Skip to content

As I write this the day before Martin Luther King, Jr., Day I thank Dr. Norville Coots, CEO of Holy Cross Health in Silver Spring, MD, for leading me on a little discovery of Dr. King's words that were new to me. Apparently often misquoted due to lack of a prepared text or transcript, he was speaking at a press conference before and then during a speech at the convention of the Medical Committee for Human Rights in Chicago on March 25, 1966. According to scholar Dr. Charlene Galarneau, the correct quote is:

"Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health is the most shocking and the most inhuman because it often results in physical death."

Sadly the pandemic reminds us these words are still true.

Good News for Vaccinated Adolescents

This week saw the publication of updated information that the Pfizer vaccine offers significant protection against serious COVID-19 illness in 12- to 17-year-olds. In this case-control test-negative study design (a design commonly used to estimate vaccine effectiveness [VE] for influenza, for example), VE was 98% for both ICU admission and receipt of life-support. VE for hospitalization was 94%. All 7 deaths in the study group were in unvaccinated individuals. One caveat, however, the study time period ended in late October, before omicron.

A Variant Early Warning System?

I was intrigued by a preprint (i.e. not yet peer-reviewed) article describing a structural and machine-learning model for an early warning system (EWS) to predict whether new SARS-CoV-2 variants will develop into significant problems. Let me state 2 things up front: first, I am in no way capable of understanding the mathematics/artificial intelligence principles used to develop this EWS; and second, investigators at BioNTech contributed to its development. Pfizer/BioNTech funds the COVID-19 vaccine trial that I oversee at Children's National, but I don't think this presents a significant bias for me in assessing this article.

All of this starts with the basic genome sequence of a new variant. The sequence data are used to predict binding affinity of the virus to host cells and potential for immune escape (monoclonal, vaccine, and natural infection antibody failures). Machine learning analysis tries to predict what sequences contribute to these properties. All of this is combined into immune escape and fitness (transmissibility) scores for each variant.

The EWS claim to fame is that it predicted exactly what omicron is now doing, in the same week that the omicron sequence was first reported. In fact it did really well in predicting pandemic behavior of 12 of the 13 named variants (alpha, beta, gamma, epsilon, zeta, iota, theta, eta, kappa, lambda, and mu) very early. Alert clinicians and Greek scholars will quickly see that what the EWS missed, at least early on, was the behavior of the delta variant. The study authors attribute some of this delay to the fact that delta likely originated in India where government regulations prohibited export of biologic data and sequencing capabilities in the country were limited. In other words, the early sample size was too low to predict how bad delta would be.

The EWS is intended to be run on a continuous basis, reanalyzing new data as available. No mention of whether the results will be made available to the public; I fear that the involvement of for-profit corporations will mean less access.

Somebody pushed the reset button this past week. Although we don't yet have the weekly variant reports from CDC (they are published on Tuesdays) it is very clear from just my small world at Children's National Hospital that omicron has hit with a vengeance. I was speaking in the hallway on Friday with my longtime friend and esteemed colleague Dr. Larry D'Angelo who likened what we are seeing to the early situation in South Africa where omicron increased exponentially even while delta was still very much present. An important caveat, however: it's risky to make too much out of day-to-day data, many factors affect case rates and sometimes we can be misled by "hot off the presses" numbers.

A Triple Whammy Ahead?

Most winters in pre-pandemic times I kept my fingers crossed that we would not have our RSV and influenza seasons occur concurrently; the few years we had a double whammy like that it really strained our resources. This winter could be worse. The good news is that although RSV is still around it seems to be on a downward trend. However, influenza A numbers have been increasing both at Children's National and nationally, suggesting we will hit full-blown flu season soon. The second and third components of the trifecta are delta and omicron. If we see all 3 of these viruses causing infections in large numbers at the same time it will be very tough. One silver lining of the omicron era is that it may stimulate more individuals to seek out primary series and booster vaccinations. Also, with school winter break and perhaps a bit more caution on the part of the public, we might have less viral circulation the next couple of weeks. We'll see.

For now clinicians should remember we have two effective influenza antiviral medications, oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and baloxivir marboxil (Xofluza), available. From a treatment perspective we don't have a lot of choices for outpatient therapy for pediatric SARS-CoV-2 infections, and the monoclonal antibody combination bamlanivimab and etesivimab just authorized for use down to newborn ages but isn't likely to be effective against omicron. (Note that currently Children's National is not using age under 1 year as an independent risk factor for use of this combination.) NIH has a nice web site to check the latest on effects of different therapeutics for SARS-CoV2 variants, much based on in vitro data rather than solid efficacy studies because it's just too soon in the omicron wave for reliable analysis.

