COVID-19 case management: The policy model in Morocco context

I. COVID-19 parameters in Morocco and the lethality assessment

Morocco, with its 36 Million citizens, noticed the first imported case, on March 2^nd, 2020. Then, the spread of COVID-19 cases in all the twelve administrative Moroccan regions raised many individual and collective cases. The metropolitans four cities (Casablanca the biggest one, Marrakech, Tangier, and Fez) had almost 70% of the cases. Unfortunately, a considerable increase is reported during August with around 20 to 40 deaths per day (e.g., On August 31 there was 62590 confirmed cumulative cases and 1141 cumulative deaths). However, during September, only Casablanca and Marrakech sustained a high level of confirmed cases, but the overall deaths remained stable between 40 ± 07 per day (e.g., On September 30 there was 102715 confirmed cumulative cases and 2194 cumulative deaths; unfortunately on October 31 the confirmed cumulative cases were 219084 with 3695 cumulative deaths).

The net lethality ratio is the total number of deaths due to COVID-19 divided by the overall confirmed COVID-19 cases. This ratio moves slowly around 1,7% and does not add any useful analysis (Figure2). Thus, COVID-19 lethality could be presented with standardisation to a minimal number of the general population. (The days’ tests do no go further than 23000 tests per day for technical reasons, even by inviting all private laboratories to do SARS-CoV2 tests. The control strategy does not target mass enrolment of all suspected COVID-19 cases). As shown in Figure3, the standardised death ratio is expected to increase from less than ten deaths per one Million habitants to be more than 220 deaths per one Million citizens by the end of the year with an estimation around 7700 lives lost.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2: Active COVID-19 patients and issued deaths in Morocco between March and October 2020

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3: Net and standardised COVID-19 Lethality Ratio in Morocco from March to October 2020

In other studies, the mortality rate of COVID-19 is commonly calculated comparing the numbers of patients who were discharged well recovered versus those who died by a timing endpoint (e.g. during the 30 past days) [7].

II. Point of care (PoC) serology tests and vaccination as preventives measures

The IgG serodiagnosis rapid tests that could be used are not considered as the gold standard test due to their not satisfactory accuracy and are mostly used to show the seroconversion and the previous exposure to the virus after at least ten days from the onset of the symptoms. In Morocco, the rapid test trademark used showed in foreign studies a better sensitivity after 14 days from the onset of symptoms and raised some concerns about its usefulness for COVID-19 confirmation[8]. Controversially, the molecular test of the same trademark was reported as highly accurate in the USA[9]. More information about PoC assays accuracy for Detection SARS-CoV-2 become available, and none of the published studies considers the non-ELISA PoC ones as adapted for detection of suspected patients either symptomatic or asymptomatic, due to the high risk of false negatives especially during the beginning days from the onset[10–16]. While some countries, specified and updated a pre-defined list of the approved Serological COVID-19 tests, based on the evaluation of their accuracy[6]. Indeed, some SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody ELISA assay has 100% sensitivity and 95% specificity after 14 days from the onset[17].

To face the winter season, and the emergence of seasonal influenza in the same population threatened by COVID-19, many international laboratories are developing a new generation of PoC allowing detection of both viruses in the same test, unfortunately, the accuracy assessment would not be available before the end of the winter in the Northern hemisphere.

Moreover, for this year, the anti-flu vaccine is expected to be a quadrivalent influenza vaccine containing one strain from each B lineage in addition to H1N1 and H3N2 strains[18]. The intention to be vaccinated by seasonal influenzas increase with the COVID-19 risk perception and increase of age in the UK[19]. Then, the yearly quantities should be increased. Another study from Brazil explains the presence of an association between the inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine and lower mortality among Covid-19 patients; such study results are available due to the seasonal vaccination in the southern hemisphere done in past April and May in concomitance with the COVID-19 emergence[20]. However, the results could be taken with more caution due to the possible presence of a herd immunity effect that allowed less mortality as reported in another previous study from a small town located in Brazil[21].

