Dataset Information

Estimates of case-fatality ratios of measles in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and modelling analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the 21st century, increases in immunisation coverage and decreases in under-5 mortality have substantially reduced the global burden of measles mortality. However, the assessment of measles mortality burden is highly dependent on estimates of case-fatality ratios for measles, which can vary according to geography, health systems infrastructure, prevalence of underlying risk factors, and measles endemicity. With imprecise case-fatality ratios, there is continued uncertainty about the burden of measles mortality and the effect of measles vaccination. In this study, we aimed to update the estimations of case-fatality ratios for measles, to develop a prediction model to estimate case-fatality ratios across heterogeneous groupings, and to project future case-fatality ratios for measles up to 2030.

Methods

We did a review of the literature to identify studies examining measles cases and deaths in low-income and middle-income countries in all age groups from 1980 to 2016. We extracted data on case-fatality ratios for measles overall and by age, where possible. We developed and examined several types of generalised linear models and determined the best-fit model according to the Akaike information criterion. We then selected a best-fit model to estimate measles case-fatality ratios from 1990 to 2015 and projected future case-fatality ratios for measles up to 2030.

Findings

We selected 124 peer-reviewed journal articles published between Jan 1, 1980, and Dec 31, 2016, for inclusion in the final review-85 community-based studies and 39 hospital-based studies. We selected a log-linear prediction model, resulting in a mean case-fatality ratio of 2·2% (95% CI 0·7-4·5) in 1990-2015. In community-based settings, the mean case-fatality ratio was 1·5% (0·5-3·1) compared with 2·9% (0·9-6·0) in hospital-based settings. The mean projected case-fatality ratio in 2016-2030 was 1·3% (0·4-3·7).

Interpretation

Case-fatality ratios for measles have seen substantial declines since the 1990s. Our study provides an updated estimation of case-fatality ratios that could help to refine assessment of the effect on mortality of measles control and elimination programmes.

Funding

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Portnoy A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6418190 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo understand the current measles mortality burden, and to mitigate the future burden, it is crucial to have robust estimates of measles case fatalities. Estimates of measles case-fatality ratios (CFRs) that are specific to age, location, and time are essential to capture variations in underlying population-level factors, such as vaccination coverage and measles incidence, which contribute to increases or decreases in CFRs. In this study, we updated estimates of measles CFRs by expanding upon previous systematic reviews and implementing a meta-regression model. Our objective was to use all information available to estimate measles CFRs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) by country, age, and year.MethodsFor this systematic review and meta-regression modelling study, we searched PubMed on Dec 31, 2020 for all available primary data published from Jan 1, 1980 to Dec 31, 2020, on measles cases and fatalities occurring up to Dec 31, 2019 in LMICs. We included studies that previous systematic reviews had included or which contained primary data on measles cases and deaths from hospital-based, community-based, or surveillance-based reports, including outbreak investigations. We excluded studies that were not in humans, or reported only data that were only non-primary, or on restricted populations (eg, people living with HIV), or on long-term measles mortality (eg, death from subacute sclerosing panencephalitis), and studies that did not include country-level data or relevant information on measles cases and deaths, or were for a high-income country. We extracted summary data on measles cases and measles deaths from studies that fitted our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Using these data and a suite of covariates related to measles CFRs, we implemented a Bayesian meta-regression model to produce estimates of measles CFRs from 1990 to 2019 by location and age group. This study was not registered with PROSPERO or otherwise.FindingsWe identified 2705 records, of which 208 sources contained information on both measles cases and measles deaths in LMICS and were included in the review. Between 1990 and 2019, CFRs substantially decreased in both community-based and hospital-based settings, with consistent patterns across age groups. For people aged 0-34 years, we estimated a mean CFR for 2019 of 1·32% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 1·28-1·36) among community-based settings and 5·35% (5·08-5·64) among hospital-based settings. We estimated the 2019 CFR in community-based settings to be 3·03% (UI 2·89-3·16) for those younger than 1 year, 1·63% (1·58-1·68) for age 1-4 years, 0·84% (0·80-0·87) for age 5-9 years, and 0·67% (0·64-0·70) for age 10-14 years.InterpretationAlthough CFRs have declined between 1990 and 2019, there are still large heterogeneities across locations and ages. One limitation of this systematic review is that we were unable to assess measles CFR among particular populations, such as refugees and internally displaced people. Our updated methodological framework and estimates could be used to evaluate the effect of measles control and vaccination programmes on reducing the preventable measles mortality burden.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; and the US National Institutes of Health.

Project description:BackgroundWhile the COVID-19 pandemic will increase mortality due to the virus, it is also likely to increase mortality indirectly. In this study, we estimate the additional maternal and under-5 child deaths resulting from the potential disruption of health systems and decreased access to food.MethodsWe modelled three scenarios in which the coverage of essential maternal and child health interventions is reduced by 9·8-51·9% and the prevalence of wasting is increased by 10-50%. Although our scenarios are hypothetical, we sought to reflect real-world possibilities, given emerging reports of the supply-side and demand-side effects of the pandemic. We used the Lives Saved Tool to estimate the additional maternal and under-5 child deaths under each scenario, in 118 low-income and middle-income countries. We estimated additional deaths for a single month and extrapolated for 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months.FindingsOur least severe scenario (coverage reductions of 9·8-18·5% and wasting increase of 10%) over 6 months would result in 253 500 additional child deaths and 12 200 additional maternal deaths. Our most severe scenario (coverage reductions of 39·3-51·9% and wasting increase of 50%) over 6 months would result in 1 157 000 additional child deaths and 56 700 additional maternal deaths. These additional deaths would represent an increase of 9·8-44·7% in under-5 child deaths per month, and an 8·3-38·6% increase in maternal deaths per month, across the 118 countries. Across our three scenarios, the reduced coverage of four childbirth interventions (parenteral administration of uterotonics, antibiotics, and anticonvulsants, and clean birth environments) would account for approximately 60% of additional maternal deaths. The increase in wasting prevalence would account for 18-23% of additional child deaths and reduced coverage of antibiotics for pneumonia and neonatal sepsis and of oral rehydration solution for diarrhoea would together account for around 41% of additional child deaths.InterpretationOur estimates are based on tentative assumptions and represent a wide range of outcomes. Nonetheless, they show that, if routine health care is disrupted and access to food is decreased (as a result of unavoidable shocks, health system collapse, or intentional choices made in responding to the pandemic), the increase in child and maternal deaths will be devastating. We hope these numbers add context as policy makers establish guidelines and allocate resources in the days and months to come.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Global Affairs Canada.