All-cause and COVID-19 mortality in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate all-cause mortality, COVID-19 mortality and all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A national, retrospective cohort analysis and national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted between 5 February 2020 and 19 September 2022. RESULTS: There were 5025 deaths during a follow-up time of 5 247 220 person-years, of which 675 were COVID-19 related. Incidence rates were 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) per 1000 person-years for all-cause mortality, 0.13 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.14) per 1000 person-years for COVID-19 mortality and 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.85) per 1000 person-years for all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality. Adjusted HR, comparing all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 0.38 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.44), highest for Filipinos at 0.56 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.69) and was 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.58) for craft and manual workers (CMWs). Adjusted HR, comparing COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 1.54 (95% CI 0.97 to 2.44), highest for Nepalese at 5.34 (95% CI 1.56 to 18.34) and was 1.86 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.60) for CMWs. Incidence rate of all-cause mortality for each nationality group was lower than the crude death rate in the country of origin. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of non-COVID-19 death was low and was lowest among CMWs, perhaps reflecting the healthy worker effect. Risk of COVID-19 death was also low, but was highest among CMWs, largely reflecting higher exposure during first epidemic wave, before advent of effective COVID-19 treatments and vaccines.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants, age, vaccination, and prior infection on infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

In 2021, Qatar experienced considerable incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection that was dominated sequentially by the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. Using the cycle threshold (Ct) value of an RT-qPCR-positive test to proxy the inverse of infectiousness, we investigated infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections by variant, age, sex, vaccination status, prior infection status, and reason for testing in a random sample of 18,355 RT-qPCR-genotyped infections. Regression analyses were conducted to estimate associations with the Ct value of RT-qPCR-positive tests. Compared to Beta infections, Alpha and Delta infections demonstrated 2.56 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 2.35-2.78), and 4.92 fewer cycles (95% CI: 4.67- 5.16), respectively. The Ct value declined gradually with age and was especially high for children <10 years of age, signifying lower infectiousness in small children. Children <10 years of age had 2.18 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 1.88-2.48) than those 10-19 years of age. Compared to unvaccinated individuals, the Ct value was higher among individuals who had received one or two vaccine doses, but the Ct value decreased gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination. Ct value was 2.07 cycles higher (95% CI: 1.42-2.72) for those with a prior infection than those without prior infection. The Ct value was lowest among individuals tested because of symptoms and was highest among individuals tested as a travel requirement. Delta was substantially more infectious than Beta. Prior immunity, whether due to vaccination or prior infection, is associated with lower infectiousness of breakthrough infections, but infectiousness increases gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination.

Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters in populations with different previous infection histories and clinical vulnerability profiles is inadequately understood. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a booster (third dose) vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, relative to that of primary-series (two-dose) vaccination over a follow-up duration of 1 year. METHODS: This observational, matched, retrospective, cohort study was done on the population of Qatar in people with different immune histories and different clinical vulnerability to infection. The source of data are Qatar's national databases for COVID-19 laboratory testing, vaccination, hospitalisation, and death. Associations were estimated using inverse-probability-weighted Cox proportional-hazards regression models. The primary outcome of the study is the effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters against infection and against severe COVID-19. FINDINGS: Data were obtained for 2 228 686 people who had received at least two vaccine doses starting from Jan 5, 2021, of whom 658 947 (29·6%) went on to receive a third dose before data cutoff on Oct 12, 2022. There were 20 528 incident infections in the three-dose cohort and 30 771 infections in the two-dose cohort. Booster effectiveness relative to primary series was 26·2% (95% CI 23·6-28·6) against infection and 75·1% (40·2-89·6) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, during 1-year follow-up after the booster. Among people clinically vulnerable to severe COVID-19, effectiveness was 34·2% (27·0-40·6) against infection and 76·6% (34·5-91·7) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19. Effectiveness against infection was highest at 61·4% (60·2-62·6) in the first month after the booster but waned thereafter and was modest at only 15·5% (8·3-22·2) by the sixth month. In the seventh month and thereafter, coincident with BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2·75* subvariant incidence, effectiveness was progressively negative albeit with wide CIs. Similar patterns of protection were observed irrespective of previous infection status, clinical vulnerability, or type of vaccine (BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273). INTERPRETATION: Protection against omicron infection waned after the booster, and eventually suggested a possibility for negative immune imprinting. However, boosters substantially reduced infection and severe COVID-19, particularly among individuals who were clinically vulnerable, affirming the public health value of booster vaccination. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core (both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar), Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.