Setback and Hope for Pediatric COVID-19 Management

On December 17 we all learned via a press release that the Pfizer vaccine trial failed to reach the pre-established noninferiority margin for children 2 - 4 years of age, although that goal was reached in the 6 - 23 month old age group. As you know I am an investigator in that trial, at the time of this writing still waiting to hear specific plans for modification of the trial presumably to administer third doses to those children.

Also on December 17, CDC released reports of 2 studies of the "Test to Stay" (TTS) strategy for managing school attendance with positive covid cases, one from Los Angeles County, CA, and the other from Lake County, IL. A lot of us have been waiting for high-quality published data on this approach. The basic approach to TTS is described on the CDC web site, suffice to say ready access to testing must be available as well as compliance with masking and other prevention methods. We of course do not have data available for TTS efficacy in the omicron era but at the moment this seems to be a reasonable approach.

Bottom line for all of this, we are entering another worrisome time for COVID-19, no reason to panic but be careful and stay abreast of new developments. Please encourage everyone to get their influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations, including boosters for the latter.

2

Around the middle of this past week I was having trouble finding some interesting news to include for this week's blog. At the same time, scientists in South Africa were first confirming the alarming facts about what is now known as the omicron variant, and as a result I ended up with too much to cover this week. I hope I can help cut through some questions and inaccuracies circulating about this newest variant of concern.

I'll devote all of today's blog to omicron, it's that important, but I want to stress one point first. The government of South Africa has one of the premier pandemic monitoring systems in the world that has given the rest of the world a bit of a lead time to prepare in case omicron turns out to be the next game-changer in the pandemic. We'll probably never know the origins of this variant, but we already know a lot about it thanks to South Africa. Furthermore, much of what I'll be relaying below comes from a press conference in South Africa! Our sound-bite specialists in the US should take a page out of their book: let the actual scientists tell the story with their own words and graphs.

The Beginning of Omicron

As part of South Africa's surveillance system (set up in February 2020, by the way), epidemiologists noted a sharp increase in COVID-19 cases from districts in the province of Guateng. When samples taken November 12-20 were analyzed it became clear that this was a different variant containing many mutations in the spike protein genome. Some were well-known, others had not been described previously, but the main concern was the sheer number affecting a region of the genome that could dramatically change the behavior of the virus.

Looking at the gene diagrams from the press conference, I count 35 separate mutations in the spike protein gene of omicron. Scarier still is the fact that 10 of those are in the receptor binding domain (RBD), a key portion of the genome with regard to many phenotypic properties of SARS-CoV-2. By comparison, the delta variant has 2 mutations in the RBD. So, we need to look very carefully for evidence of how omicron behaves with regard to transmissibility, detectability, immune escape (evading immunity from natural infection and vaccines, poor response to monoclonal antibody or convalescent plasma therapy), and disease severity.

With respect to transmissibility, it is very likely that omicron has heightened ability to spread within a population. Preliminary data from Gauteng suggest a reproductive number of 1.93, not off the charts but pretty healthy. Note this estimate could change significantly because it is based on so few cases in just one country. More concerning is that in just a couple weeks it appears that omicron is replacing delta as the predominant strain in Gauteng and possibly in other provinces as well. The latter information comes from an interesting property of the variant that can be detected by PCR testing rather than waiting for the more technically-difficult and time-consuming method of whole genome sequencing (WGS). A new variant with increased transmissibility and multiple mutations that could affect other viral behavior makes omicron a great concern.

Omicron displays what is called "S gene dropout" where the S gene is so different that it tests negative for that gene in conventional PCR testing. Most PCR tests look at more than one gene, usually the nucleoprotein (N) and open reading frame (ORF) genes in addition to S. So, a specimen that is strongly positive for N or ORF but negative for S could very likely be omicron. As you might surmise, any PCR test that looks only at S gene will likely miss omicron altogether. Still, this property of omicron has allowed South African scientists to hypothesize that this new variant isn't just a fluke in one province but likely has extended across South Africa. What they are now seeing is this same S gene dropout in their newer cases elsewhere. WGS studies now in progress are needed to confirm this, and we should have those answers in the next several days.

