Vaccine Effectiveness Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reinfection by Type and Frequency of Vaccine: A CommunityBased Case-Control Study

Background@#Although guidelines recommend vaccination for individuals who have recovered from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection to prevent reinfection, comprehensive evaluation studies are limited. We aimed to evaluate vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection according to the primary vaccination status, booster vaccination status, and vaccination methods used. @*Methods@#This population-based case-control study enrolled all SARS-CoV-2-infected patients in Seoul between January 2020 and February 2022. Individuals were categorized into case (reinfection) and control (no reinfection) groups. Data were analyzed using conditional logistic regression after adjusting for underlying comorbidities using multiple regression. @*Results@#The case group included 7,678 participants (average age: 32.26 years). In all vaccinated individuals, patients who received the first and second booster doses showed reduced reinfection rates compared with individuals who received basic vaccination (odds ratio [OR] = 0.605, P < 0.001 and OR = 0.002, P < 0.001). Patients who received BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, NVX-CoV2373 and heterologous vaccination showed reduced reinfection rates compared with unvaccinated individuals (OR = 0.546, P < 0.001; OR = 0.356, P < 0.001; and OR = 0.472, P < 0.001). However, the ChAdOx1-S or Ad26.COV2.S vaccination group showed a higher reinfection rate than the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination group (OR = 4.419, P < 0.001). @*Conclusion@#In SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, completion of the basic vaccination series showed significant protection against reinfection compared with no vaccination. If the first or second booster vaccination was received, the protective effect against reinfection was higher than that of basic vaccination; when vaccinated with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 only or heterologous vaccination, the protective effect was higher than that of ChAdOx1-S or Ad26.COV2.S vaccination only.

Using an influenza epidemic threshold different from those in the United States and Europe caused longer epidemic periods in Korea during the 2018– 2019, 2019–2020, and 2022–2023 seasons: a comparative study / 이화의대지

Objectives@#During the COVID-19 pandemic, the first seasonal influenza epidemic was declared in the 37th week of 2022 in Korea and has continued through the winter of 2023–2024. However, this finding has not been observed in the United States and Europe. The present study aimed to determine whether the prolonged influenza epidemic in Korea from 2022 to 2023 was caused by using a different influenza epidemic threshold compared to the thresholds used in the United States and Europe. @*Methods@#Korea, the United States, and Europe use different methods to set seasonal influenza epidemic thresholds. First, we calculated the influenza epidemic thresholds for influenza seasons using the different methods of those three regions. Using these epidemic thresholds, we then compared the duration of influenza epidemics for the most recent three influenza seasons. @*Results@#The epidemic thresholds estimated by the Korean method were lower than those by the other methods, and the epidemic periods defined using the Korean threshold were estimated to be longer than those defined by the other regions’ thresholds. @*Conclusion@#A low influenza epidemic threshold may have contributed to the prolonged influenza epidemic in Korea, which was declared in 2022 and has continued until late 2023. A more reliable epidemic threshold for seasonal influenza surveillance needs to be established in Korea.

Evaluation of Intervention Policies for the COVID-19Epidemic in the Seoul/Gyeonggi Region through a Model Simulation

Purpose@#To evaluate the efficacy of intervention policies on coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) dissemination. @*Materials and Methods@#An age-structured compartmental model for the COVID-19 outbreak was proposed to predict the impact of control measures in the Seoul/Gyeonggi region. The model was calibrated based on actual data and realistic situations, including daily vaccine doses, proportion of delta variant cases, and confirmed cases by age. We simulated different scenarios for non-pharmaceutical interventions by varying social distancing and school attendance strategies. @*Results@#Two-step mitigation of social distancing without in-person classes would result in a rapid increase in confirmed cases up to 10000 but would keep severe cases within the manageable range of the health care system. The overall impact of taking down the distancing level by one step with twice the increase in contacts at school was comparable to the above scenario. Implementation of two-step mitigation of social distancing along with a two-fold increase in contacts among the school-age group would dramatically increase confirmed and severe cases by over 80000 and 100, respectively, as early as the beginning of December. This policy would cause the situation to spiral out of control, considering the scale of the response and time to prepare. On the other hand, the burden on the current healthcare system caused by two-step mitigation of social distancing and 40% increased contacts in the school-age group was manageable if prepared. @*Conclusion@#A compromise between social distancing and school attendance policy and timely preparations for the spread of COVID-19 are required.

Clinical Course and Outcomes of 3,060 Patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea, January–May 2020

Background@#The fatality rate of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) varies among countries owing to demographics, patient comorbidities, surge capacity of healthcare systems, and the quality of medical care. We assessed the clinical outcomes of patients with COVID-19 during the first wave of the epidemic in Korea. @*Methods@#Using a modified World Health Organization clinical record form, we obtained clinical data for 3,060 patients with COVID-19 treated at 55 hospitals in Korea. Disease severity scores were defined as: 1) no limitation of daily activities; 2) limitation of daily activities but no need for supplemental oxygen; 3) supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula; 4) supplemental oxygen via facial mask; 5) non-invasive mechanical ventilation; 6) invasive mechanical ventilation; 7) multi-organ failure or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy; and 8) death. Recovery was defined as a severity score of 1 or 2, or discharge and release from isolation. @*Results@#The median age of the patients was 43 years of age; 43.6% were male. The median time from illness onset to admission was 5 days. Of the patients with a disease severity score of 3–4 on admission, 65 (71.5%) of the 91 patients recovered, and 7 (7.7%) died due to illness by day 28. Of the patients with disease severity scores of 5–7, 7 (19.5%) of the 36 patients recovered, and 8 (22.2%) died due to illness by day 28. None of the 1,324 patients who were < 50 years of age died; in contrast, the fatality rate due to illness by day 28 was 0.5% (2/375), 0.9% (2/215), 5.8% (6/104), and 14.0% (7/50) for the patients aged 50–59, 60–69, 70–79, and ≥ 80 years of age, respectively. @*Conclusion@#In Korea, almost all patients of < 50 years of age with COVID-19 recovered without supplemental oxygen. In patients of ≥ 50 years of age, the fatality rate increased with age, reaching 14% in patients of ≥ 80 years of age.