Persistence of spike-specific immune responses in BNT162b2-vaccinated donors and generation of rapid ex-vivo T cells expansion protocol for adoptive immunotherapy: A pilot study.

Introduction: The BNT162b2 mRNA-based vaccine has shown high efficacy in preventing COVID-19 infection but there are limited data on the types and persistence of the humoral and T cell responses to such a vaccine. Methods: Here, we dissect the vaccine-induced humoral and cellular responses in a cohort of six healthy recipients of two doses of this vaccine. Results and discussion: Overall, there was heterogeneity in the spike-specific humoral and cellular responses among vaccinated individuals. Interestingly, we demonstrated that anti-spike antibody levels detected by a novel simple automated assay (Jess) were strongly correlated (r=0.863, P<0.0001) with neutralizing activity; thus, providing a potential surrogate for neutralizing cell-based assays. The spike-specific T cell response was measured with a newly modified T-spot assay in which the high-homology peptide-sequences cross-reactive with other coronaviruses were removed. This response was induced in 4/6 participants after the first dose, and all six participants after the second dose, and remained detectable in 4/6 participants five months post-vaccination. We have also shown for the first time, that BNT162b2 vaccine enhanced T cell responses also against known human common viruses. In addition, we demonstrated the efficacy of a rapid ex-vivo T cell expansion protocol for spike-specific T cell expansion to be potentially used for adoptive-cell therapy in severe COVID-19, immunocompromised individuals, and other high-risk groups. There was a 9 to 13.7-fold increase in the number of expanded T cells with a significant increase of anti-spike specific response showing higher frequencies of both activation and cytotoxic markers. Interestingly, effector memory T cells were dominant in all four participants' CD8+ expanded memory T cells; CD4+ T cells were dominated by effector memory in 2/4 participants and by central memory in the remaining two participants. Moreover, we found that high frequencies of CD4+ terminally differentiated memory T cells were associated with a greater reduction of spike-specific activated CD4+ T cells. Finally, we showed that participants who had a CD4+ central memory T cell dominance expressed a high CD69 activation marker in the CD4+ activated T cells.

Protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against the omicron variant and severe disease: a systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: The global surge in the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has resulted in many individuals with hybrid immunity (immunity developed through a combination of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination). We aimed to systematically review the magnitude and duration of the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against infection and severe disease caused by the omicron variant. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched for cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the WHO COVID-19 database, and Europe PubMed Central from Jan 1, 2020, to June 1, 2022, using keywords related to SARS-CoV-2, reinfection, protective effectiveness, previous infection, presence of antibodies, and hybrid immunity. The main outcomes were the protective effectiveness against reinfection and against hospital admission or severe disease of hybrid immunity, hybrid immunity relative to previous infection alone, hybrid immunity relative to previous vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity relative to hybrid immunity with fewer vaccine doses. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions Tool. We used log-odds random-effects meta-regression to estimate the magnitude of protection at 1-month intervals. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022318605). FINDINGS: 11 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and 15 studies reporting the protective effectiveness of hybrid immunity were included. For previous infection, there were 97 estimates (27 with a moderate risk of bias and 70 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of previous infection against hospital admission or severe disease was 74·6% (95% CI 63·1-83·5) at 12 months. The effectiveness of previous infection against reinfection waned to 24·7% (95% CI 16·4-35·5) at 12 months. For hybrid immunity, there were 153 estimates (78 with a moderate risk of bias and 75 with a serious risk of bias). The effectiveness of hybrid immunity against hospital admission or severe disease was 97·4% (95% CI 91·4-99·2) at 12 months with primary series vaccination and 95·3% (81·9-98·9) at 6 months with the first booster vaccination after the most recent infection or vaccination. Against reinfection, the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following primary series vaccination waned to 41·8% (95% CI 31·5-52·8) at 12 months, while the effectiveness of hybrid immunity following first booster vaccination waned to 46·5% (36·0-57·3) at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: All estimates of protection waned within months against reinfection but remained high and sustained for hospital admission or severe disease. Individuals with hybrid immunity had the highest magnitude and durability of protection, and as a result might be able to extend the period before booster vaccinations are needed compared to individuals who have never been infected. FUNDING: WHO COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

