Saturday, 2 May 2020

Will the CMCO lead to a 3rd wave?

A blog about COVID 19 in Malaysia.   Updated 9 Aug 2020:   
Although the article was first published on 2nd May 2020, the analysis and conclusions on why there will not be another wave or why we don't need another lockdown still remain valid.  We still do not see data-driven comments by the various experts.  With hindsight, the fact that there was no 3rd wave shows the importance of data-based opinions.  Furthermore, the points made in the Letter are equally valid today. 



3rd wave
Designed by Freepik


I saw an FMT article yesterday with health experts saying that the conditional MCO might cause a third wave of infection. Malaysiakini also had a similar story saying that more than half of the cases over the past 7 days were from local transmissions. 

The problem with all the health experts’ comments so far is that I have not seen anyone offering in-depth data-driven analysis to support their positions. 

For example, although half of the past 7 days cases were local transmissions, more than 3/4 of these were from EMCO areas and/or clusters with very good chances of breaking any transmissions.

In order to rectify this, I had earlier in the week summarized all my analyses and sent it to both Malaysiakini and Star with the hope that they either publish it as a letter or start a more detailed investigative piece. 

Unfortunately, none of the media picked it up so I figured that either my rationale is flawed or I am not credible enough. 

The letter was to provide a data-driven rationale that irrespective of the number of daily cases, we should not extend the MCO come 12 May implying that we can relax the MCO immediately. 

I attach it for you all to judge.

To come back to the concern about the conditional MCO, I guess the govt position that it will not lead to a 3rd wave is based on two key premises: 
  • We can still minimize the contact between those currently infected and/or PUI from the general public after 4 May
  • There are no significant asymptomatic cases that are free to walk about.

Maintaining contacts

With regards to minimizing contacts, we should look at this from the 3 sources of infections.

1)  Those under mandatory quarantine i.e. returnees and EMCO areas – there should not be much concern about them infecting the public. 

2)  Clusters that are not under EMCO as the people are not centrally located e.g. Sri Petaling, Kuching medical. There are still daily new cases from this group e.g. over the past 5 days we still have 60 new cases altogether from the Sri Petaling and Church clusters. 

I have the least info for this group and I hope there is some voluntary stay at home and MOH is still doing contact tracing. 

3) Community and/or sporadic spread i.e. don't know where or who is the source. The way to control this is testing, contact tracing and isolation. 

We did this in the first wave and I think that as long as the daily number of cases is below 30, we should be OK. The weakest link in this containment approach is contact tracing. So it was good to require restaurants to keep track of their customers. 

 Also downloading the MyTrace app should help. I tried downloading MyTrace to see how it works but I have not been able to key in the verification code. 

There are still bugs. I also noticed that there were only 500 odd downloads. I think the govt should get serious about getting more people to download this app.


Asymptomatic cases

With regards to the asymptomatic cases, I would like to bring you back to one of the 3 mysteries I posted a few days ago i.e. mystery No 2 which asked where all the large numbers of cases as computed by a backward-looking mortality analysis went to c/w with the reported number of cases? 

My hypothesis on the “missing cases” is that because our contact tracing is so slow, by the time MOH identified the cluster and tested all those related to the cluster, these mild and asymptomatic cases had already recovered and no amount of PCR test was going to detect them. 

The way to check this reason is to conduct the antibody test on these clusters but until then I cannot think of another reason. 

If you accept this "missing cases" hypothesis, then there is no need to worry about the asymptomatic cases. 

But if the hypothesis is wrong, then expect a spike in 2 to 3 weeks’ time. But it is not all that bad as the ban on public gathering and wearing face masks (not mandatory?) are targeted at controlling the spread from asymptomatic cases. 


Finally, if you agree with the above rationale that there will be minimal contact between the infected and the general public, why are the barbers and hair salons still closed? 