Furthermore, in vitro experiment, from multi European research collaboration, confirmed that quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine induces trained immunity responses against SARS-CoV-2 that enhance the COVID-19 protection[22]. Many previous studies demonstrated this vaccination benefice for pregnant women, and their newborns protected against influenza via passively acquired antibodies[23]. The quadrivalent vaccine immunogenicity and safety were confirmed for children aged 6-35 months and in older subjects aged 66-80 years[24]. The same well-tolerated seasonal influenza vaccine trademark is used in Morocco [25]. Additionally, based on the literature, all symptomatic or pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic COVID-19 patients should receive immediate seasonal influenza vaccination and the suitable period is between the second and twelve days from the onset to match with the best vaccination window’s opportunity for SARS-CoV-2 clearance[26].

III. The RT-qPCR accuracy

For some scientists and health laboratory workers, the big challenge is that the PCR is not appropriate to detect virus infections, but it still used due to its ability to replicate DNA sequences by reverse transcriptase method. However, the amount of DNA obtained with the same RNA material can vary widely. As consequences, if the specificity of this technic is almost 95 %, its sensitivity is considered at least around 70%[27]

More, RNA extraction step represents a major bottleneck due to reagents shortage, cost, polling technic and time-consuming procedures[2,28]. Some clinical and testing errors (ineffective symptom screening, sampling errors, sample contamination,.) and analytical testing errors (insufficient sample, non-validated tests, instrument malfunction,.) compromise the results[11].

The Limit of Detection (LoD) depends on the trademark of the molecular assay. The low LoD may be attributable to technical deficiencies in the product’s manufacture[29]. In practice, the low sensitivity of the kit implies failing to identify many patients. Which means, at least up to 20% of all negative COVID-19 tests with RT-qPCR could be false negatives[30]. Similarly, a single negative test should not be used as a determinant clinical decision in patients [31,32].

In Morocco, the case management strategy was initially based on the PCR’ results to confirm the COVID-19’ positivity and the negative control results to declare recovering. However, the only information available at the operational level was the qualitative binary appreciation of this test (Positive, Or Negative). Indeed, some commercialised SARS-CoV-2 kits for RT-qPCR (the cheapest ones) are only qualitative, contrary to the fact that the “q” in “qPCR” stands for “quantitative". However, some manufacturers declare possible to use additional specific software’s to define the viral load by indirect calculations[31]. While, good laboratory practices emphasise that RT-qPCR should provide the viral load indirect and individual quantification, to allow to match with the required minimal information needed for results declaration[33].

IV. The role of cycles quantification values

One of the public health benefices to investigate the cycles quantification values (Cq) (anciently named cycle threshold) of all affected persons, is to control the overall severity of the different periods of epidemy that happen in the country. As an example, Italy described the trend of the Cq values concerning different periods of the epidemic, showing a statistically significant increase in Cq values associated with a decrease in the percentage of affected samples[34]. For example, a person with a high Cq value tested early in the disease course might be or become infectious with a new lower Cq value. Then, the presence of more viral load is translated by a decrease in Cq value when the control test is done[34]. Under-treatment, the mean viral load decreased rapidly but could increase in one to three weeks [35].

However, COVID-19 recovered person is not easy to define. Each one who had no more symptoms needs two tests noticing negative results or close to the Cq >34 (do not have meaningful transmissibility of the disease)[36]. Indeed, Cq > 34 correspond to less than four viral copies in RT-qPCR device with 100% sensitivity[37,38]. A French team confirmed the strong correlation between successful isolation of SARS-CoV-2 in cell culture and Cq value of RT-qPCR targeting envelop gene and suggested that patients with Cq above 34 (Based on their PCR device used) are not contagious and can be exempted from hospital care or for strict confinement of the non-hospitalised patients[39]. While being sure that recovered patients are not in pre-relapse phase, or remain with infra clinical symptoms, and genes or spikes mutations are other scientific challenges[40,41].

