-la-riduzione-del-traffico-per-l2019emergenza-covid-non-incide-sulle-polveri.
  41. ↵
    Wang, P., Chen, K., Zhu, S., Wang, P. & Zhang, H. 2020. Severe air pollution events not avoided by reduced anthropogenic activities during COVID-19 outbreak. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 158, 104814, doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104814.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  42. ↵
    Paudel, J. 2020. Short-Run Environmental Effects of COVID-19: Evidence from Forest Fires. SSRN, doi:10.2139/ssrn.3597247.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  43. ↵
    Kraemer, M. U. G., Yang, C.-H., Gutierrez, B., Wu, C.-H., Klein, B., Pigott, D. M., du Plessis, L., Faria, N. R., Li, R., Hanage, W. P., Brownstein, J. S., Layan, M., Vespignani, A., Tian, H., Dye, C., Pybus, O. G. & Scarpino, S. V. 2020. The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science, eabb4218, doi:10.1126/science.abb4218.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. ↵
    Tobías, A. 2020. Evaluation of the lockdowns for the SARS -CoV-2 epidemic in Italy and Spain after one month follow up. Science of the Total Environment, 725, 138539, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138539.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
Posted June 23, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email
Early evidence of a higher incidence of COVID-19 in the air-polluted regions of eight severely affected countries
Riccardo Pansini, Davide Fornacca
medRxiv 2020.04.30.20086496; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.20086496
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools

Subject Area