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - 


Letter

As the MCO comes up to 6th week, I am certain many people are wondering if there could be another potential extension come mid-May especially because double-digit daily new cases (DDDNC) are still being reported rather than the aspired single digits or even complete elimination of the virus.

I would like to share a few justifications of why the MCO can still end by 12 May 2020 even if DDDNC is still being observed by then.

This rationale is built around four key points
  • The DDDNC will not overwhelm our medical capacity
  • The majority of cases are from clusters and/or EMCO areas
  • The risk of a virus resurgence Post MCO can be managed if the correct controls are put in place and maintained
  • We have met the threshold of the USA and European Union guidelines for ending the lockdown

1) Medical capacity

The original goal of the MCO was to ensure that the number of infections does not overwhelm our medical capacity. 

Today we have about 6,900 beds and about 1,000 ventilators set aside for COVID 19 treatment. 

During the MCO period, the peak bed utilization was less than 40%. Correspondingly, the maximum number of COVID 19 patients on ventilators was 66. At the same time, we do not seem to have a critical shortage of PPE or even healthcare staff.

A back of the envelope calculations (Notes 1, 2) also shows that our medical facilities (beds and ventilators) can easily support DDDNC.

Unless we are having problems with PPE and/or healthcare staffing, the analysis suggests that insufficient medical capacity cannot be a reason to extend the MCO. 

One of the reasons for the MCO was to “flatten the curve” so as not to overwhelm our medical system. Not only have we flattened the curve, but the number of cases is significantly below our medical capacity even at peak infection.


2) Clusters and EMCO areas

About 2/3 of the total cases in the country are accounted for by clusters, sub-clusters, and those in the EMCO areas. 

This profile meant that a larger part of the DDDNC is due to location-based or event-based transmission making it easier for detection and control. For example, on 26 April, almost all of the 38 new cases were reported to be from clusters and EMCO areas.

The trade-off is thus not between national public health and economic impact, but rather between controlling the virus within a specified area and/or community vs the national economy. MOH has already demonstrated its ability to trace such clusters and/or to execute the EMCO to keep the virus in control.


3) Resurgence post-MCO Is manageable

A common reason why we should not lift the MCO too early is the concern about a virus resurgence. There are two counter-arguments to this reason: -

a) It is likely that we will have a virus surge even if we have zero reported daily cases before lifting the MCO

b) Even if we have DDDNC by the time the MCO is lifted, the virus surge can still be controlled.


a) Likelihood of a virus surge.

This argument follows this logic - a virus surge is still likely post-MCO because there will continue to be sources of infections even excluding those currently under quarantine or under EMCO:
  • Unless we quarantine all contacts related to new cases at the time when the MCO is lifted, there will be some infected in the incubation stage walking freely. To identify all contacts quickly may be beyond our current contact tracing capability.
  • At the MCO opening date, there will still be cases under treatment. Some of our healthcare staff have been infected through work so we can expect this to be a source of new infections.
  • There will still be returnees post MCO. Although under quarantine, we already have a history of such groups contributing to the daily new case numbers. 
  • Since we have not carried out mass testing of the general population, there may be asymptomatic cases walking around when MCO is lifted. Based on mortality rates, the actual number of cases is estimated to be 40% higher than that reported implying that we have asymptomatic cases. (Note 3)

Given these, there is little basis for any plan to achieve zero cases before lifting the MCO.


b) Capacity to handle a new surge of Post MCO infections.

In this context, there are 2 critical questions
  • Can we avoid a spike?
  • What is the threshold for another national MCO if the virus goes out of control so that the public and business community can see what is coming and take appropriate action?

Avoiding a spike
We have been able to manage to keep the virus under control during the 1st wave. It was the second wave that was a cause of concern that lead to the MCO.

