Infectivity of Omicron BA.5 Comparison with Original Strain and Other Mutated Strain of SARS-CoV-2 in Japan

IF 0.7 Q4 GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Disaster Research Pub Date : 2023-01-20 DOI:10.20965/jdr.2023.p0004
J. Kurita, T. Sugawara, Y. Ohkusa
{"title":"Infectivity of Omicron BA.5 Comparison with Original Strain and Other Mutated Strain of SARS-CoV-2 in Japan","authors":"J. Kurita, T. Sugawara, Y. Ohkusa","doi":"10.20965/jdr.2023.p0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Earlier studies have indicated the BA.5 sublineage of Omicron variant strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as more infective than BA.2. Object: This study estimated BA.5 infectivity while controlling other factors possibly affecting BA.5 infectivity including vaccine effectiveness, waning effectiveness, other mutated strains, Olympic Games, and countermeasures. Method: The effective reproduction number R(t) was regressed on shares of BA.5 and vaccine coverage, vaccine coverage with some delay, temperature, humidity, mobility, shares of other mutated strains, countermeasures including the Go to Travel Campaign, and the Olympic Games and associated countermeasures. The study period was February 2020–July 22, 2022, using data available on August 12, 2022. Results: A 120 day lag was assumed to assess waning. Mobility, some states of emergency, vaccine coverage and those with lag, and the Delta and Omicron BA.2 proportions were found to be significant. The omicron BA.1 proportion was significant, but with an unexpected sign. The estimated coefficient of BA.5 was negative but not significant. The Go to Travel Campaign was significantly negative, indicating reduced infectivity. The Olympic Games were negative but not significant, indicating that they did not raise infectivity. Discussion: The obtained estimated results show that BA.5 did not have higher infectivity than the original strain. It was lower than either Delta or Omicron BA.2 variant strains. That finding might be inconsistent with results obtained from earlier studies. This study controlled several factors potentially affecting R(t), though the earlier studies did not. Therefore, results from this study might be more reliable than those of earlier studies.","PeriodicalId":46831,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disaster Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disaster Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2023.p0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Earlier studies have indicated the BA.5 sublineage of Omicron variant strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) as more infective than BA.2. Object: This study estimated BA.5 infectivity while controlling other factors possibly affecting BA.5 infectivity including vaccine effectiveness, waning effectiveness, other mutated strains, Olympic Games, and countermeasures. Method: The effective reproduction number R(t) was regressed on shares of BA.5 and vaccine coverage, vaccine coverage with some delay, temperature, humidity, mobility, shares of other mutated strains, countermeasures including the Go to Travel Campaign, and the Olympic Games and associated countermeasures. The study period was February 2020–July 22, 2022, using data available on August 12, 2022. Results: A 120 day lag was assumed to assess waning. Mobility, some states of emergency, vaccine coverage and those with lag, and the Delta and Omicron BA.2 proportions were found to be significant. The omicron BA.1 proportion was significant, but with an unexpected sign. The estimated coefficient of BA.5 was negative but not significant. The Go to Travel Campaign was significantly negative, indicating reduced infectivity. The Olympic Games were negative but not significant, indicating that they did not raise infectivity. Discussion: The obtained estimated results show that BA.5 did not have higher infectivity than the original strain. It was lower than either Delta or Omicron BA.2 variant strains. That finding might be inconsistent with results obtained from earlier studies. This study controlled several factors potentially affecting R(t), though the earlier studies did not. Therefore, results from this study might be more reliable than those of earlier studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
奥密克戎BA.5与日本严重急性呼吸系统综合征冠状病毒2型原始株和其他突变株的感染性比较
背景:早期研究表明,严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2型奥密克戎变异株BA.5亚系比BA.2更具传染性。目的:本研究估计了BA.5的传染性,同时控制了可能影响BA.5传染性的其他因素,包括疫苗效力、效力减弱、其他变异毒株、奥运会和对策。方法:将有效繁殖数R(t)回归到BA.5和疫苗覆盖率的份额、有一定延迟的疫苗覆盖率、温度、湿度、流动性、其他变异毒株的份额、包括去旅行运动和奥运会在内的对策以及相关对策。研究期间为2020年2月至2022年7月22日,使用2022年8月12日的可用数据。结果:假设滞后120天来评估衰退。流动性、一些紧急状态、疫苗覆盖率和滞后状态,以及德尔塔和奥密克戎BA.2的比例被发现是显著的。奥密克戎BA.1的比例是显著的,但有一个意想不到的迹象。BA.5的估计系数是负的,但不显著。“去旅行”运动明显呈阴性,表明传染性降低。奥运会是阴性的,但并不显著,这表明它们没有提高传染性。讨论:所获得的估计结果表明BA.5没有比原始菌株更高的传染性。它低于德尔塔或奥密克戎BA.2变异株。这一发现可能与早期研究的结果不一致。这项研究控制了几个可能影响R(t)的因素,尽管早期的研究没有。因此,这项研究的结果可能比早期研究的结果更可靠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Disaster Research
Journal of Disaster Research GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
37.50%
发文量
113
期刊最新文献
Impact Resistance Test of Cladding by Using Gravel Applicability of a Modified I-D Method for Predicting Slope Failure to Different Slopes Disaster Preparedness Using Local Wisdom Approach in Palu City Stochastic Precipitation Model Using Large Ensemble Data Estimation of the Seismic Source of the 1974 Lima Peru Earthquake and Tsunami (Mw 8.1)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1