RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Increased infections, but not viral burden, with a new SARS-CoV-2 variant JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2021.01.13.21249721 DO 10.1101/2021.01.13.21249721 A1 Walker, A. Sarah A1 Vihta, Karina-Doris A1 Gethings, Owen A1 Pritchard, Emma A1 Jones, Joel A1 House, Thomas A1 Bell, Iain A1 Bell, John I A1 Newton, John N A1 Farrar, Jeremy A1 Diamond, Ian A1 Studley, Ruth A1 Rourke, Emma A1 Hay, Jodie A1 Hopkins, Susan A1 Crook, Derrick A1 Peto, Tim A1 Matthews, Philippa C. A1 Eyre, David W. A1 Stoesser, Nicole A1 Pouwels, Koen B. A1 COVID-19 Infection Survey team YR 2021 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/01/15/2021.01.13.21249721.abstract AB Background A new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01, was identified in the UK in December-2020. Direct estimates of its potential to enhance transmission are limited.Methods Nose and throat swabs from 28-September-2020 to 2-January-2021 in the UK’s nationally representative surveillance study were tested by RT-PCR for three genes (N, S and ORF1ab). Those positive only on ORF1ab+N, S-gene target failures (SGTF), are compatible with B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01. We investigated cycle threshold (Ct) values (a proxy for viral load), percentage of positives, population positivity and growth rates in SGTF vs non-SGTF positives.Results 15,166(0.98%) of 1,553,687 swabs were PCR-positive, 8,545(56%) with three genes detected and 3,531(23%) SGTF. SGTF comprised an increasing, and triple-gene positives a decreasing, percentage of infections from late-November in most UK regions/countries, e.g. from 15% to 38% to 81% over 1.5 months in London. SGTF Ct values correspondingly declined substantially to similar levels to triple-gene positives. Population-level SGTF positivity remained low (<0.25%) in all regions/countries until late-November, when marked increases with and without self-reported symptoms occurred in southern England (to 1.5-3%), despite stable rates of non-SGTF cases. SGTF positivity rates increased on average 6% more rapidly than rates of non-SGTF positives (95% CI 4-9%) supporting addition rather than replacement with B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01. Excess growth rates for SGTF vs non-SGTF positives were similar in those up to high school age (5% (1-8%)) and older individuals (6% (4-9%)).Conclusions Direct population-representative estimates show that the B.1.1.7/VOC202012/01 SARS-CoV-2 variant leads to higher infection rates, but does not seem particularly adapted to any age group.Competing Interest StatementDWE declares lecture fees from Gilead, outside the submitted work. No other author has a conflict of interest to declare.Clinical TrialISRCTN21086382Clinical Protocols https://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/covid-19/covid-19-infection-survey/protocol-and-information-sheets Funding StatementThis study is funded by the Department of Health and Social Care with in-kind support from the Welsh Government, the Department of Health on behalf of the Northern Ireland Government and the Scottish Government. ASW, KDV, EP, TEAP, NS, DE, KBP are supported by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at the University of Oxford in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) (NIHR200915). ASW and TEAP are also supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. EP and KBP are also supported by the Huo Family Foundation. ASW is also supported by core support from the Medical Research Council UK to the MRC Clinical Trials Unit [MC_UU_12023/22] and is an NIHR Senior Investigator. PCM is funded by Wellcome (intermediate fellowship, grant ref 110110/Z/15/Z) and holds an NIHR Oxford BRC Senior Fellowship award. DWE is supported by a Robertson Fellowship and an NIHR Oxford BRC Senior Fellowship. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, NIHR, Department of Health, or PHE.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study received ethical approval from the South Central Berkshire B Research Ethics Committee in the UK (20/SC/0195).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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.YesDe-identified study data are available for access by accredited researchers in the ONS Secure Research Service (SRS) for accredited research purposes under part 5, chapter 5 of the Digital Economy Act 2017. For further information about accreditation, contact Research.Support@ons.gov.uk or visit the SRS website.