Post MCO we ought to be able to do better as
  • We have increased our testing capacity
  • Although MOH has yet to announce them, it is very likely that we will have many social distancing and public hygiene measures post-MCO that were not there previously
  • We are likely to continue with the 14 days quarantine for all traveling into the country.
We have the EMCO measures to contain specific locations rather than a national shutdown


MCO threshold
It is worth revisiting the rationale for why the MCO was first announced on 16th March 2020, when there were 125 new COVID 19 cases reported. Was there a data-driven basis to establish this trigger?

IHME, the University of Washington health research centre whose mortality projections have often been quoted by the Whitehouse, had a rule of thumb (based on the capacity of the US medical system) for lifting the lockdown based on the number of daily new cases falling below 1 case per million population. Using this, our threshold would be 32 new daily cases.

Another approach is to have the number of daily cases such that R naught (R0) = 1. MOH had around 11 April stated that RO had come down to 1 and accordingly the threshold can be 150 cases (taking the average cases for 10 – 12 April). Of course, an epidemiologist would be able to provide better estimates.

An alternative is to look at the number of daily cases that our medical system can support and factor in a margin of safety to cover exponential growth. 

The analysis in Note 1 shows that based on beds as the bottleneck, we can comfortably support 490 new cases per day. Our history is that during the exponential growth stage we went from 35 daily cases to 217 daily cases within 3 weeks. Using this factor, the trigger for another MCO is 80 new cases (Note 4).

The point is that ignoring IHME, the 38 cases for 26 April and any future DDDNC should be seen in the context of the above 80 – 150 cases trigger.


4) Malaysia has met the current US and European Union Guidelines for opening

While MOH has yet to unveil its guidelines for lifting the MCO, many other countries who had implemented their lockdowns earlier have already issued guidelines for ending their lockdowns. It seems unlikely that the MOH guidelines or threshold would be significantly different.

In any event, Malaysia has already met both the US and European Union guidelines (Note 5, 6).


Conclusion…

When the stakes are this high, all of us need to keep ourselves better informed and ensure that when major policy decisions are taken, they are grounded on facts & reliable data.

A target for the complete elimination of the virus (i.e zero cases) may be impractical given the potential cost to the economy. As this potential threat seems to be here to stay, a more pragmatic approach is to learn how to ‘live with’ and manage this risk.

We all have a responsibility to adhere to the post MCO control measures (e.g. social distancing and public hygiene measures). At the same time, the authorities need to maintain vigilant monitoring of trends (number of cases) to provide enough lead time so that the public and business community will not be surprised.

While the above provides some data-driven reasons for not extending the MCO irrespective of the number of daily cases come 12 May, more importantly, they provide the rationale for relaxing the MCO even at this stage.



Note
1.      With 6,900 beds and assuming 14 days of treatment, there is the capacity to handle 490 new cases daily, assuming all who are infected are hospitalized.  Furthermore, the capacity will be much higher if we follow that practice of many countries where the mild cases are quarantined at home. Given that about 80% of cases are mild, the beds’ capacity could increase fivefold.

2.      The peak ventilator requirement was 3 % of those under treatment.  Based on 1,000 ventilators, and assuming that those on ventilators require 21 days of treatment there is the capacity to handle about 1580 new cases daily

3.      Assuming 1.6 % mortality rate and current mortality reflects that 2 weeks ago, we projected 5,713 cases c/w actual 4,119 ie 39 % higher for week 5 of MCO

4.      With 79 cases at the start of exponential growth, we expect 490 cases 3 weeks later.  Even if MCO is implemented when we hit 490 cases, there would be many contacts at the incubation stage. By week 3, there would be about 4,800 infected persons before the impact of any MCO begins to bring the spread down.  The 4,800 cases are well below our 6,900 beds’ capacity. 

5.      The “opening up America again” guidelines had a “gating criteria” covering symptoms, cases, and hospitals. Since there is no public data about how Malaysia is tracking symptoms, we looked at performance under the other 2 criteria.
a)      Under cases: Downward trajectory of documented cases within a 14-day period OR Downward trajectory of positive tests as a % of total tests within a 14-day period - We have met both criteria
b)      Under hospitals: Treat all patients without crisis care AND Robust testing programme in place for at-risk healthcare workers, including emerging antibody - Note 2 shows that we have sufficient medical capacity and MOH guidelines for healthcare staff to meet this.

