One of the key questions about the new variant (B.1.1.7) is whether there is conclusive evidence that it is more transmissible. I don't think we are absolutely certain yet, but I am pretty confident that it is more transmissible. (1/N)
First, what's the alternative hypothesis? A lineage can get "lucky" and increase in frequency because it happened to be present in local circumstances that favour growth (e.g. poor compliance with social distancing). (2/N)
A good example of this is 20A.EU1 that spread widely throughout Europe after the summer (see excellent @firefoxx66 paper: medrxiv.org/content/10.110…). So far, evidence seems to suggest that was just a "lucky" case, rather than a biological change in the virus. (3/N)
But there are three clear differences with B.1.1.7. First, it appeared with 17 coding mutations compared to its most recently observed ancestor, see Figure 2 in virological.org/t/preliminary-…. This is unprecedented in the pandemic: it isn't just any old lineage. (4/N)
Second, it's much harder for a never-before-seen lineage to grow explosively when the pandemic is as active as it has been in the UK in the past few months. It's very different to 20A.EU1's story in the summer, when there was a long quiet period followed by the second wave. 5/N
In other words, if for some reason there was suddenly a favorable environment in London and the SE, it would've favored all lineages, and there were lots that were already very common, which are now being replaced by B.1.1.7. 6/N
Third, several of the mutations in B.1.1.7 have come up in independent analyses looking for possible functional mutations, especially N501Y. For example: 7/N
Items 1 & 3 (tons of mutations; some in parts of the viral genome that are highly suspect) have to change your prior. Item 2, coupled with the observed spread in the UK (which continues with each new sequence we produce) is pretty strong data. 8/N
In addition to all this there are models that try to disentangle cause and effect in the correlation between B.1.1.7 and growth. I think these will be published in some form soon, but even without them, I think the case is strong. 9/9

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jeffrey Barrett

Jeffrey Barrett Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jcbarret

19 Dec
One of the lines of evidence on transmission is in this tweet. One of the mutations in the new variant (deletion of amino acids 69 & 70 in spike) by coincidence causes 1 of the 3 channels of a widely used PCR test to drop out, giving us a way to track it in real time. (thread)
First, an important note: this assay has probes in two other parts of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, and they are not affected by the new lineage. Since not all three channels have to "light up" to declare a positive, this doesn't significantly affect test sensitivity.
Our sequencing data lags by about 2 weeks, but this read-out at test sites only lags by 24 hours, so we can see how fast the variant spreads in real time. Figuring this relationship out in the past few days was one thing that clarified the seriousness of the situation.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!