RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 The impacts of increased global vaccine sharing on the COVID-19 pandemic; a retrospective modelling study
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.01.26.22269877
DO 10.1101/2022.01.26.22269877
A1 Moore, Sam
A1 Hill, Edward M.
A1 Dyson, Louise
A1 Tildesley, Michael J.
A1 Keeling, Matt J.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/01/27/2022.01.26.22269877.abstract
AB Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has generated considerable morbidity and mortality world-wide. While the protection offered by vaccines (and booster doses) offers a method of mitigating the worst effects, by the end of 2021 the distribution of vaccine was highly heterogeneous with some countries achieving over 90% coverage in adults by the end of 2021, while others have less than 2%. In part, this is due to the availability of sufficient vaccine, although vaccine hesitancy also plays a role.Methods We use an age-structured model of SARS-CoV-2 dynamics, matched to national data from 152 countries, to investigate the global impact of different vaccine sharing protocols during 2021. We assume a direct relationship between the emergence of variants with increased transmissibility and the cumulative amount of global infection, such that lower global prevalence leads to a lower reproductive number within each country. We compare five vaccine sharing scenarios, from the current situation, through sharing once a particular within-country threshold is reached (e.g. all over 40s have received 2 doses), to full sharing where all countries achieve equal age-dependent vaccine deployment.Findings Compared to the observed distribution of vaccine uptake, we estimate full vaccine sharing would have generated a 1.5% (PI -0.1 - 4.5%) reduction in infections and a 11.3% (PI 0.6 - 23.2%) reduction in mortality globally by January 2022. The greatest benefit of vaccine sharing would have been experienced by low and middle income countries, who see an average 5.2% (PI 2.5% - 10.4%) infection reduction and 26.8% (PI 24.1% - 31.3%) mortality reduction. Many high income countries, that have had high vaccine uptake (most notably Canada, Chile, UK and USA), suffer increased infections and mortality under most of the sharing protocols investigated, assuming no other counter measures had been taken. However, if reductions in vaccine supply in these countries had been offset by prolonged use of non-pharmaceutical intervention measures, we predict far greater reductions in global infection and mortality of 64.5% (PI 62.6% - 65.4%) and 62.8% (PI 44.0% - 76.3%), respectively.Interpretation By itself, our results suggest that although more equitable vaccine distribution would have had limited impact on overall infection numbers, vaccine sharing would have substantially reduced global mortality by providing earlier protection of the most vulnerable. If increased vaccine sharing from high income nations had been combined with slower easing of non pharmaceutical interventions to compensate for this, a large reduction in both infection and mortality globally would be expected, confounded by a lower risk of new variants arising.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSEM, MJK and MJT were supported by the Vaccine Efficacy Evaluation for Priority Emerging Diseases(VEEPED) project through the National Institute for Health Research using Official Development Assistance(ODA) funding. LD, MJT and MJK were supported by UKRI through the JUNIPER modelling consortium [grant number MR/V038613/1]. LD, MJT and MJK were supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through the MathSys CDT [grant number EP/S022244/1]. MJK, EMH and MJT were supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [grant number: BB/S01750X/1]. MJK and SEM were supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) [Policy Research Programme, Mathematical & Economic Modelling for Vaccination and Immunisation Evaluation, and Emergency Response; NIHR200411]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. MJK is affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Gastrointestinal Infections at University of Liverpool in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA), in collaboration with University of Warwick. MJK is also affiliated to the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Genomics and Enabling Data at University of Warwick in partnership with UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). The views expressed are those of the author(s)and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or UK Health Security Agency. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.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).YesI 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.YesThe study was based on data from a variety of publicly available sources: population demographic data provided by the WHO [26]; Income group classifications given by the World Bank [24]; COVID vaccine deployment provided by Our World in Data [6]; COVID mortality and infection estimates to date made by the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation [19]; data on COVID variants collated by GISAID [21].