6.      We have also met the European Union roadmap for exiting lockdown based on 3 criteria
a)      Epidemiological, the spread should be reduced for some time
b)      Sufficient health system capacity
c)      Monitoring capacity: testing, contact tracing and isolation



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Be fearless to get more to Stay Safe, Share this Blog

PS: This blog is for me to better understand COVID 19 as this will impact my investments. If you are also into equities, follow me at i4value.asia

Disclaimer:  I am not an epidemiologist, healthcare worker, pharmacist, or staff in the Ministry of Health, but rather is someone with a strong interest in numerical analysis.  The content is an attempt to understand what is happening in the battle against COVID 19 from a data-based perspective. The opinions expressed here are based on information extracted from readily available public sources but I do not warrant its completeness or accuracy and should not be relied on as such.

Friday, 1 May 2020

Is it safe to go back to work?

A blog about COVID 19 in Malaysia.   Updated 9 Aug 2020:   
It may seem academic today, but on 1 May 2020,  Malaysia had about 6,000 cases in total.  The week before there was an average of 57 daily cases.  So there was real concern whether the virus had been brought under control.  The comparison between Malaysia and the US was to give some perspective to this concern.    Although the article was first published on 1st May 2020, the analysis and conclusions still remain valid.  In fact today, the US has a higher number of infections making the comparative numbers bigger.  


Back to work
Designed by Freepik

It looks as if the MCO is going to be relaxed slowly even if we still have double digits daily new cases. Is it safe to go back to work?

In the US, the message is that there must be sufficient testing and/or testing capacity before opening up the economy. With only 0.5 % of Malaysians tested so far, what confidence do we have that all is safe?

I would like to provide some data-driven rationale on why the situation in Malaysia is different from that in the USA and that we can safely proceed with opening up the economy as follows: 

1) The general public in Malaysia have less chance to come into contact with those infected as the Malaysian protocol is to hospitalize all COVID 19 cases whereas, in the US, the mild cases self-quarantine at home and only the serious cases are hospitalized. 

2) It is 105 times more likely for a person in the USA to come into contact with a mild or asymptomatic person with COVID 19 than for a person in Malaysia. 

This was estimated using a backward-looking mortality analysis which showed that the mild and/or asymptomatic cases in the USA is equivalent to 57 cases per 1,000 population whereas for Malaysia it is 0.5 cases per 1,000 population. (Refer to Note 1)

The higher deaths in the US suggests that about 6 % of the population has been infected whereas for Malaysia it is around 0.07%. 

3) Malaysians have a better chance of knowing where or who to avoid as about 3/4 of the cases in Malaysia are from identifiable groups (clusters, EMCO areas, returnees) leaving the balance as community spread. 

My view is that the critical number to observe is the one from the community spread as by definition we don't know where or who the source is. There has not been much news in the US about clusters and the news seems to suggest that the majority are from community spread.

Over the past week, we estimated that the number of cases from community spread averaged about 14 cases per day. (refer to Note 2). To put this in perspective prior to 12 Mac (which we can safely conclude that the cases were all from the 1st wave ie pre-Sri Petaling), the highest number of daily cases was 28.

4) In terms of testing, Malaysia has done better than the US. This is based on the positivity rate (defined as the number of positive cases / total number of tests) where Malaysia 3.8% is much lower c/w 17.5 % for the US. 

A high positivity rate implies that only those with a very high chance of being infected are tested. WHO standard is for < 10 % detection rate.

The figure for the US meant that the testing is not sufficient. (Refer to Note 3). Note that the number of tests per capita is not as reliable an indicator of testing sufficiency as detection rates.


Conclusion
While I think that although Malaysia is not as aggressive as the US in ramping up the number of tests, I feel much more confident looking at the above. 

