Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Jun 14;16(6):e0253193. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253193

Sex differences in the incidence, mortality, and fatality of COVID-19 in Peru

Max Carlos Ramírez-Soto 1,2,*, Hugo Arroyo-Hernández 3, Gutia Ortega-Cáceres 4
Editor: Jeffrey Shaman5
PMCID: PMC8202928  PMID: 34125851

Abstract

Background

There is a worrying lack of epidemiological data on the sex differential in COVID-19 infection and death rates between the regions of Peru.

Methods

Using cases and death data from the national population-based surveillance system of Peru, we estimated incidence, mortality and fatality, stratified by sex, age and geographic distribution (per 100,000 habitants) from March 16 to November 27, 2020. At the same time, we calculated the risk of COVID-19 death.

Results

During the study period, 961894 cases and 35913 deaths were reported in Peru. Men had a twofold higher risk of COVID-19 death within the overall population of Peru (odds ratio (OR), 2.11; confidence interval (CI) 95%; 2.06–2.16; p<0.00001), as well as 20 regions of Peru, compared to women (p<0.05). There were variations in incidence, mortality and fatality rates stratified by sex, age, and region. The incidence rate was higher among men than among women (3079 vs. 2819 per 100,000 habitants, respectively). The mortality rate was two times higher in males than in females (153 vs. 68 per 100,000 habitants, respectively). The mortality rates increased with age, and were high in men 60 years of age or older. The fatality rate was two times higher in men than in women (4.96% vs. 2.41%, respectively), and was high in men 50 years of age or older.

Conclusions

These findings show the higher incidence, mortality and fatality rates among men than among women from Peru. These rates vary widely by region, and men are at greater risk of COVID-19 death. In addition, the mortality and fatality rates increased with age, and were most predominant in men 50 years of age or older.

Introduction

While males and females have the same susceptibility to COVID-19 infection, global data have shown higher mortality and fatality rates among men than among women [1]. In addition, most countries with available data have shown higher infection, mortality and fatality rates in males than in females, and these rates varied from country to country and between regions [1–5]. Furthermore, there is an increased risk of death for both sexes with the advancement of age, but at all ages above 30 years, males show a significantly higher risk of death than females [2, 3]. In several countries, the male/female ratio as regards death is above 1, and in some countries, such as Albania, Costa Rica, Thailand and the Netherlands, this ratio is even higher than 2 [2].

The first SARS-CoV-2 infection in Peru was identified in March 2020, which was followed by transmission into the community. Peru is currently still being affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, with more than 1 million cases and more 35000 deaths reported as of February 14, 2021 [6]. In Peru, the COVID-19 mortality rate is 11.3 per 10,000 habitants, and the fatality rate is 3.54% [6]. One study in May 2020 reported fatality rates in men and women of 10.8 and 6.5%, respectively, for individuals older than 70 years of age who contracted COVID-19 [7]. Despite these findings, data on the effects of sex and age differentials on incidence, mortality and fatality rates for COVID-19, and these rates’ associations between regions of Peru, are not available. These estimates are important for refining estimates of infection and transmission via different regions’ health profiles. Furthermore, this analysis could help to significantly improve our knowledge, and provide insights into COVID-19 prevention and control in Peru.

For these reasons, in order to describe the differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection and death rates among men and women from Peru, we estimated the incidence, mortality and fatality from COVID-19, stratified by sex, age, and geographic distribution.

Materials and methods

Study design

For this study, we obtained case and death data for COVID-19 from the National Open Data Platform, Presidencia del Consejo de Ministros, Peru (https://www.datosabiertos.gob.pe/group/datos-abiertos-de-covid-19), which collects daily information on COVID-19 cases and deaths in Peru. Peru is a multicultural and multilingual country that is divided into 25 regions. The total population of Peru is 31 million inhabitants, according to the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI). In Peru, the Centro Nacional de Epidemiología, Prevención y Control de Enfermedades (CDC-Peru) maintains the national system for the surveillance of significant diseases, including COVID-19. Starting on 5 March 2020, the CDC-Peru mandated the immediate reporting of all COVID-19 cases. Information that is collected by healthcare centers is directed to the national surveillance system. These data are then published daily in the National Open Data Platform, Peru. COVID-19 cases include all those patients who have been reported to the CDC-Peru with and without symptoms of COVID-19 and laboratory confirmation. Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases are defined as those with a positive result for COVID-19 from an RT-PCR assay or immunochromatographic test. The study period was March 16 to November 27, 2020.