Immune escape is a feared property of any variant. Delta expressed this to some degree; in general our vaccines and immune-based therapies don't work quite as well for delta as for the original SARS-CoV-2 strain, but they still provide decent protection from severe disease. At this point we just don't know if this is happening with omicron. We will know, likely within 1-2 weeks, how individual sera from people previously infected or vaccinated can neutralize omicron. It will take much longer to understand how innate immunity and the rest of the immune system behaves with this new variant. Every vaccine manufacturer is now scurrying to look at this and prepare new prototype vaccines in case they are needed for protection from omicron.

Does omicron cause more severe disease? That also will take a bit of time to know. In general, new outbreaks tend to affect younger and healthier populations; they are the ones more out and about to be exposed. So, we can be misled early on into thinking that this new variant is associated with milder disease. If it does spread more extensively we'll end up with a broader population infected and will have the answer to the question of disease severity. Unfortunately there isn't a reliable method to determine this in the laboratory.

What to Do Now?

In the US we may have a little lead time, although I'd be very surprised if we don't eventually learn that omicron is already here. First and foremost, we need to vaccinate the unvaccinated. Yes, it may be that the current vaccines turn out to be less effective against omicron, but based on everything we know about this virus it is clear that partial protection is far better than no protection. Second, everyone who is eligible for a booster should get one now. We do know that neutralizing antibody titers measured one month after a booster dose are very high; this can help overcome some slight decrease in effectiveness against omicron. Don't wait for a new vaccine tailored to omicron; this will take at least three months to see the light of day.

Third, we need to go back to those non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that have proved so successful in the past: masking especially for indoor activities, social distancing, good hand hygiene, and avoiding large gatherings. We already likely will have a spike in cases from Thanksgiving holiday activities; let's not aggravate an already problematic situation by ignoring NPIs.

Notice that I didn't mention travel bans among the NPIs. That's because they likely aren't effective in the long run. I guess one could argue that this ban on travel from 8 countries in southern Africa gives us another week or two to prepare for omicron.

I'll be watching immunization rates very closely the next couple of weeks; maybe we've learned our lesson and those who have been hesitant will come forward in larger numbers to start their vaccine series.

No One is Safe Until We All are Safe

The Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center tracks, among other topics, vaccination coverage across the world. It's very clear where the haves and have-nots reside. In Africa only one country, the small island nation of Mauritius, has a fully vaccinated rate of 72% that is above the world average. South Africa's rate is listed as 24% (compare to US of 60% which is pretty dismal itself), but South Africa actually has more vaccine doses available than it does residents seeking vaccine. However, many African countries are in the single digits and do not have access to vaccines. I reiterate that we need to remove all barriers to COVID-19 vaccination across the world. We are running out of Greek letters, but more importantly we are losing lives needlessly.

As we enter our second pandemic Thanksgiving holiday, I'm reminded we have a lot to be thankful for compared to a year ago. This time last year the only people who were vaccinated against COVID-19 were the relatively small numbers of subjects randomized to receive vaccine in the clinical trials. Now we know that our approved and authorized vaccines are both safe and effective and clearly have put a dent in the pandemic in the US. Also, we now have treatment options including two oral medications making their way through the FDA evaluation process. Unlike last year, many families will be able to gather safely to celebrate the holiday. For those that do, please be safe both in your travel plans and in your infection control practices.

The Number Needed to Vaccinate

Last week the FDA authorized booster doses of mRNA vaccines, and subsequently the CDC/ACIP met on November 19 to make their recommendations. Now everyone 18 years of age and older can get a booster if desired.

I won't bother to recite all of the data presented, suffice to say the new experimental data submitted by Pfizer and Moderna consisted primarily of antibody titers one month after a booster dose, along with some limited safety information. I did want to mention the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) just to give you an idea of how many people benefit from boosters at different age groups. NNV is a spinoff of the term number needed to treat which is another way of looking at data beyond p values. It was hoped it would be useful in explaining risks and benefits to lay people, but that hasn't quite been realized.

Dr. Oliver's presentation at ACIP looked at NNV for different age groups, telling us how many people would need to be vaccinated to prevent one additional person being infected or hospitalized with COVID-19. Slides 37 and 38 in her presentation display the data in graphical form.