While I may not have 100% accuracy in the figures since my data were from publicly available information, I think it provides an appropriate order of magnitude. 
 
With a Federal government in control of public health, Malaysia will be in a better position to have a coordinated response to any surge as compared to the US where each state is responsible for its own public health. We have EMCOed areas and I think the US will have difficulty trying this.



Note
1. The backward-looking estimates of the number of infections are based on the number of deaths divided by the mortality rates and as it takes some time from infection to death, the computed number for today actually represents the number of cases some time ago. 

In our analysis, we have assumed a mortality rate of 0.5%, and the time from infection to death is 2 weeks. 

We carried out a 6 weeks analysis based on the number of deaths in Malaysia and the USA from 12 Mac to 29 Apr to represent the number of infections from 27 Feb to 15 April (the reference date).

USA - With 58,327 deaths for the period we estimated that there are 11.665 million cases c/w the reported 609,516 on 15 April ie there are 19.14 more cases than that reported. Using this ratio and with cum 1.036 million cases on 28 April, we projected that there are actually cum 19.828 million cases. 

Assuming that all the reported cases were hospitalized, this meant that there were 19.828 – 1.036 = 18.792 million cases that were either mild or asymptomatic, equivalent to 57 cases per 1,000 population

Malaysia – With 100 deaths for the period we estimated that there are 20,000 cases c/w the reported 5,072 on 15 April ie there are 3.94 more cases than that reported. 

Using this ratio and with 5,851 cum cases on 28 April, we projected that there are actually cum 23,072 cases. Assuming that all the reported cases were hospitalized, this meant that there were 23,072 – 5,851 = 17,221 cases that were either mild or asymptomatic, equivalent to 0.5 cases per 1,000 population

This analysis is to provide a comparative order of magnitude and is likely to underestimate the true number of cases as using this methodology for Sweden, we found that 8 % of the population has been infected. 

However, the epidemiologist responsible for Sweden's COVID 19 strategy was reported to have said that about 25% of the population has already been infected. This could mean that either the mortality is lower, or the time from infection to death is longer, or that we have not sufficiently accounted for the cases for the period between the reference date and currently or all of these. 

The analysis indicates that a high proportion of those infected is asymptomatic - 75 % for Malaysia and 95 % for the US. 

This is consistent with studies of cases in Iceland and Vo where the whole population/community is tested. However, 95 % for the US looks high may suggest so doubt about the US data.

Note that a sensitivity analysis showed that if the mortality rate is increased, the number of times for a person in the US to come into contact with an infected period c/w Malaysia increases.


2. We broke down the MOH reported daily new cases into the following.


Date -
April
Total
Returnees
Cluster/EMCO
Bal = community spread
No of cases per day
Bal % of total
24
88
13
62
13
15
25
51

32
19
37
26
38

34
4
11
27
40




28
31
10
10
11
35
29
94
72
12
10
11
30
57
25
7
25
44
Average



14
26
Note that the info about the breakdown had to be deduced from the various media reports and there were days like 27 April where we could not find any info


3. As more people are tested the detection rate would come down.

     Date        US       Malaysia
                  Detection rate (%)

     5 April      19.1      7.0

    22 April    19.5       5.1

    29 April    17.5      3.8




- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Be fearless to get more to Stay Safe, Share this Blog

PS: This blog is for me to better understand COVID 19 as this will impact my investments. If you are also into equities, follow me at i4value.asia

Disclaimer:  I am not an epidemiologist, healthcare worker, pharmacist, or staff in the Ministry of Health, but rather is someone with a strong interest in numerical analysis.  The content is an attempt to understand what is happening in the battle against COVID 19 from a data-based perspective. The opinions expressed here are based on information extracted from readily available public sources but I do not warrant its completeness or accuracy and should not be relied on as such.


New record

We are entering new records for the number of weekly cases both nationally and for the central region. If you think of exponential grow...