1 Abstract
Objective To track the statistical case fatality rate (CFR) in the second wave of the UK coronavirus outbreak, and to understand its variations over time.
Design Publicly available UK government data and clinical evidence on the time between first positive PCR test and death are used to determine the relationships between reported cases and deaths, according to age groups and across regions in England.
Main Outcome Measures Estimates of case fatality rates and their variations over time.
Results Throughout October and November 2020, deaths in England can be broadly understood in terms of CFRs which are approximately constant over time. The same CFRs prove a poor predictor of deaths when applied back to September, when prevalence of the virus was comparatively low, suggesting that the potential effect of false positive tests needs to be taken into account. Similarly, increasing CFRs are needed to match cases to deaths when projecting the model forwards into December. The growth of the S gene dropout VOC in December occurs too late to explain this increase in CFR alone, but at 33% increased mortality, it can explain the peak in deaths in January. Seasonal effects could be in part responsible for the early December increase in CFR, and if so, the estimate of increased mortality would be reduced. There is also evidence that the prevalence of B.1.1.7 may have been slower amongst older age groups, and if this is a factor, then 33% could be an underestimate of mortality. From the second half of January, the CFRs for older age groups show a marked decline. Since the fraction of the VOC has not decreased, this decline is likely to be the result of the rollout of vaccination. However, due to the rapidly decreasing nature of the raw cases, any imprecisions in the time-to-death distribution are magnified in this time period, rendering estimates of vaccination’s effect less precise.
Conclusions The relationship between cases and deaths, even when controlling for age, is not static through the second wave of coronavirus in England. An apparently anomalous low case-fatality ratio in September can be accounted for by a 0.4% false-positive fraction. The rapid growth in CFR in December can be understood in part in terms of a more deadly new variant B.1.1.7, while a decline in January correlates with vaccine roll-out, suggesting that vaccine reduce the severity of infection, as well as the risk.
What is already known on this topic The case fatality rate (CFR) is a useful measure which enables one to estimate future deaths based on current infections. In England, there was a surge in Covid-19 CFR around the beginning of December.
What the study adds Using it, we monitor the case-fatality rate across time, region and age group from publicly available case data. This quantity is related to the lethality of the virus. It shows a sharp increase in December 2020, which parallels the spread of the B.1.1.7 variant. The January peak in actual deaths matches that predicted by cases if B.1.1.7 is about 33% more deadly; this estimate would be lower if there is a seasonal effect on deaths, and higher if at the peak the variant was less pervasive amongst older age groups. A steady drop in CFR from January suggests that vaccination not only reduces transmission but also the risk of serious illness among those infected. It is notable that these conclusions are reached with publicly available data independent of clinical studies.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
Not a clinical trial
Funding Statement
We acknowledge funding from UKRI grant ST/V00221X/1 under COVID-19 initiative. This work was undertaken [in part] as a contribution to the Rapid Assistance in Modelling the Pandemic (RAMP) initiative, coordinated by the Royal Society. The funders had no role in considering the study design or in the collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the report, or decision to submit the article for publication.
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:
University of Edinburgh
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 data is publicly available online via links provided in the paper. Code is available on request.