In the National Open Data Platform, data on cases of and deaths from COVID-19 include basic demographic information, such as age, sex, region and date of notification. Information on ethnicity, symptoms and comorbidities is not available in the data on cases and deaths by COVID-19.

All data were collected as part of the routine surveillance of the National Open Data Platform, Peru. All data were fully anonymized before you accessed them. Therefore, the study was exempt from review by an ethics board.

Statistical analysis

COVID-19 cumulative incidence, mortality and fatality estimates were calculated by regions, and stratified by sex and age group. We used the numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths along with population estimates to calculate the cumulative incidence and mortality of COVID-19 in the population, according to age and sex, per 100,000 people. The population estimates for Peru in 2020 were obtained from the National Institute of Statistics and Informatics (INEI). We also calculated the differences in the absolute numbers of cases in each region, stratified by sex; for this, we assumed that all the estimated populations of Peru in 2020 were exposed to COVID-19. Finally, we calculated the association between sex and absolute numbers of COVID-19 deaths. Differences in absolute numbers of cases, and the associations between sex and absolute numbers of COVID-19 deaths, were determined using a χ2 test and odds ratio (OR). Stata Software version 9.4 (SAS Institute) was used for data analyses.

Results

COVID-19 cases and deaths

A total of 961,894 cases with laboratory confirmation from March 16 through to November 27, 2020 were include in the study. Of these, 748,229 (77.8%) and 213,665 (22.2%) cases were confirmed by immunochromatographic tests and RT-PCR, respectively. Of all the cases, 498,568 (51.8%) were men. During this period, 35,913 deaths associated with COVID-19 were reported in Peru. Of these, 24,730 (68.9%) were men. Most of the cases and deaths, for both men and women, were reported in the Lima region (Table 1).

Table 1. Differences in the cases absolute numbers and risk of COVID-19 deaths, stratified by sex, and geographic distribution, Peru, 2020.

