Abstract
Background: Given the continuing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and much of the U.S. implementing social distancing due to the lack of alternatives, there has been a push to develop a vaccine to eliminate the need for social distancing. Methods: In 2020, we developed a computational model of the U.S. simulating the spread of COVID-19 coronavirus and vaccination. Results: Simulation experiments revealed that when vaccine efficacy exceeded 70%, coverage exceeded 60%, and vaccination occurred on day 1, the attack rate dropped to 22% with daily cases not exceeding 3.2 million (reproductive rate, R0, 2.5). When R0 was 3.5, the attack rate dropped to 41% with daily cases not exceeding 14.4 million. Increasing coverage to 75% when vaccination occurred by day 90 resulted in 5% attack rate and daily cases not exceeding 258,029when R0 was 2.5 and a 26% attack rate and maximum daily cases of 22.6 million when R0 was 3.5. When vaccination did not occur until day 180, coverage (i.e., those vaccinated plus those otherwise immune) had to reach 100%. A vaccine with an efficacy between 40% and 70% could still obviate the need for other measures under certain circumstances such as much higher, and in some cases, potentially unachievable, vaccination coverages. Conclusion: Our study found that to either prevent or largely extinguish an epidemic without any other measures (e.g., social distancing), the vaccine has to have an efficacy of at least 70%.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was supported in part by the City University of New York Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ, via Grant No. R01HS023317), US Agency for International Development (under Agreement No. AID-OAA-A-15-00064), and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (Grant Nos. U01HD086861 and 5R01HD086013-02). The funders did not have any role in the study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data, writing the report, and the decision to submit the report for publication. The authors of this manuscript are responsible for its content, including data analysis. Statements in the manuscript do not necessarily represent the official views of, or imply endorsement by, the National Institutes of Health, AHRQ, or the Department of Health and Human Services.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
IRB exempt
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All relevant data available in manuscript.
