Rapid Development of An Inactivated Vaccine for SARS-CoV-2

Encouraging Study Results for an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine

Link: Rapid Development of An Inactivated Vaccine for SARS-CoV-2

Researchers in the above study developed a pilot-scale production of a purified inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Administration of the vaccine induced SARS-CoV-2-specific neutralizing antibodies in mice, rats and non-human primates.

The antibodies produced in the animals neutralized 10 different SARS-CoV-2 strains. Immunization with two different doses  provided partial or complete protection (in macaques).  Systematic evaluation of the vaccine that it’s safe in macaques.

Early data to be sure, but encouraging. 

ADHS Data Dashboard Greatly Improved

Pay it a visit!

If it has been a few days since you’ve been to the ADHS’ data dashboard– make sure you make a new visit. There’s a lot more data there now including current trends and key healthcare facility metrics including hospital ICU capacity. There’s more detail on demographic data and a new feature looking at COVID-19 rates. One glance at those rates will give you newfound perspective on just how profound the health disparities are up in the northeast corner of the state. 

A shout out to the ADHS team of Laura Erhart, Teresa Jue, Susan Robinson, Wes Korteum, et.al. and the web design team led by Jesse Lewis for laying the data out in a consumable way.

New Arizona-Specific Modeling Released

All scenarios show adequate hospital capacity

The ADHS published a modeling report this week that provides state-specific projections of new cases and deaths based on the best available science and Arizona case data. The report produces daily counts for infected individuals, ICU use, and deaths for five different scenarios. 

It provides scenario-based estimates of resource needs for hospital beds, ICU beds, and ventilators but doesn’t include a capacity assessment.  A trip to the new ADHS Dashboard reveals that peak use in all of the AZ model scenarios are well below our existing capacity.

These modeling results build on the growing model results that suggest we are fine with our current hospital capacity.  Here’s Dr.Gerald’s latest model result summary, always a good source of information. Models that are well respected are included in Dr. Gerald’s work include the IHME Model developed by the University of Washington and the University of Texas Modeling Consortium which includes a GPS tool that quantifies the effectiveness of social distancing measures.  

Elective Procedure Ban Partially Lifted

Arizona’s hospitalization data and the predictive models have consistently shown that there is enough hospital bed and ICU capacity overall with a margin of safety (except for a hot spot in the northeast part of the state).  The overall safety margin for hospital capacity and the improving PPE situation means that hospitals should now be able to safely make their own decisions about what procedures to allow. 

Last week the governor declared that elective surgeries can resume if hospitals meet certain criteria starting May 1, 2020. We support this decision. 

This change will be a very good thing for many Arizonans who have been waiting for important procedures that have been canceled and or delayed. There is a common mis-perception that elective procedures are cosmetic procedures. That’s not the case, the vast majority of elective procedures are important surgeries like hip and knee replacements, and some kinds of cancer and cardiac surgeries etc.

Medical facilities can now ask the ADHS permission to proceed with elective procedures if they meet some criteria like:

  • Having more than 14 days worth of personal protective equipment for medical staff on hand;

  • Maintaining adequate staffing and bed capacity;

  • Screening staff, patients and visitors for COVID-19 symptoms;

  • Developing discharge plans for patients being transferred to nursing facilities that include COVID-19 testing; and 

  • Implementing an “enhanced” cleaning process for waiting areas.

You can read the governor’s announcement here.

Suicide Surveillance Report from Pima County

It’s no secret that economic distress and social isolation are risks factors for suicide. Mark Person from the Pima County Health Department published a suicide surveillance report with some disturbing results. Normally I would do some interpretation of the data- but in this case I think I’ll provide some excerpts from the surveillance report.

Recent suicide data has displayed a spike in the number of deaths recorded in Pima County for the first 28 days of March 2020. The sharpest increases were observed over the second half of March when 15 suicides were recorded in a 14-day time frame for an average slightly above one per day. This spike was more than double the amount from the previous 14 days

Although we cannot accurately estimate how much of this increase is being influenced by the current environment, we have been able to verify through record review that several of these deaths were influenced by isolation and the constant stream of negative media which exaggerates the sense of risk and fear associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

For these reasons, this alert also comes with a reminder of the psychological trauma that occurs as a result of exaggerated reporting and misused statistics presented out of context. This paired with uncertainty, financial stress, isolation, and reduced access to resources has placed all of our most vulnerable populations at a much higher risk than usual. The current statewide response to the pandemic is rightfully aimed at protecting individuals most susceptible to the virus.

However, given what we know about isolation, poverty, and the profound influence of social media, it’s of equal importance to focus on our most vulnerable populations who are absorbing a disproportionate amount of the consequences stemming from social distancing and financial decline.

The Number of Diagnostic Kits is Expanding

The FDA has a very streamlined process for authorizing the emergency use of a host of testing kits for the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).  Some are the classic PCR tests and some are antibody tests (IgM and IgG).

So far there are 30 different tests on the Emergency Use Authorization list.  Here is a link to the FDA’s  Test Kit Manufacturers Table which includes the manufacturer and their contact information, fact sheets for providers and patients and instructions.  

Guidance on COVID-19 Case Finding & Contract Tracing

The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials collaborated with Johns Hopkins University to produce A National Plan to Enable Comprehensive COVID-19 Case Finding and Contact Tracing in the US. The report calls for a robust and comprehensive system to identify all COVID-19 cases and trace all close contacts of each identified case, and outlines a vision—complete with resources and specific action steps—to accomplish this goal. Here’s the media release.

Also, the Singapore Ministry of Health has built a Contact Tracing App that conducts scaled contract tracing and involves public engagement in the process. They recently announced they’re making it open source.  The advantage of something like this is its value in identifying pre-symptomatic contacts, while maintaining confidentiality. 

I downloaded the App to test it out but couldn’t activate it because on the verification screen they have Singapore’s country code hard wired.

Federal Government Issues Reopening Guidelines

The federal government issued new guidelines to help state and local government officials with decision criteria to consider to relax some of the interventions currently in place without jeopardizing public health from exceeding hospital treatment capacity.

It’s a three-phase set of guidelines for governors and others to consider with the goal of mitigating the risk of resurgence and protect the most vulnerable. The guidelines specify symptoms, cases, and hospital capacity criteria that must be satisfied before proceeding to a phased comeback.

Take a look at the guidelines for yourself.  My take was that it is reasonably well thought out but there wasn’t any gating criteria emphasis (page 1) regarding diagnostic and antibody testing availability. 

That seems like a pretty big oversight to me- as testing availability is important for contact tracing (once community spread wanes).  Widespread accurate antibody testing is also important information for businesses to have access to as they plan their individual re-openings.

The guidelines don’t even mention predictive modeling as a gating criteria component.  Predictive modeling can provide important information for decision makers- arguably more important than the information provided by looking at simple trends in case counts (gating criteria number 2).

There’s also a big emphasis on syndromic survieillance in the gating criteria that (in my opinion) is given too high of a priority. I would have replaced the syndromic surveillance gating criteria with predictive modeling outcomes.