V. Household stay and asymptomatic cases management

The asymptomatic cases could be an essential source of contagion and need to be controlled biologically via virus nucleic acid testing[42]. Even if, the presence of RNA in RT-qPCR does not necessarily correlate with infectivity or transmission capacity, or at least is not yet easy to prove it scientifically[43]. However, studies published before July 2020 reported that the viral load detected was similar in both asymptomatic and the symptomatic patients, which prove the transmission potential of asymptomatic patients and minimally symptomatic ones [35,42,44],

Since August 01^st, in Morocco, due to more severe cases needing intensive emergency cares and hospital beds, the asymptomatic patients or those with few and minim symptoms are invited to take the adjuvant medication and stay in their homes (Figure1a). While, the evidence from China and USA show that households sites are the most favourable areas to spread the disease between 33% and 55% of the parents, partners, spouses and children were affected by their positive in-home person living with them. The odds ratio of the infectivity increases by seven to fifteen times if the residents in the household have some associated morbidities such diabetes or immunocompromised health conditions[45,46]. Ignorance, small habitations, less favourable social conditions, and inappropriate houses living conditions are the common risk factors for more inhouse infectivity.

VI. The duration of isolation and infectivity risk

Substantial viral loads can be detected around day five of infection and decrease gradually based on the characteristics of the disease or the effective antiviral treatments taken[35,47]. In contrast, the virus load and transmission events start earlier two to three days before symptom onset[48]. While at the beginning of the pandemic, some studies 14 days of isolation after diagnosis stated to be sufficient to get negativity [49]. In contrast from Wuhan in China, the onset of the symptoms was linked to the percentage of positive results. This positivity declined from 100% in week one, to 66% in week three, and 32% in week four, to 5 and 0% in weeks five and six[36]. Then, the accuracy is correlated to the duration from the symptoms onsets, and the day 24^th is the mean date to get negativity[36]. Another study from Italy reported that the timeline of Cq value would be negative between 21 and 28 days[50]. Then, for both patients and health workers suggest a longer time of self or supervised isolation[51].

In contrast, the MoH assume two unchangeable hypotheses that become useless: the person is no longer transmitting virus ten days after symptom resolution and COVID-19 patient’s loss their infectivity after seven days under treatment. Consequently, the isolation should be increased from 14 to 28 days and balanced with the following parameters (the asymptomatic state, the overall duration from the beginning of the symptoms, the younger vs older, the time change of the cycles quantification).

VII. Hospital environment and laboratory safety matters

Staphylococcus aureus and Candida Albicans that are frequent in the Moroccan population and are the primary nosocomial infections in the Moroccan hospitals lead to false-positive SARS-CoV-2 results by primers’ cross-reactivity. The co-infection with other viruses or bacteria create diagnostic confusion like for the cold virus (Influenza, Parainfluenza, Rhinovirus…)[52].

Moreover, nosocomial infections are sustained by the high level of contamination of air and surface by SARS-CoV-2 in hospital rooms. One study from Singapore hospitals reported more than 56% of environmental hospital rooms contamination and more than 66% of hospital surface contamination[53]. In contrast, the Cq value of contaminated rooms and non-contaminated rooms were equal to 25 and 33, respectively[53].

False positives results occur in a laboratory if reagents become contaminated, which is a significant concern about the testing volume during a pandemic. Indeed, the occurrence of contaminations of commercial primers of SARS-CoV-2 affects diagnostic specificity. Thus, the need to pre-test each batch of reagents before using in routine [54]. Then, COVID-19 diagnostic results should be reassessed systematically with the clinical or radiological patterns to validate the epidemiological basis and take individualised measures.

In Morocco, following the epidemiological increase of SARS-CoV-2, more self-demands about molecular tests arise. This test could be done theoretically within a price of zero, 55 to 150 US dollars, depending on the health coverage and the laboratory affiliation and the laboratory package promoted (Public, Army or private sectors). The actual process to do self-tests or tests based on the population demand remains not available in Morocco, even if this strategy is presented as less consuming of personal protective equipment[55]. Effectively, insufficient laboratories number able to perform molecular tests with safety conditions, a shortage and no standardisation of testing reagents and equipment create delays in testing with reduced effectiveness to control the direct first contacts and their secondary contacts in each new growth outbreak. Either, to face more demand pressure, laboratories must perform their own validation pool studies to determine the most efficient pool size[28,56].