Speaking just about the Pfizer data (NNVs are higher - i.e. less beneficial - for Moderna due to longer persistence of antibody), for persons like me 65 years and older 481 would need to receive a booster dose to prevent 1 additional hospitalization over a 6 month period. That's not bad, but of course the numbers get higher in the younger age groups. For 50-64 NNV is 2051, then 3361 for 30-49 year-olds and finally 8738 for the 18-29 year age group, which is not a great benefit. Know that these are predictions based on modeling and a lot of assumptions, but I think they are useful numbers to help you understand the magnitude of booster benefit. If you are like me, you're getting a lot of questions from parents about booster doses for teenagers and younger. Don't worry too much about that now, boosters aren't likely to be a big help for them. We'll know more once the children in the clinical trials have 6-month antibody levels drawn, coming soon.

Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy

Boosters aren't the way out of this mess, we still need to vaccinate the unvaccinated. According to multiple polls, a core group of adults in the US aren't going to be convinced to choose vaccination no matter what data are explained. They have made a decision and only choose to look at information that supports that decision. However, a lot of unvaccinated folks are open to discussion. For them, a new toolkit from our surgeon general, Dr. Vivek Murthy, is a good approach to try to correct misinformation. His advice to healthcare providers has 5 points: Listen, Empathize, Point to credible sources, Don't publicly shame, and Use inclusive language. It's a 22-page easy read, please take the time to look it over and decide how you can use it in your practice.

In a week without major pandemic news, it seems that the medical and lay media have found time to speculate about how this pandemic might end. Of course this is premature, we hardly know what to expect next month, let alone the years to come. It does give me an excuse to make some observations on current goings-on.

Medical Pundits Aren't Reading the Literature Carefully

I was flabbergasted when I learned of major news media outlets like NPR and Wall Street Journal giving voice to poorly-informed opinions related to COVID-19 vaccination of young children. In one, a mother who also is an adult infectious diseases physician expounded on her plan to deliberately spread out the interval between vaccine doses for her child because she had concluded a longer interval between doses resulted in longer-lasting immunity. In explaining her rationale, she seemed to have discounted the fact that she was guessing on extrapolation of studies in adults in entirely different settings and vaccines, not to mention the fact that only a 3-week interval has been studied for the Pfizer vaccine in younger children. We simply don't know what spreading out intervals will do, although this is certainly something to be studied particularly if we need to incorporate regular COVID-19 vaccination within the regular pediatric well-child visit schema. I absolutely support this mother's right to make decisions about her child's healthcare, but is it necessary to promote this poorly substantiated thought to the general public?

Worse was another piece where the authors cherry-picked superficial data from some pretty dense discussions at FDA and ACIP to reach similarly unfounded views regarding risks and benefits of pediatric COVID-19 vaccines. It appeared they hadn't read the source documents but rather looked at some slide presentations from Pfizer to point out presumed holes in CDC recommendations. A deeper dive to look at detailed briefing documents from FDA as well as discussion of 6 different vaccine risk/benefit scenarios, all concluding benefits exceed risks of vaccination in the 5-11 year-old age group, seems to refute their editorial points. Anyone could correctly accuse me of cherry-picking my discussions for this blog, but this is always informed by careful analysis of the original source documents.

Bottom line? Reading an opinion written by pundits in a respected media source doesn't guarantee you are reading an evidence-based conclusion.

I Will Be Safe When Everyone Else is Safe

Earlier in the pandemic we talked about herd immunity and ending SARS-CoV-2 transmission. That happy ending doesn't seem likely now; talk to a white-tailed deer in Iowa about it. Just don't get too close.

Many of us in the US are guilty of not giving enough voice to the global situation. We are all very pleased with availability of vaccines including boosters in our country, even though our immunization rates pale beside what less-resourced countries have accomplished. Let me point you to 2 sources to give you a view of the "pan" in this pandemic.

First is a great data source from Our World in Data. This site, updated daily, gives both quick and detailed looks at progress (or lack thereof) for COVID-19 vaccination across the globe. Note from the first map the horrific gaps in coverage in some countries, as well as the relatively poor showing in the resource-rich US. I probably don't need to remind you of how isolated outbreaks can become global problems very quickly. Remember Ebola?

Second is an article appearing recently in the BMJ that looked at life expectancy and premature mortality from the pandemic in 37 upper-middle and high income countries utilizing corrections for population age spectrum and other factors not often considered in this type of report. The US was second-worst to Russia in changes in life expectancy for populations, far worse than countries at the other end of the analysis such as Iceland, Denmark, Norway, South Korea, Taiwan, and New Zealand. Although all of those countries have differing circumstances, we can learn much from study of their mitigation strategies.