Population COVID-19 cases COVID-19 deaths Risk of COVID-19 death
Region Male, No Female, No Male, No Female, No p-value* Male, No Female, No p-value* OR (95% CI)
Overall 16,190,895 16,435,053 498568 463326 0.00001 24730 11183 0.00001 2.11 (2.06–2.16)
Amazonas 219,801 207,005 8382 9566 0.00001 187 55 0.00001 3.95 (2.92–5.34)
Áncash 594,832 585,806 14204 14426 0.0083 977 450 0.00001 2.29 (2.05–2.57)
Apurímac 220,370 210,366 3233 3239 0.0501 80 56 0.03650 1.44 (1.02–2.04)
Arequipa 735,707 761,731 24010 22289 0.00001 1064 469 0.00001 2.16 (1.93–2.41)
Ayacucho 341,951 326,262 7139 7371 0.00001 246 105 0.00001 2.47 (1.96–3.11)
Cajamarca 727,265 726,446 11973 11835 0.415 378 182 0.00001 2.09 (1.75–2.50)
Callao 550,046 579,808 22025 18687 0.00001 1285 617 0.00001 1.81 (1.64–2.00)
Cusco 686,543 670,532 12299 11675 0.026 334 157 0.00001 2.05 (1.69–2.48)
Huancavelica 184,121 181,196 3746 3905 0.0109 93 40 0.00001 2.46 (1.69–3.57)
Huánuco 384,345 375,922 8946 10134 0.00001 278 172 0.00001 1.86 (1.53–2.25)
Ica 488,836 486,346 15083 15850 0.00001 1140 585 0.00001 2.13 (1.93–2.36)
Junín 678,494 682,973 12637 12902 0.252 613 286 0.00001 2.25 (1.95–2.59)
La Libertad 1,000,002 1,016,769 17918 17454 0.00004 1612 762 0.00001 2.17 (1.98–2.37)
Lambayeque 638,228 672,557 15273 15567 0.003 1269 581 0.00001 2.34 (2.11–2.58)
Lima 5,119,560 5,508,910 232188 196840 0.00001 11262 4841 0.00001 2.02 (1.95–2.09)
Loreto 531,000 496,559 12022 12514 0.00001 705 283 0.00001 2.69 (2.34–3.09)
Madre de Dios 98,215 75,596 4607 4610 0.00001 112 39 0.00001 2.92 (2.04–4.21)
Moquegua 102,855 89,885 7708 7567 0.00001 197 90 0.00001 2.17 (1.69–2.80)
Pasco 140,252 131,652 3152 3088 0.0874 74 50 0.03920 1.46 (1.02–2.09)
Piura 1,030,975 1,016,979 20532 20242 0.954 1386 712 0.00001 1.99 (1.81–2.18)
Puno 611,616 626,381 9454 9004 0.00001 250 120 0.00001 2.01 (1.61–2.50)
San Martín 474,458 425,190 11313 12721 0.00001 531 236 0.00001 2.60 (2.23–3.04)
Tacna 188,152 182,822 7089 6938 0.663 178 73 0.00001 2.42 (1.84–3.19)
Tumbes 135,675 115,846 4441 4619 0.00001 221 111 0.00001 2.13 (1.69–2.68)
Ucayali 307,596 281,514 9194 10283 0.00001 258 111 0.00001 2.65 (2.11–3.31)

*χ2 test

Abbreviations: OR, odds ratio; CIs, confidence intervals.

On average, the COVID-19 infection rate was significantly higher in men (p<0.00001) compared to women, and was higher in 19 regions of Peru (Table 1). Men had a twofold higher risk of COVID-19 death within the overall population of Peru (OR, 2.11; CI 95%; 2.06–2.16; p<0.00001), as well as in 20 regions of Peru, compared to women. In the Amazonas region, men had an almost fourfold higher risk of COVID-19 death compared to women (OR, 3.95; CI 95%; 2.92–5.34; p<0.00001) (Table 1).

Incidence rate

There were variations in estimated incidence according to sex and age (Fig 1). Although the incidence of COVID-19 overall was higher among men than among women (3079 vs. 2819 per 100,000 habitants, respectively), the incidence was higher among females in 13 regions of Peru (Fig 1A). The highest incidence rates of COVID-19 among women (8419 per 100,000 women) and men (7494 per 100,000 male) were reported in Moquegua, followed by the Madre de Dios and Lima regions. The incidence rates of COVID-19 in the overall population of Peru increased with age in both men and women (Fig 1B and 1C). The incidence rates were highest in women between the ages of 40 and 49 years (12,592 per 100,000 women) (Fig 1B), and in men in the age group of ≥80 years (12,571 per 100,000 men), in the Moquegua and Amazonas regions, respectively (Fig 1C).

Fig 1. Sex and age-stratified COVID-19 incidence estimates by region (A, B and C), Peru, 2020.

Fig 1

Mortality rate

Overall, the mortality rate associated with COVID-19 was two times higher in males than in females (153 vs. 68 per 100,000 habitants, respectively) (Fig 2A), in all the regions of Peru. The highest mortality rates for men and women were reported in the Callao region (234 vs. 106 per 100,000 habitants), followed by Ica, Lima and Moquegua (Fig 2A). On average, the mortality rates increased with age, and the mortality rates in men 60 years of age or older, as well as in the 25 regions of Peru we assessed, were high (Fig 2B) compared with women 60 years of age or older (Fig 2C). The highest mortality rates for men and women were reported in the age group of ≥80 years, and were found in the Tumbes (2590 per 100,000 men) and Ica (1288 per 100,000 women) regions, respectively (Fig 2A and 2B).

