The role of childrens’ vaccination for COVID-19—Pareto-optimal allocations of vaccines

COVID-19 vaccines have been approved for children of age five and older in many countries. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether children should be vaccinated and at what priority. In this work, we use mathematical modeling and optimization to study how vaccine allocations to different age groups effect epidemic outcomes. In particular, we consider the effect of extending vaccination campaigns to include the vaccination of children. When vaccine availability is limited, we consider Pareto-optimal allocations with respect to competing measures of the number of infections and mortality and systematically study the trade-offs among them. In the scenarios considered, when some weight is given to the number of infections, we find that it is optimal to allocate vaccines to adolescents in the age group 10-19, even when they are assumed to be less susceptible than adults. We further find that age group 0-9 is included in the optimal allocation for sufficiently high values of the basic reproduction number.     

COVID-19: vaccination problems

This minireview addresses problems of financing the vaccine development, regulatory questions, the ethics and efficacy of vaccine prioritization strategies and the coverage of variant viruses by current vaccines. Serious adverse effects observed with adenovirus vectored vaccines and mRNA vaccines in mass vaccination campaigns are reported. The ethical problems of continuing with placebo controlled vaccine trials and alternative clinical trial protocols are discussed as well as concrete vaccination issues such as the splitting of doses, the delaying of the second dose, the immunization with two different vaccine types and the need of vaccinating seropositive subjects. Strategies to increase vaccine acceptance in the population are shortly mentioned.     

Risk assessment and evaluation of China’s policy to prevent COVID-19 cases imported by plane

As of October 5, 2020, China has reported 2,921 cases imported from overseas. Assessing the effectiveness of China''s current policies on imported cases abroad is very important for China and other countries that are facing or will face overseas imported cases. In April, we used a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered metapopulation model to simulate the epidemic in seven foreign countries, China and the three Chinese key cities. Based on the model outside China, we estimated the proportion of people in incubation period and calculated the risk indexes for Chinese cities through analyzing aviation traffic data from these countries. Based on the model in China and the three key cities, we collected information on control measures and quantified the effectiveness of implementing the current policies at different times and intensities. Our model results showed that Shanghai, Beijing, Qingdao, Guangzhou, and Tianjin have the top five risk indexes. As of April 20, 2020, under current measures, the number of confirmed cases could be reduced by 99% compared with no air traffic restrictions and isolation measures; the reduction could be 93% with isolation of passengers only from key countries. If the current policy were postponed for 7, 10, or 20 days, the increase in the number of confirmed cases would be 1,329, 5,524, and 779,245 respectively, which is 2^.1, 5^.7, and 662^.9 times the number of confirmed cases under current measures. Our research indicates that the importation control measures currently taken by China were implemented at an appropriate time to prevent the epidemic spreading and have achieved relatively good control results. However, it is necessary to remain vigilant; otherwise, another outbreak peak could occur.     

Impact of COVID-19 on public’s interest in radiotherapy and other cancer treatments: a cross-sectional Google Trends analysis

BackgroundCOVID-19 has significantly impacted cancer care. While previous studies have emphasized treatment modification and prioritized the delivery of cancer care, few have examined this issue from the public perspective.Materials and methodsIn the following study, we examine how public interest in various forms of cancer treatment has evolved during the pandemic using Google Trends. One-way ANOVA and linear regression tests were used to compare the mean search volume indices of three periods: pre-lockdown, lockdown, and reopening.Results/ConclusionsOur findings suggest that public interest in cancer treatments decreased during lockdown and returned after reopening but, in general, is still lower than pre-lockdown levels. Despite that, healthcare professionals should strive to provide timely cancer care, assuage patients’ fears of healthcare settings, and encourage patients to continue proper cancer screenings.