Effectiveness of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have reported that influenza vaccination is associated with lower risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) morbidity and mortality. This study aims to estimate effectiveness of influenza vaccination, using Abbott's quadrivalent Influvac Tetra vaccine, against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against severe COVID-19. METHODS: This matched, test-negative, case-control study was implemented on a population of 30,774 healthcare workers (HCWs) in Qatar during the 2020 annual influenza vaccination campaign, September 17, 2020-December 31, 2020, before introduction of COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Of 30,774 HCWs, 576 with PCR-positive tests and 10,033 with exclusively PCR-negative tests were eligible for inclusion in the study. Matching by sex, age, nationality, reason for PCR testing, and PCR test date yielded 518 cases matched to 2058 controls. Median duration between influenza vaccination and the PCR test was 43 days (IQR, 29-62). Estimated effectiveness of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection> 14 days after receiving the vaccine was 29.7% (95% CI: 5.5-47.7%). Estimated effectiveness of influenza vaccination against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 was 88.9% (95% CI: 4.1-98.7%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: Recent influenza vaccination is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity.

Detection of Antinuclear Antibodies Targeting Intracellular Signal Transduction, Metabolism, Apoptotic Processes and Cell Death in Critical COVID-19 Patients.

Background and Objectives: The heterogeneity of the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) lies within its diverse symptoms and severity, ranging from mild to lethal. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a leading cause of mortality in COVID-19 patients, characterized by a hyper cytokine storm. Autoimmunity is proposed to occur as a result of COVID-19, given the high similarity of the immune responses observed in COVID-19 and autoimmune diseases. Here, we investigate the level of autoimmune antibodies in COVID-19 patients with different severities. Results: Initial screening for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) IgG using ELISA revealed that 1.58% (2/126) and 4% (5/126) of intensive care unit (ICU) COVID-19 cases expressed strong and moderate ANA levels, respectively. An additional sample was positive with immunofluorescence assays (IFA) screening. However, all the non-ICU cases (n=273) were ANA negative using both assays. Samples positive for ANA were further confirmed with large-scale autoantibody screening by phage immunoprecipitation-sequencing (PhIP-Seq). The majority of the ANA-positive samples showed "speckled" ANA pattern by microscopy and revealed autoantibody specificities that targeted proteins involved in intracellular signal transduction, metabolism, apoptotic processes, and cell death by PhIP-Seq; further denoting reactivity to nuclear and cytoplasmic antigens. Conclusion: Our results further support the notion of routine screening for autoimmune responses in COVID-19 patients, which might help improve disease prognosis and patient management. Further, results provide compelling evidence that ANA-positive individuals should be excluded from being donors for convalescent plasma therapy in the context of COVID-19.

Neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 are higher but decline faster in mRNA vaccinees compared to individuals with natural infection.

BACKGROUND: Waning protection against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants by pre-existing antibodies elicited due to current vaccination or natural infection is a global concern. Whether this is due to the waning of immunity to SARS-COV-2 remains unclear. AIM: We aimed to investigate the dynamics of antibody isotype responses among vaccinated naïve (VN) and naturally infected (NI) individuals. METHODS: We followed up antibody levels in COVID-19 mRNA-vaccinated subjects without prior infection (VN, n = 100) in two phases: phase-I (P-I) at ~ 1.4 and phase-II (P-II) at ~ 5.3 months. Antibody levels were compared to those of unvaccinated and naturally infected subjects (NI, n = 40) at ~ 1.7 (P-1) and 5.2 (P-II) months post-infection. Neutralizing antibodies (NTAb), anti-S-RBD-IgG, -IgM, and anti-S-IgA isotypes were measured. RESULTS: The VN group elicited significantly greater antibody responses (p < 0.001) than the NI group at P-I, except for IgM. In the VN group, a significant waning in antibody response was observed in all isotypes. There was about ~ a 4-fold decline in NTAb levels (p < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgG (~5-folds, p < 0.001), anti-S-RBD-IgM (~6-folds, p < 0.001), and anti-S1-IgA (2-folds, p < 0.001). In the NI group, a significant but less steady decline was notable in S-RBD-IgM (~2-folds, p < 0.001), and a much smaller but significant difference in NTAb (<2-folds, p < 0.001) anti-S-RBD IgG (<2-folds, p = 0.005). Unlike the VN group, the NI group mounted a lasting anti-S1-IgA response with no significant decline. Anti-S1-IgA, which were ~ 3 folds higher in VN subjects compared to NI in P-1 (p < 0.001), dropped to almost the same levels, with no significant difference observed between the two groups in P-II. CONCLUSION: While double-dose mRNA vaccination boosted antibody levels, vaccinated individuals' 'boost' was relatively short-lived.

