The SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant was first identified in the state of Maharashtra in late 2020 and spread throughout India, outcompeting pre-existing lineages including B.1.617.1 (Kappa) and B.1.1.7 (Alpha) 1 . In vitro, B.1.617.2 is 6-fold less sensitive to serum neutralising antibodies from recovered individuals, and 8-fold less sensitive to vaccine-elicited antibodies as compared to wild type (WT) Wuhan-1 bearing D614G. Serum neutralising titres against B.1.617.2 were lower in ChAdOx-1 versus BNT162b2 vaccinees. B.1.617.2 spike pseudotyped viruses exhibited compromised sensitivity to monoclonal antibodies against the receptor binding domain (RBD) and N-terminal domain (NTD). B.1.617.2 demonstrated higher replication efficiency in both airway organoid and human airway epithelial systems compared to B.1.1.7, associated with B.1.617.2 spike in a predominantly cleaved state compared to B.1.1.7. The B.1.617.2 spike protein was able to mediate highly efficient syncytium formation that was less sensitive to inhibition by neutralising antibody as compared to WT spike. Additionally we observed that B.1.617.2 had higher replication and spike mediated entry as compared to B.1.617.1, potentially explaining B.1.617.2 dominance. In an analysis of over 130 SARS-CoV-2 infected healthcare workers across three centres in India during a period of mixed lineage circulation, we observed reduced ChAdOx-1 vaccine effectiveness against B.1.617.2 relative to non-B.1.617.2, with the caveat of possible residual confounding. Compromised vaccine efficacy against the highly fit and immune evasive B.1.617.2 Delta variant warrants continued infection control measures in the post-vaccination era. India's first wave of SARS-CoV-2 infections in mid-2020 was relatively mild and was controlled by a nationwide lockdown. Since easing of restrictions, India has seen expansion in cases of COVID-19 since March

After escaping relatively unscathed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, India witnessed a ferocious second COVID-19 wave, starting in March 2021 and accounting for about half of global cases by the first week of May. SARS-CoV-2 had spread widely throughout India in the first wave, with the third national serosurvey in January 2021 finding that 21.4% of adults and 25.3% of 10-to 17-year-old adolescents were seropositive (1). Delhi, the national capital, was not included in the national serosurvey but had undergone multiple periods of high transmission in 2020 (Fig. 1A). In a district-wise stratified serosurvey conducted by the Delhi Government in January 2021, overall seropositivity was reported to be 56.1% (95% CI, 55.5-56.8%), ranging from 49.1% to 62.2% across 11 districts (2). This was expected to confer some protection from future outbreaks.Despite high seropositivity, Delhi was amongst the most affected cities during the second wave. The rise in new cases was exceptionally rapid in April, going from approximately 2000 to 20,000 between 31 March and 16 April. This was accompanied by a rapid rise in hospitalizations and ICU admissions (Fig. 1B). In this emergency situation with saturated bed occupancy by 12 April, major private hospitals were declared by the state as full COVID care-only and senior medical students, including from alternative medicine branches, were pressed into service (3). Deaths rose proportionately (Fig. 1C) and the case-fatality ratio (CFR), estimated as the scaling factor between time-advanced cases and deaths (Fig. 1D), was stable (mean, SD; 1.9, 0.3%). Population spread of SARS-CoV-2 is underestimated by test positive cases alone (1, 2). To better understand the degree of spread and the factors leading to the unexpectedly severe outbreak, we used all available data including testing, sequencing, serosurveys, and serially followed cohorts.In the absence of finely resolved or serial data from national and state surveys, we focused on data for Delhi participants of a national serosurvey of Council of Scientific and

Background The first national severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) serosurvey in India, done in May-June, 2020, among adults aged 18 years or older from 21 states, found a SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody seroprevalence of 0•73% (95% CI 0•34-1•13). We aimed to assess the more recent nationwide seroprevalence in the general population in India. MethodsWe did a second household serosurvey among individuals aged 10 years or older in the same 700 villages or wards within 70 districts in India that were included in the first serosurvey. Individuals aged younger than 10 years and households that did not respond at the time of survey were excluded. Participants were interviewed to collect information on sociodemographics, symptoms suggestive of COVID-19, exposure history to laboratoryconfirmed COVID-19 cases, and history of COVID-19 illness. 3-5 mL of venous blood was collected from each participant and blood samples were tested using the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay. Seroprevalence was estimated after applying the sampling weights and adjusting for clustering and assay characteristics. We randomly selected one adult serum sample from each household to compare the seroprevalence among adults between the two serosurveys.Findings Between Aug 18 and Sept 20, 2020, we enrolled and collected serum samples from 29 082 individuals from 15 613 households. The weighted and adjusted seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies in individuals aged 10 years or older was 6•6% (95% CI 5•8-7•4). Among 15 084 randomly selected adults (one per household), the weighted and adjusted seroprevalence was 7•1% (6•2-8•2). Seroprevalence was similar across age groups, sexes, and occupations. Seroprevalence was highest in urban slum areas followed by urban non-slum and rural areas. We estimated a cumulative 74•3 million infections in the country by Aug 18, 2020, with 26-32 infections for every reported COVID-19 case.Interpretation Approximately one in 15 individuals aged 10 years or older in India had SARS-CoV-2 infection by Aug 18, 2020. The adult seroprevalence increased approximately tenfold between May and August, 2020. Lower infection-to-case ratio in August than in May reflects a substantial increase in testing across the country.

Background Earlier serosurveys in India revealed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of 0.73% during May-June and 7.1% during August-September 2020. We conducted the third serosurvey during Dec 2020 and Jan 2021, to estimate the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among general population and healthcare workers (HCWs) in India. Methods We conducted the serosurvey in the same 70 districts selected for the first and second serosurveys. From each district, we enrolled at least 400 individuals aged ≥ 10 years from general population and 100 HCWs from sub-district level health facilities. Sera from general population were tested for presence of IgG antibodies against nucleocapsid (N) and spike protein (S1-RBD) of SARS-CoV-2, whereas sera from HCWs were tested for anti-S1-RBD. We estimated weighted seroprevalence adjusted for assay characteristics. Results Of the 28,598 sera from general population, 4585 (16%) had IgG antibodies against N, 6647 (23.2%) against S1-RBD and 7436 (26%) against either. The weighted and assay characteristic adjusted seroprevalence against either of the antibodies was 24.1 (95%CI: 23.0%-25.3%). Among 7385 HCWs, the seroprevalence of anti-S1-RBD IgG antibodies was 25.6% (95% CI: 23.5%-27.8%). Conclusions Nearly one in four individuals aged > = 10 years from general population as well as HCWs in India were exposed to SARS-CoV-2 by December 2020.

Purpose Profile of maternal deaths in selected districts of four Indian states was studied to examine the regional differences in non-biological causal factors (socioeconomic and sociocultural) in maternal mortality and to examine the method and completeness of implementation of Maternal and Perinatal Death Inquiry and Response (MAPEDIR) process. Methods An integrated qualitative and quantitative method was used to study the MAPEDIR process in selected districts of four states in India, through the use of standardized questionnaire for key informant interviews, participant observation checklist, analysis of verbal autopsy questionnaire, and maternal death reports. ResultsA comparison of Profile's maternal deaths investigated showed that women died between 25 and 27 years of age. Half of the women died at home because of inability to afford transport (Delay II) and treatment costs. One third of the deaths had occurred in a health facility (Delay III) because of lack of specialists, equipments or blood. Two thirds of the delays (Delay I) were in seeking medical care. Review of the implementation process of MAPEDIR highlighted that the social audit review model is a unique field based collaborative initiative comprising of stakeholders from various sector in order to improve maternal health programming by reducing maternal mortality. Conclusions MAPEDIR has been able to identify sociocultural, economic and health care systems related determinants of maternal deaths. Standardization the mechanism for information data sharing at district, sub-district and village level can maximize the use of available evidence for advocacy and policy shifts by developing policies and interventions suited to local needs.