Optimizing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategies in France: Results from a stochastic agent-based model

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic is a major global societal, economic and health threat. The availability of COVID-19 vaccines has raised hopes for a decline in the pandemic. We built upon a stochastic agent-based microsimulation model of the COVID-19 epidemic in France. We examined the potential impact of different vaccination strategies, defined according to the age, medical conditions, and expected vaccination acceptance of the target non-immunized adult population, on disease cumulative incidence, mortality, and number of hospital admissions. Specifically, we examined whether these vaccination strategies would allow to lift all non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs), based on a sufficiently low cumulative mortality and number of hospital admissions. While vaccinating the full adult non-immunized population, if performed immediately, would be highly effective in reducing incidence, mortality and hospital-bed occupancy, and would allow discontinuing all NPIs, this strategy would require a large number of vaccine doses. Vaccinating only adults at higher risk for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, i.e. those aged over 65 years or with medical conditions, would be insufficient to lift NPIs. Immediately vaccinating only adults aged over 45 years, or only adults aged over 55 years with mandatory vaccination of those aged over 65 years, would enable lifting all NPIs with a substantially lower number of vaccine doses, particularly with the latter vaccination strategy. Benefits of these strategies would be markedly reduced if the vaccination was delayed, was less effective than expected on virus transmission or in preventing COVID-19 among older adults, or was not widely accepted.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.17.21249970: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.


    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.


    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has several limitations. First, as with all modeling studies, we rely on existing knowledge and current assumptions, that might need to be revised with advances in knowledge of this novel disease. Second, there are still uncertainties concerning vaccine effectiveness, availability, and acceptance. Although we used real world data for acceptance and data from large phase III clinical trials for vaccine efficacy, we cannot rule out heterogeneity in vaccine effectiveness and uptake that would be tied to COVID-19 risk. For example, if more at-risk individuals do not accept vaccination, it may reduce the efficacy of the tested strategies.35 Third, we considered that infected people could develop immunity for at least several months.36 Although post-COVID-19 immunity length remains incompletely known, this assumption has not been rejected, with only a small number of reinfection cases reported. Fourth, we considered that vaccination in each scenario would be virtually achieved by January 15th, 2021 and calculated the number of vaccine doses needed in each scenario. While this is unrealistic, our objective was to assess which vaccination strategies might permit safe discontinuation of NPIs if performed immediately. Although implementation of such strategies may require weeks if not months during which NPIs should be maintained, we preferred this approach instead of making uncertain assumptions concerning population behaviors during the next months. Finally, the results sho...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.


    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.


    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.


    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.