Evaluation of commercially available fully automated and ELISA-based assays for detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies.

Rapid and accurate measurement of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2)-specific neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) is paramount for monitoring immunity in infected and vaccinated subjects. The current gold standard relies on pseudovirus neutralization tests which require sophisticated skills and facilities. Alternatively, recent competitive immunoassays measuring anti-SARS-CoV-2 nAbs are proposed as a quick and commercially available surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). Here, we report the performance evaluation of three sVNTs, including two ELISA-based assays and an automated bead-based immunoassay for detecting nAbs against SARS-CoV-2. The performance of three sVNTs, including GenScript cPass, Dynamiker, and Mindray NTAb was assessed in samples collected from SARS-CoV-2 infected patients (n = 160), COVID-19 vaccinated individuals (n = 163), and pre-pandemic controls (n = 70). Samples were collected from infected patients and vaccinated individuals 2-24 weeks after symptoms onset or second dose administration. Correlation analysis with pseudovirus neutralization test (pVNT) and immunoassays detecting anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was performed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was generated to assess the optimal threshold for detecting nAbs by each assay. All three sVNTs showed an excellent performance in terms of specificity (100%) and sensitivity (100%, 97.0%, and 97.1% for GenScript, Dynamiker, and Mindray, respectively) in samples collected from vaccinated subjects. GenScript demonstrated the strongest correlation with pVNT (r = 0.743, R2 = 0.552), followed by Mindray (r = 0.718, R2 = 0.515) and Dynamiker (r = 0.608, R2 = 0.369). Correlation with anti-SARS-CoV-2 binding antibodies was variable, but the strongest correlations were observed between anti-RBD IgG antibodies and Mindray (r = 0.952, R2 = 0.907). ROC curve analyses demonstrated excellent performance for all three sVNT assays in both groups, with an AUC ranging between 0.99 and 1.0 (p < 0.0001). Also, it was shown that the manufacturer's recommended cutoff values could be modified based on the tested cohort without significantly affecting the sVNT performance. The sVNT provides a rapid, low-cost, and scalable alternative to conventional neutralization assays for measuring and expanding nAbs testing across various research and clinical settings. Also, it could aid in evaluating actual protective immunity at the population level and assessing vaccine effectiveness to lay a foundation for boosters' requirements.

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat.

Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic^1,2. Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches¹, while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach² that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities³ in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Protection from previous natural infection compared with mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 in Qatar: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding protection conferred by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination is important for informing vaccine mandate decisions. We compared protection conferred by natural infection versus that from the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar. METHODS: We conducted two matched retrospective cohort studies that emulated target trials. Data were obtained from the national federated databases for COVID-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 testing, and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death between Feb 28, 2020 (pandemic onset in Qatar) and May 12, 2022. We matched individuals with a documented primary infection and no vaccination record (natural infection cohort) with individuals who had received two doses (primary series) of the same vaccine (BNT162b2-vaccinated or mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohorts) at the start of follow-up (90 days after the primary infection). Individuals were exact matched (1:1) by sex, 10-year age group, nationality, comorbidity count, and timing of primary infection or first-dose vaccination. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death in the natural infection cohorts was compared with incidence in the vaccinated cohorts, using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustment for matching factors. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2021 (date of second-dose vaccine roll-out) and May 12, 2022, 104 500 individuals vaccinated with BNT162b2 and 61 955 individuals vaccinated with mRNA-1273 were matched to unvaccinated individuals with a documented primary infection. During follow-up, 7123 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the BNT162b2-vaccinated cohort and 3583 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. 4282 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohort and 2301 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. The overall adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection was 0·47 (95% CI 0·45-0·48) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·51 (0·49-0·54) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. The overall adjusted HR for severe (acute care hospitalisations), critical (intensive care unit hospitalisations), or fatal COVID-19 cases was 0·24 (0·08-0·72) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·24 (0·05-1·19) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. Severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 was rare in both the natural infection and vaccinated cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Previous natural infection was associated with lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of the variant, than mRNA primary-series vaccination. Vaccination remains the safest and most optimal tool for protecting against infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death, irrespective of previous infection status. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar; Qatar Ministry of Public Health; Hamad Medical Corporation; Sidra Medicine; Qatar Genome Programme; and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.