Fig 2. Sex and age-stratified COVID-19 mortality estimates by region (A, B and C), Peru, 2020.

Fig 2

Fatality rate

The fatality rate associated with COVID-19 in the overall population of Peru was two times higher in men than in women (4.96% vs. 2.41%, respectively) (Fig 3A). The fatality rate was higher in men in all regions of Peru. The fatality rates in men 50 years of age or older, as well as those in the 25 regions of Peru, were high (Fig 3B), compared with women 50 years of age or older (Fig 3C). The highest fatality rates were reported in men and women in the age group of ≥80 years, and were found in the Loreto (57.31%) and Ica (37.74%) regions, respectively (Fig 3B and 3C).

Fig 3. Sex and age-stratified COVID-19 fatality estimates by region (A, B and C), Peru, 2020.

Fig 3

Discussion

In this study, based on the national population surveillance system, we found higher rates of incidence, mortality and fatality among men than among women in Peru. In addition, the mortality and fatality rates increased with age, and were predominant in men 50 years of age or older. To the best of our knowledge, only one study has previously estimated COVID-19 mortality among men and women in Peru (as of May 2020), and this only included totals of 129,148 COVID-19 cases and 7,660 COVID-19 deaths [7], while our study included totals of 961,894 COVID-19 cases and 35,913 COVID-19 deaths. Our principal finding was that men were at a twofold higher risk of COVID-19 death in 20 regions of Peru, and an almost fourfold higher risk of COVID-19 death in 1 region. These findings suggest an increased risk of death from COVID-19 for men throughout almost the whole country. The higher risks of death associated with COVID-19 for men are probably related to cardiovascular diseases, obesity or diabetes, biological or genetic factors, age, and the epidemiological profile in each region, but they can also be explained by the deficiencies of the health system [11–15].

In April 2020, Peru enacted multiple interventions (social isolation, use of masks and handwashing), including closing businesses and prohibiting gatherings, to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Despite these nonpharmaceutical interventions, the incidence rates evolved simultaneously, and were higher among men than among women, with the highest rates among women being in the Moquegua and Madre de Dios regions. This can be explained by the lower proportions of women in the populations of some regions (Table 1). In contrast, despite the size of the male population being greater in some regions, the COVID-19 incidence rates registered in some of these regions were higher. Despite these population differences, it should be noted that in six regions of Peru (Ucayali, Huánuco, San Martín, Ica, Junín and Ancash), the highest numbers of cases were registered in women, and five of these regions had higher incidence rates in women than in men. Several reports point to sex differences in COVID-19 resulting from male patients having higher rates of infection. These disparities in sex mainly relate to factors concerning social behaviour and human biology [8]. Among social factors, it is considered that men represent a higher proportion of smokers, and more often exhibit lifestyles that cause the main comorbidities associated with COVID-19. In addition, men enact cultural practices that put them at greater risk of becoming ill, spreading the infection or seeking less medical attention [8]. The greater susceptibility of men can also be related to their greater amounts of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors compared to women [9], although further studies are needed to confirm that plasma ACE2 levels can indicate a higher risk for COVID-19 [10]. Besides this, we found disproportionate differences in incidence rates stratified by sex and age. For example, high incidence rates were registered in women aged 20 and 79 years old in 5 regions, whereas the highest incidence rates were recorded among men aged 50 and ≥80 years old in 10 regions of Peru. In addition, the incidence rates for girls and women 10–19 years of age were the highest in all regions of Peru, compared with men. These disproportionate incidence rates stratified by age among men/women are explained in part by social determinants, such as unemployment, educational level, housing and living conditions and population density, in addition to the assessed levels of susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection among the different age groups of men/women in Peru.

