PreprintCited by 1,611SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchCOVID-19 epidemiological studiesSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing

Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Lineage B.1.1.7 in England: Insights from linking epidemiological and genetic data

Open access
Volz, Erik, Mishra, Swapnil, Chand, Meera, Barrett, Jeffrey C., Johnson, Robert, Geidelberg, Lily, Hinsley, Wes R, Laydon, Daniel J +27 more·2021·Nature

Preprint — published as 10.1038/s41586-021-03470-x · Paper page

Abstract

The SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7, now designated Variant of Concern 202012/01 (VOC) by Public Health England, originated in the UK in late Summer to early Autumn 2020. We examine epidemiological evidence for this VOC having a transmission advantage from several perspectives. First, whole genome sequence data collected from community-based diagnostic testing provides an indication of changing prevalence of different genetic variants through time. Phylodynamic modelling additionally indicates that genetic diversity of this lineage has changed in a manner consistent with exponential growth. Second, we find that changes in VOC frequency inferred from genetic data correspond closely to changes inferred by S-gene target failures (SGTF) in community-based diagnostic PCR testing. Third, we examine growth trends in SGTF and non-SGTF case numbers at local area level across England, and show that the VOC has higher transmissibility than non-VOC lineages, even if the VOC has a different latent period or generation time. Available SGTF data indicate a shift in the age composition of reported cases, with a larger share of under 20 year olds among reported VOC than non-VOC cases. Fourth, we assess the association of VOC frequency with independent estimates of the overall SARS-CoV-2 reproduction number through time. Finally, we fit a semi-mechanistic model directly to local VOC and non-VOC case incidence to estimate the reproduction numbers over time for each. There is a consensus among all analyses that the VOC has a substantial transmission advantage, with the estimated difference in reproduction numbers between VOC and non-VOC ranging between 0.4 and 0.7, and the ratio of reproduction numbers varying between 1.4 and 1.8. We note that these estimates of transmission advantage apply to a period where high levels of social distancing were in place in England; extrapolation to other transmission contexts therefore requires caution.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/2020.12.30.20249034

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mild restrictions that kept the parametric reproduction number around 0.9 with the original virus strain would keep it around 1.3 (at least) if new variants increase transmissibility by at least 40-50%.

    “In particular, the mild restrictions that kept around 0.9 with the original virus strain would keep it around 1.3 (at least) if the new variants increase transmissibility of at least 40–50%, as reported in the literature49–51.”

    From Modeling vaccination rollouts, SARS-CoV-2 variants and the requirement for non-pharmaceutical interventions in Italy (2021) · cites this paper as [49]

    In 'Estimating reproduction numbers for VOC and non-VOC independently' (page unavailable), the paper reports mean reproduction numbers of 0.92 for non-VOC strains and 1.45 for B.1.1.7 during England’s second lockdown. The Abstract (page unavailable) estimates a 1.4–1.8 ratio, supporting the approximate numerical comparison. But the paper describes high levels of social distancing, not mild restrictions, and cautions against extrapolating its estimate to other transmission contexts or variants. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Recently, viral variants of concern have emerged in the UK (B.1.1.7), South Africa (B.1.351), and Brazil (P.1) that harbor specific mutations in their S proteins that may be associated with increased transmissibility.

    “Recently, viral variants of concern have emerged in the UK (B.1.1.7), South Africa (B.1.351), and Brazil (P.1) that harbor specific mutations in their S proteins that may be associated with increased transmissibility (50–55).”
  • SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV enter host cells through binding of the S glycoprotein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2).

    “SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV enter host cells through binding of the S glycoprotein to angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2)1,28.”
  • The N501Y mutation has been reported to increase transmissibility of the B.1.17 variant circulating in the UK.

    “and has been reported to increase transmissibility of the B.1.17 variant circulating in the UK.16”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Volz, E., Mishra, S., Chand, M., Barrett, J. C., Johnson, R., Geidelberg, L., Hinsley, W. R., Laydon, D. J., Dabrera, G., O’Toole, Á., Amato, R., Ragonnet-Cronin, M., Harrison, I., Jackson, B., Ariani, C. V., Boyd, O., Loman, N. J., McCrone, J. T., Gonçalves, S., Jorgensen, D., Myers, R., Hill, V., Jackson, D. K., Gaythorpe, K., Groves, N., Sillitoe, J., Kwiatkowski, D. P., The COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) consortium, Flaxman, S., Ratmann, O., Bhatt, S., Hopkins, S., Gandy, A., Rambaut, A., & Ferguson, N. M.
Affiliations
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • Public Health England (GB)
  • Wellcome Sanger Institute (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
Corresponding author
  • Volz, Erik
  • Ferguson, Neil M
Venue
Nature
Publisher
openRxiv
Published
2021-01-04
Volume
593
Issue
7858
Pages
266-269
ISSN
0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3136588845
Cited by
1,611
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 86 · 2024: 116 · 2023: 216 · 2022: 464 · 2021: 685 · 2020: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
116.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP 1175094, 206194, OPP1197730, MR/R015600/1, OPP1084362)
  • Wellcome Trust (MR/R015600/1, 204911/Z/16/Z, Z/17/Z, 206298/Z/17/Z, RDA02, 206298, 206194)
  • UK Research and Innovation (MR/V038109/1, MR/R015600/1, MC_PC_19027)
  • National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit
  • Cancer Research UK (23923)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (PR-OD-1017–20002, MR/R015600/1, RDA02, NIHR301445, OPP1175094, ACF-2018-04-014)
  • Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS-CSF4-Torok, SBF004\1080)
  • Imperial College London (MR/R015600/1)
  • European Commission (725422, MR/R015600/1, 101003653, COVID-19, 206298/Z/17/Z)
  • Rural Development Administration
  • Novo Nordisk (NNF20OC0059309)
  • Novo Nordisk Fonden (NNF20OC0059309)
  • Medical Research Council (MR/R015600/1, MR/M006212/1, MC_PC_19026, MR/V038109/1, MR/S00291X/1, MC_PC_19012, COVID-19)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/V002910/1, EP/V002910/2)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Keywords
SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7 lineage, variants of concern, transmissibility, S-gene target failure, time-varying reproduction number, viral genomic surveillance, COVID-19 pandemic, England
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Child, Preschool, England, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Middle Aged, Phylogeny, Time Factors, Genome, Viral, Age Distribution, Evolution, Molecular, Basic Reproduction Number, Young Adult, Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review