Covid-19 Vaccine Protection among Children and Adolescents in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: The BNT162b2 vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has been authorized for use in children 5 to 11 years of age and adolescents 12 to 17 years of age but in different antigen doses. METHODS: We assessed the real-world effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among children and adolescents in Qatar. To compare the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the national cohort of vaccinated participants with the incidence in the national cohort of unvaccinated participants, we conducted three matched, retrospective, target-trial, cohort studies - one assessing data obtained from children 5 to 11 years of age after the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant became prevalent and two assessing data from adolescents 12 to 17 years of age before the emergence of the omicron variant (pre-omicron study) and after the omicron variant became prevalent. Associations were estimated with the use of Cox proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTS: Among children, the overall effectiveness of the 10-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 25.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0 to 38.6). Effectiveness was highest (49.6%; 95% CI, 28.5 to 64.5) right after receipt of the second dose but waned rapidly thereafter and was negligible after 3 months. Effectiveness was 46.3% (95% CI, 21.5 to 63.3) among children 5 to 7 years of age and 16.6% (95% CI, -4.2 to 33.2) among those 8 to 11 years of age. Among adolescents, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 30.6% (95% CI, 26.9 to 34.1), but many adolescents had been vaccinated months earlier. Effectiveness waned over time since receipt of the second dose. Effectiveness was 35.6% (95% CI, 31.2 to 39.6) among adolescents 12 to 14 years of age and 20.9% (95% CI, 13.8 to 27.4) among those 15 to 17 years of age. In the pre-omicron study, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 infection among adolescents was 87.6% (95% CI, 84.0 to 90.4) and waned relatively slowly after receipt of the second dose. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination in children was associated with modest, rapidly waning protection against omicron infection. Vaccination in adolescents was associated with stronger, more durable protection, perhaps because of the larger antigen dose. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).

Comparative analysis of within-host diversity among vaccinated COVID-19 patients infected with different SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a rapidly evolving RNA virus that mutates within hosts and exists as viral quasispecies. Here, we evaluated the within-host diversity among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals (n = 379) infected with different SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern. The majority of samples harbored less than 14 intra-host single-nucleotide variants (iSNVs). A deep analysis revealed a significantly higher intra-host diversity in Omicron samples than in other variants (p value < 0.05). Vaccination status and type had a limited impact on intra-host diversity except for Beta-B.1.315 and Delta-B.1.617.2 vaccinees, who exhibited higher diversity than unvaccinated individuals (p values: <0.0001 and <0.0021, respectively). Three immune-escape mutations were identified: S255F in Delta and R346K and T376A in Omicron-B.1.1.529. The latter 2 mutations were fixed in BA.1 and BA.2 genomes, respectively. Overall, the relatively higher intra-host diversity among vaccinated individuals and the detection of immune-escape mutations, despite being rare, suggest a potential vaccine-induced immune pressure in vaccinated individuals.

Duration of immune protection of SARS-CoV-2 natural infection against reinfection.

BACKGROUND: The future of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic hinges on virus evolution and duration of immune protection of natural infection against reinfection. We investigated duration of protection afforded by natural infection, the effect of viral immune evasion on duration of protection, and protection against severe reinfection, in Qatar, between February 28, 2020 and June 5, 2022. METHODS: Three national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted to compare incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity among unvaccinated persons with a documented SARS-CoV-2 primary infection, to incidence among those infection-naïve and unvaccinated. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazard regression models. RESULTS: Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against pre-Omicron reinfection was 85.5% (95% CI: 84.8-86.2%). Effectiveness peaked at 90.5% (95% CI: 88.4-92.3%) in the 7th month after the primary infection, but waned to ~ 70% by the 16th month. Extrapolating this waning trend using a Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of 50% in the 22nd month and < 10% by the 32nd month. Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against Omicron reinfection was 38.1% (95% CI: 36.3-39.8%) and declined with time since primary infection. A Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of < 10% by the 15th month. Effectiveness of primary infection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 reinfection was 97.3% (95% CI: 94.9-98.6%), irrespective of the variant of primary infection or reinfection, and with no evidence for waning. Similar results were found in sub-group analyses for those ≥50 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Protection of natural infection against reinfection wanes and may diminish within a few years. Viral immune evasion accelerates this waning. Protection against severe reinfection remains very strong, with no evidence for waning, irrespective of variant, for over 14 months after primary infection.