In our study, the COVID-19 mortality rates were the highest in men for all regions of Peru. These rates increased with age, and were higher in men 60 years of age or older, compared with women. The mortality rate among adults was higher than that reported by various other studies [1, 3, 15]. These differences in mortality rates associated with older age are probably related to cardiovascular diseases, obesity, or diabetes [11–15], since these are common conditions among older adults [16]. In addition, older adults have elevated rates of COVID-19-associated hospitalization, and the majority of persons hospitalized have underlying medical conditions [17]. In contrast, we found low mortality rates in women [1, 3, 15]. These findings are consistent with the literature. The lower mortality rates in women might be due to their better immune response regulated by estrogen [18, 19]. Women infected with SARS-CoV-2 have been shown to produce more T cells than men [20]. Likewise, it has been reported that in the early phase of the disease, women have relatively higher serum concentrations of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 [21].

The average fatality rates in Peru are consistent with findings from countries such as Portugal, Germany, Colombia, China, Australia and Bosnia, where the fatality rates are greater for males. In addition, it should be noted that four regions of Peru (La Libertad, Lambayeque, Ica and Piura) show the highest COVID-19 fatality rates. These findings are consistent with the fatality rates from countries such as Mexico, Spain, Ecuador, Switzerland, Romania and the Philippines [2]. The fatality rates also increase with age. As such, in 38 countries reporting sex-disaggregated data on COVID-19 cases and deaths, males above 60 years of age had higher fatality rates than females [2]. In our study, the fatality rates also increased with age, and were highest in men 60 years of age or older, in all the regions of Peru, compared with women, with fatality rates greater than 40% for men ≥80 years old in five regions. Similar to mortality, these fatality rates assessed by age are probably related to cardiovascular diseases, obesity, immune response, socioeconomic and demographic factors, etc [11–15]. To these factors must be added the weaknesses of the Peruvian health system, which at the beginning of the pandemic had only an average of one bed in an intensive care unit for every 100,000 people, as well as a shortage of oxygen and few health professionals.

Sex differences in incidence and mortality from COVID-19 can also be explained for immunological mechanisms, genetic factor, inflammation, and cancer. A recent study found that men had higher levels of IL-8 and IL-18. In addition, women had a more robust CD8 T cell activation, while poor T cell responses were associated with COVID-19 progression in males [20]. Other study revelated that the females may produce larger amounts of neutralizing antibodies, compared with males, especially in the early phase of COVID-19 [21]. The immune mediators were also associated with adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 in men (TNFSF13B, CCL14, CCL23, IL-7, IL-16, and IL-1857) [22]. Because of these immune mechanisms, males are more likely to develop the cytokine storm associated with poor clinical outcomes. Literature evidence suggests one potential association between COVID-19 and prostate cancer [22]. Interestingly, the complications and mortality from COVID-19 are predominant in men aged 50 years or older, and the risk for prostate cancer increases in men above the age of 50. This association can be explained by the high expression of TMPRSS2 in prostate cancer, and SARS-CoV-2 entry into the host cell [22–25]. Genetic factor as the presence of the double chromosome XX in women, can also play a role in SARS-CoV-2 infection, since the X chromosome contains a large number of genes regulating immunity [26]. In addition to immunological and genetics mechanisms, the estrogen also plays a significant role in immune responses in women [26, 27]. In summary, based on the evidence, the biological sex differences (immunological mechanisms, genetic factor, and inflammation) may affect the pathogenic mechanisms of COVID-19, including the risk for infection, severity, and death.

The study has important limitations. First, although the incidence rates were high, it is likely that these rates were actually higher, since the availability of diagnosis testing was limited early on in the pandemic, and varied nationally. Furthermore, most of the cases were confirmed by rapid tests, the sensitivity limits of which are low compared with molecular tests. Secondly, due to limitations in the epidemiological surveillance system, the mortality and lethality rates may also actually be higher than those estimated in this study, since there have recently been delays in the registration of deaths. Thirdly, this study was an analysis of a secondary database, and although the database is an official data source, there may have been errors or delays in registration that would produce an underreporting of cases. Therefore, these findings could result in a possible bias. Despite these limitations, our findings give us approximations of incidence, mortality and case fatality rates adjusted for age and sex.

Conclusion

Our findings show higher incidence, mortality and fatality rates among men than among women in Peru. These rates vary widely by region, and men are at greater risk of COVID-19-assocaited death in the overall population in Peru. In addition, the mortality and fatality rates increased with age, and are predominant in men aged 50 years or older. Therefore, actions aimed at improving the surveillance and prevention of infection in the population, and particularly in that portion with comorbidities and the elderly, are necessary in a country where the capacity for hospital response and intensive care is insufficient.

Data Availability

Data available at https://www.datosabiertos.gob.pe/group/datos-abiertos-de-covid-19.

Funding Statement

This manuscript has no funding.

References

  • 1.Global Health 50/50. COVID-19: data disaggregated by age and sex. Date accessed: December 27, 2020. https://globalhealth5050.org/covid19/age-and-sex-data/
  • 2.Scully EP, Haverfield J, Ursin RL, Tannenbaum C, Klein SL. Considering how biological sex impacts immune responses and COVID-19 outcomes. Nat Rev Immunol. 2020;20(7):442–7. doi: 10.1038/s41577-020-0348-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bhopal SS, Bhopal R. Sex differential in COVID-19 mortality varies markedly by age. Lancet. 2020;396(10250):532–3. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31748-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Pradhan A, Olsson PE. Sex differences in severity and mortality from COVID-19: are males more vulnerable? Biol Sex Differ. 2020;11(1):53. doi: 10.1186/s13293-020-00330-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Williamson EJ, Walker AJ, Bhaskaran K, et al. Factors associated with COVID-19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature. 2020;584(7821):430–436. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2521-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ministerio de Salud. Sala situacional COVID-19 Peru. Lima: Ministerio de Salud; February 14, 2021. https://covid19.minsa.gob.pe/sala_situacional.asp
  • 7.Munayco C, Chowell G, Tariq A, Undurraga EA, Mizumoto K. Risk of death by age and gender from CoVID-19 in Peru, March-May, 2020. Aging (Albany NY). 2020;12(14):13869–81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gebhard C, Regitz-Zagrosek V, Neuhauser HK, Morgan R, Klein SL. Impact of sex and gender on COVID-19 outcomes in Europe. Biol Sex Differ. 2020; 11(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s13293-020-00304-9 11:29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Schroeder S, Kruger N, Herrler T, Erichsen S, et al. SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and Is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell. 2020;1 81(2):271–280.e278. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Leow MKS. Clarifying the controversial risk-benefit profile of soluble ACE2 in COVID-19. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):396. doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03097-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kopel J, Perisetti A, Roghani A, Aziz M, Gajendran M, Goyal H. Racial and Gender-Based Differences in COVID-19. Front Public Health. 2020. Jul 28;8:418. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00418 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Abate BB, Kassie AM, Kassaw MW, Aragie TG, Masresha SA. Sex difference in coronavirus disease (COVID-19): a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2020. Oct 6;10(10):e040129. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040129 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Penna C, Mercurio V, Tocchetti CG, Pagliaro P. Sex-related differences in COVID-19 lethality. Br J Pharmacol. 2020;177(19):4375–4385. doi: 10.1111/bph.15207 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Shi S, Qin M, Shen B, et al. Association of Cardiac Injury With Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in Wuhan, China. JAMA Cardiol. 2020;5(7):802–810. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.0950 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Zhou F, Yu T, Du R, et al. Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020;395(10229):1054–1062. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30566-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI). Situación de salud de la población adulto mayor, 16. Lima: INEI; 2017. https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/publicaciones_digitales/Est/Lib1459/libro.pdf
  • 17.Garg S, Kim L, Whitaker M, O’Halloran A, Cummings C, Holstein R, et al. Hospitalization rates and characteristics of patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019—COVID-NET, 14 States, March 1–30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(15):458–464. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6915e3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fish EN. The X-files in immunity: sex-based differences predispose immune responses. Nat Rev Immunol. 2008;8(9):737–44. doi: 10.1038/nri2394 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Klein SL, Marriott I, Fish EN. Sex-based differences in immune function and responses to vaccination. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2015;109(1):9–15. doi: 10.1093/trstmh/tru167 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Takahashi T, Ellingson MK, Wong P, Israelow B, Lucas C, Klein J, et al. Sex differences in immune responses that underlie COVID-19 disease outcomes. Nature. 2020;588(7837):315–320. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2700-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zeng F, Dai C, Cai P, Wang J, Xu L, Li J. A comparison study of SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody between male and female COVID-19 patients: A possible reason underlying different outcome between sex. J Med Virol. 2020;92(10):2050–2054. doi: 10.1002/jmv.25989 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chakravarty D, Nair SS, Hammouda N, Ratnani P, Gharib Y, Wagaskar V, et al. Sex differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection rates and the potential link to prostate cancer. Commun Biol. 2020;8;3(1):374. doi: 10.1038/s42003-020-1088-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Muus C, Luecken MD, Eraslan G, Sikkema L, Waghray A, Heimberg G, et al. Single-cell meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 entry genes across tissues and demographics. Nat Med. 2021;27(3):546–559. doi: 10.1038/s41591-020-01227-z [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Schroeder S, Krüger N, Herrler T, Erichsen S, et al. SARS-CoV-2 Cell Entry Depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and Is Blocked by a Clinically Proven Protease Inhibitor. Cell. 2020;181(2):271–280.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Ou X, Liu Y, Lei X, Li P, Mi D, Ren L, et al. Characterization of spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 on virus entry and its immune cross-reactivity with SARS-CoV. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):1620. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15562-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Anca PS, Toth PP, Kempler P, Rizzo M. Gender differences in the battle against COVID-19: Impact of genetics, comorbidities, inflammation and lifestyle on differences in outcomes. Int J Clin Pract. 2021;75(2):e13666. doi: 10.1111/ijcp.13666 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bouman A, Heineman MJ, Faas MM. Sex hormones and the immune response in humans. Human Reproduction Update 2005; 11: 411–23. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmi008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Jeffrey Shaman

13 Apr 2021

PONE-D-21-06294

Sex differences in the incidence, mortality, and fatality of COVID-19 in Peru

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Ramírez-Soto,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

The reviews are relatively concordant.  Please respond to their comments on a point-by-point basis and revised the manuscript accordingly.  For your response to Reviewer 3, note that novelty, or perceived significance, is not a criterion for acceptance at PLOS ONE.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 28 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jeffrey Shaman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your ethics statement in the manuscript and in the online submission form, please provide additional information about the patient records used in your retrospective study. Specifically, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them.

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

"We have no conflicts of interest"

At this time, please address the following queries:

  1. Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

  2. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

  3. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

  4. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section: 

"This manuscript is not funding"

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now

 This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Partly

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This study highlights the COVID-19 incidence and mortality among the Peruvian population. The authors show that the incidence as well as mortality rate is high for males compared to females. This is a general trend in most of the countries. This study does not highlight new findings; however, as the authors have indicated, this study could be important for monitoring and introducing infection control measures in Peru. The manuscript is well written and the authors have presented the data comprehensively. Hence, this manuscript can be accepted in the current form.

Reviewer #2: The present study shows higher COVID-19 incidence and related mortality among men than women in Peru. In addition to showing that men are at greater risk of COVID-19 death, the authors also shows that fatality rates increased with age, and that were mainly predominant in men with 50 years of age or older. The present study lacks in novelty, since these findings are only consistent with a very large number of published reports from different European countries, from different Asian countries, including China, and from the USA. The only advantage that I see from this study is the geographical area of assessment, beeing a research study performed in Peru, since COVID-19 reports from South America are still too few compared to the other continents.

