Abstract
Introduction The B.1.617.2 variant (Delta) was associated with increased transmissibility and lower vaccine effectiveness than the B.1.1.7 variant (Alpha). However, the effect of the B.1.617.2 variant on disease severity remains unclear. This study aims to assess whether infection with the B.1.617.2 variant was associated with a higher risk of serious illness, compared with other co-circulating variants, measured through hospitalization and death by COVID-19 in Portugal.
Methods We conducted a matched cohort study in adult individuals diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 infection between March 29 and August 1, 2021. Cases were individuals with a positive PCR test notified to the surveillance system. SARS-CoV-2 variants were classified first by genomic sequencing (WGS) and, if this information was unavailable, by detecting the S gene target failure.
Delta (B.1.617.2) and Alpha (B.1.1.7) cases were matched on the week of diagnosis at a 1 to k ratio (k being the maximum number of unexposed available in that week) to maximize the inclusion of unexposed, using the nearest-neighbor algorithm. The hazard risk and 95% confidence intervals of hospitalization and death among those infected with the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant vs. Alpha (B.1.1.7) was estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for confounding for sex, age, and vaccination status.
Results A total of 2,778 cases were included in the study. Of the total, 1 742 (68%) were identified as B.1.617.2 variant cases and 3 629 (32%) as B.1.1.7 variant. Within the B.1.1.7 variant cases 106 (2.9%) were hospitalized, and 110 (6.3%) within the B.1.617.2 variant cases. A total of 29 deaths were reported, 8 (0.2%) in patients infected with B.1.1.7 variant and 21 (1.2%) in patients with the B.1.617.2 variant. The confounding adjusted risk of hospitalization, in persons infected with the B.1.617.2 variant was 2.44 (95%CI 1.85; 3.20) times higher than the risk of hospitalization among B.1.1.7 variant cases, and the confounding-adjusted risk of death for B.1.617.2 variant cases was 5.20 (95%CI 2.20; 12.29) times higher than the risk of death in patients infected by B.1.1.7 variant.
Conclusion The B.1.617.2 variant is associated with an increased risk of hospitalization and death compared with the B.1.1.7 variant.
Competing Interest Statement
EFR - is a board member at UPHILL, a software company that provides digital training solutions and that has customers in the pharmaceutical sector (e.g. Pfizer). No business was conducted between the two entities regarding mRNA vaccine products or similar, neither related to the abovementioned study APS - Is an expert in an advisory board of a COVID-19 drug in Portugal.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
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:
Ethics committee/IRB of Portuguese National Institute of Health gave ethical approval for this work
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: None
Funding statement: None
Data Availability Statement: data can be provided by the data owners upon reasonable request
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors