MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4293546449 · doi:10.1111/irv.13046

SARS‐CoV‐2 <scp>Omicron</scp> BA.5: Riding the seventh wave in Central Canada

2022· letter· en· W4293546449 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Toni Li, Adrian Yung, Carolyn Tran, Maximilien Boulet

Notice bibliographique

RevueInfluenza and Other Respiratory Viruses · 2022
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversityQueen's University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)NeutralizationVirologyPandemicTransmission (telecommunications)Neutralizing antibody2019-20 coronavirus outbreakAntibodyMedicineImmunologyOutbreakVirusDiseaseInternal medicineTelecommunicationsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 variant (Omicron) has spread aggressively around the world with rapid transmission in Canada identified within days of its classification as a variant of concern by the World Health Organization.1, 2 The BA.5 subvariant in particular has quickly spread to over 50 countries with recent rapid propagation in Central Canada, increasing from 45.8% to 78.2% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections in Ontario in the first half of July.3 Alongside, per cent positivity of testing increased from 8.4% to 14.8%, sufficient for the provincial government to declare a seventh wave driven by BA.5 on the 6th of July (Figure 1).4, 5 During the same time period, the Quebec government also reported a seventh wave, with BA.5 representing 75.5% of all SARS-CoV-2 infections in Quebec.6 The predominance of BA.5 in the most densely populated area of Canada indicates yet another pandemic epidemiological shift. Omicron and its subvariants have shown progressing neutralization escape properties towards both immunization as well as previous COVID-19 infection.7, 8 Initial lineages of Omicron already demonstrated lower vaccine effectiveness as compared with the Delta variant.8 However, neutralizing activity of mRNA vaccines have been significantly lower against newer sublineages of Omicron as compared with the initial lineages, with BA.5 in particular having substantially lower serum neutralizing titres when compared with BA.1 and BA.2.9 The spike-F486V mutation associated with neutralizing antibody resistance in BA.4 has also been identified in BA.5.7 These findings suggest subsequent sublineages of Omicron have continually expanded their neutralizing escape properties and have increased re-infection risk for patients with endogenous anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The successful development of bivalent vaccines, targeting both the original mRNA sequence as well as the newer sequence of Omicron and its subvariants, offers an alternative that may hinder escape properties.10 In addition, rapid antigen tests (RATs), also referred to as lateral flow tests, have been noted to have reduced diagnostic performance towards the Omicron variant when compared with the Delta variant.11 With decreased sensitivity towards Omicron and its descendent lineages, a single negative RAT result may not be a reliable indicator for ruling out infection. With RATs having superior accessibility, resource and cost efficiency, and turnaround time compared with the gold standard polymerase chain reaction test for the general public, this higher false negative rate may foster a false sense of security. This is particularly concerning given that cases have been documented as being infectious several days prior to testing positive on a RAT.11 As such, there may be value in the development of RATs with increased sensitivity to the most prevalent COVID-19 lineages based on regional epidemiological data. With Omicron and its subvariants having ever-increasing immune escape properties, considerable global resources have been invested in the development and production of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target specific components of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein receptor as a therapeutic option in treating COVID-19 infection.12, 13 While certain mAbs initially received rapid authorization for use, the propensity of COVID-19 subvariants to develop mutations and mount resistance against therapeutic management has resulted in reduced efficacy and the removal of certain therapies from clinical practice guidelines.13, 14 BA.5 in particular has been identified as having considerably lower neutralization sensitivity to various mAbs compared with the initial Omicron lineages.15 With the increasing development of resistance to existing therapy, there is considerable value in the research and development of therapeutic and prophylactic options that are targeted towards dominating global strains of COVID-19. Given the reduced protection from immunization and endogenous anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies towards BA.5 in addition to decreased sensitivity of RATs and efficacy of mAbs, there is considerable room for the development of superior prophylactic, therapeutic, and testing options. There continues to be great importance in remaining vigilant by following infection prevention and control best practices including maintaining robust respiratory and hand hygiene, self-isolating based on high-risk exposure or symptoms, and limiting nonessential travel. Receiving booster doses of mRNA vaccination, if available and accessible, may offer an additional layer of protection especially for vulnerable populations. Bivalent vaccines including new mRNA sequences may also increase efficacy and length of protection. Careful disease surveillance of metrics such as wastewater signal monitoring and hospitalization rates will facilitate rapid identification and interventions for regional epidemiological changes. The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the article. Toni Li: Conceptualization; data curation; supervision; visualization. Adrian Yung: Data curation. Carolyn Tran: Data curation. Maximilien Boulet: Supervision. The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1111/irv.13046. The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the Ontario Government Data Catalogue at https://data.ontario.ca/en/ and the Quebec Government Data Dashboard at https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coronavirus/situation-coronavirus-in-quebec/.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,993
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,133
Tête enseignante GPT0,359
Écart entre enseignants0,226 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations4
Publié2022
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInfluenza and Other Respiratory VirusesMême sujetSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchTravaux en français237 207