Major point

The authors need to add a paragraph in the Discussion on the potential mechanisms involved in the higher COVID-19 incidence and related mortality among men than women. You can also cite and use as a reference the following very recent publication:

Gender differences in the battle against COVID-19: Impact of genetics, comorbidities, inflammation and lifestyle on differences in outcomes. Int J Clin Pract. 2021 Feb;75(2):e13666.

Reviewer #3: The author report higher incidence, mortality and fatality rates among men than among women from Peru. Men are at greater risk of COVID-19 death. The mortality rates increased with age, and were most predominant in men 50 years of age or older.

The manuscript is well written and technically sound. However, for a global audience the manuscript lacks novelty. The gender and age as risk factors for COVID-19 are already well described.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Jun 14;16(6):e0253193. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253193.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


26 Apr 2021

Response-to-reviewers: Manuscript PONE-D-21-06294

We thank the Reviewers for their comments and constructive criticism, we believe that the quality of our manuscript has been significantly improved. We have revised our paper in a point-by-point manner. Modifications are in yellow text.

Reviewer #1: This study highlights the COVID-19 incidence and mortality among the Peruvian population. The authors show that the incidence as well as mortality rate is high for males compared to females. This is a general trend in most of the countries. This study does not highlight new findings; however, as the authors have indicated, this study could be important for monitoring and introducing infection control measures in Peru. The manuscript is well written and the authors have presented the data comprehensively. Hence, this manuscript can be accepted in the current form.

Response: Thank you for your comment.

Reviewer #2: The present study shows higher COVID-19 incidence and related mortality among men than women in Peru. In addition to showing that men are at greater risk of COVID-19 death, the authors also shows that fatality rates increased with age, and that were mainly predominant in men with 50 years of age or older. The present study lacks in novelty, since these findings are only consistent with a very large number of published reports from different European countries, from different Asian countries, including China, and from the USA. The only advantage that I see from this study is the geographical area of assessment, beeing a research study performed in Peru, since COVID-19 reports from South America are still too few compared to the other continents.

The authors need to add a paragraph in the Discussion on the potential mechanisms involved in the higher COVID-19 incidence and related mortality among men than women. You can also cite and use as a reference the following very recent publication: Gender differences in the battle against COVID-19: Impact of genetics, comorbidities, inflammation and lifestyle on differences in outcomes. Int J Clin Pract. 2021 Feb;75(2):e13666.

Response: Thank you for your comment. We have included a paragraph in the Discussion on the potential mechanisms involved in the higher COVID-19 incidence and related mortality among men than women (lines, 228-247). We have also cited and use as a reference the publication: Gender differences in the battle against COVID-19: Impact of genetics, comorbidities, inflammation and lifestyle on differences in outcomes. Int J Clin Pract. 2021 Feb;75(2):e13666.

Reviewer #3: The author report higher incidence, mortality and fatality rates among men than among women from Peru. Men are at greater risk of COVID-19 death. The mortality rates increased with age, and were most predominant in men 50 years of age or older.

The manuscript is well written and technically sound. However, for a global audience the manuscript lacks novelty. The gender and age as risk factors for COVID-19 are already well described.

Response: Thank you for your comment. While the gender and age as risk factors for COVID-19 are already well described in different European countries, including China, and from the USA, COVID-19 reports in South America and Peru are still too few. Therefore, actions aimed at improving the surveillance and prevention of infection in the population, are necessary in a country where the capacity for hospital response and intensive care is insufficient. We also understand that novelty is not a criterion for acceptance at PLOS ONE.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response-to-review_PONE-D-21-06294.docx

Decision Letter 1

Jeffrey Shaman

31 May 2021

Sex differences in the incidence, mortality, and fatality of COVID-19 in Peru

PONE-D-21-06294R1

Dear Dr. Ramírez-Soto,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Jeffrey Shaman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: I have no further comments. The authors have addressed all my previous comments.

The article can be published.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Jeffrey Shaman

4 Jun 2021

PONE-D-21-06294R1

Sex differences in the incidence, mortality, and fatality of COVID-19 in Peru

Dear Dr. Ramírez-Soto:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Jeffrey Shaman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE


Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

RESOURCES