Effectiveness of Autumn 2023 COVID-19 vaccination and residual protection of prior doses against hospitalisation in England, estimated using a test-negative case-control study. (preprint)

IntroductionThe last COVID-19 vaccine offered to all adults in England became available from November 2021. The most recent booster programme commenced in September 2023. Bivalent BA.4-5 or monovalent XBB.1.5 boosters were given. During the study period, the JN.1 variant became dominant in England. MethodsVaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation was estimated throughout using the test-negative case-control study design where positive PCR tests from hospitalised individuals are cases and comparable negative PCR tests are controls. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with the test result as the outcome, vaccination status as the primary exposure variable of interest and confounder adjustment. ResultsThere was no evidence of residual protection for boosters given as part of previous campaigns. There were 28,916 eligible tests included to estimate the effectiveness of the autumn 2023 boosters in those aged 65 years and older. VE peaked at 50.6% (95% CI: 44.2-56.3%) after 2-4 weeks, followed by waning to 13.6% (95% CI: -11.7-33.2%). Estimates were generally higher for the XBB.1.5 booster than the BA.4-5 booster, but this difference was not statistically significant. Point estimates were highest against XBB sub-lineages. Effectiveness was lower against both JN.1 and EG.5.1 variants with confidence intervals non-overlapping with the effectiveness of the XBB sub-lineages at 2-4 weeks for EG.5.1 where VE was 44.5% (95% CI: 20.2-61.4%) and at 5-9 weeks for JN.1 where VE was 26.4% (95%CI: -3.4-47.6%). ConclusionsThe recent monovalent XBB.1.5 and bivalent BA.4-5 boosters provided comparable and good protection against hospitalisation, however there was evidence of lower VE against hospitalisation of these boosters against JN.1.

Quantifying and adjusting for confounding from health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access in observational research. (preprint)

Objective: To assess the feasibility and effect of using proxy markers of health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access to quantify and adjust for confounding in observational studies of influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Design: Cohort study for influenza VE in the 2019/2020 influenza season and for early COVID-19 VE (December 2020 to March 2021). Setting: Primary care data pre-linked to secondary care and death data in England. Participants: Individuals aged ≥66 years on 1 September 2019. Interventions: Vaccination with any influenza vaccination in the 2019/2020 season or with either a BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1-S vaccination from 08/12/2020 to 31/03/2021. Main outcome measures: Influenza or COVID-19 specific infections, hospitalisation and death. VE was estimated with sequential adjustment for demographics, underlying health conditions, and 14 markers reflecting uptake of public health interventions (screenings, vaccinations and NHS health checks), active healthcare access/use (prostate antigen testing, bone density scans, GP practice visits, low value procedures and blood pressure measurements) and lack of access/underuse (hospital visits for ambulatory care sensitive conditions and did not attend primary care visits). Influenza vaccination in the 2019/2020 season was also considered as a negative exposure intervention against the first wave of COVID-19. Results: We included 1,991,284, 1,796,667, and 1,946,943 individuals in the influenza, COVID-19 and negative exposure VE populations, respectively. Vaccinated individuals were more likely to display active health-seeking behaviour, including participation in UK national screening programmes, compared with unvaccinated individuals. In the 2019/2020 influenza season, adjusting for health-seeking markers increased VE against infection from -1.5% (95%CI: -3.2,0.1) to 7.1% (95%CI: 5.4,8.7), but this trend was less apparent for more severe outcomes. For COVID-19 during early vaccine roll out, adjusting for health-seeking markers in addition to demographics and underlying health conditions did not change VE estimates against infection or severe disease (e.g., two doses of BNT162b2 against infection: from 82.8% [95%CI: 78.4,86.3] to 83.1% [95%CI: 78.7,86.5]). Adjusting for health-seeking markers removed bias in the negative exposure analysis of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection (-7.5% [95%CI: -10.6,-4.5] vs -2.1% [95%CI: -6.0,1.7] before vs after adjusting for health-seeking markers). Conclusions: Markers of health-seeking behaviour and healthcare access can be identified in electronic health records, are associated with vaccination uptake, and can be used to quantify and account for confounding in observational studies.

Covid-19 vaccine safety in pregnancy, a nested case-control study in births from April 2021 to March 2022, England (preprint)

Introduction: Vaccine safety in pregnancy is always of paramount importance. Current evidence of COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnancy has been reassuring with no association found with negative maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, very few safety studies are conducted on a national level and investigate dosage, timing of vaccination as well as vaccine manufacturer. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a population based COVID-19 vaccine safety evaluation in England, including timing of vaccination by trimester, dosage and vaccine manufacturer received in pregnancy. Method: A matched case control study nested in a retrospective cohort where adverse maternal and neonatal pregnancy outcomes were compared across several COVID-19 vaccine exposures using conditional multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for a range of demographic and health characteristics. Eligible participants were identified from the national maternity services dataset (MSDS) and records were linked to hospital admission, national COVID-19 vaccine and COVID-19 testing databases. Matching criteria differed by outcome but included participant's age and estimated week of conception. Results: 514,013 pregnant individuals aged between 18 and 50 years were identified during the study period (births from 16th of April 2021- 31st March 2022). Receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy conferred lower odds of giving birth to a baby who was low birthweight (aOR=0.86, 95% CI: 0.79 - 0.93), preterm (aOR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.85 - 0.92) or who had an Apgar score less than 7 at five mins of age (aOR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80 - 0.98). There was no association between vaccination in pregnancy and stillbirth (aOR=0.90, 95% CI: 0.76 - 1.07), neonatal death (aOR=1.27, 95% CI: 0.91 - 1.77) perinatal death (aOR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.83 - 1.16), and maternal venous thromboembolism in pregnancy (aOR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.43 - 1.56). The odds of maternal admission to intensive care unit were lower in vaccinated pregnant women (aOR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.76 - 0.95). Conclusion: COVID-19 vaccines are safe to use in pregnancy and they confer protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection which can lead to adverse outcomes for both the mother and the infant. Our findings generated important information to communicate to pregnant women and health professionals to support COVID-19 maternal vaccination programmes.

Adapting COVID-19 research infrastructure to capture Influenza and Respiratory Syncytial Virus alongside SARS-CoV-2 in UK healthcare workers Winter 2022/23 and beyond: protocol for a pragmatic sub-study (preprint)

IntroductionDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, extensive research was conducted on SARS-CoV-2, however important questions about other respiratory pathogens remain unanswered. A severe influenza season in 2022-2023 with simultaneous circulation of SARS-CoV2 and Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) is anticipated. This sub-study aims to determine the incidence and impact of these respiratory viruses on healthcare workers (HCW), the symptoms they experienced, the effectiveness of both COVID-19 and influenza vaccination and the burden of these infections on the National Health Service (NHS) workforce. Methods and analysisThis is a longitudinal prospective cohort sub-study, utilising the population and infrastructure of SIREN, which focuses on hospital staff in the UK. Participants undergo fortnightly Nucleic Acid Amplification Testing (NAAT) on a multiplex assay including SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A&B and RSV, regardless of symptoms. Questionnaires are completed every two weeks, capturing symptoms, sick days, exposures, and vaccination records. Serum samples are collected monthly or quarterly from participants associated with a SIREN site. This sub-study commenced on 28/11/22 to align with the predicted influenza season and participants influenza vaccine status. The SIREN Participant Involvement Panel (PIP) shaped the aims and methods for the study, highlighting its acceptability. UK Devolved Administrations were supported to develop local protocols. Analysis plans include incidence of asymptomatic and symptomatic infection, comparisons of vaccination coverage; assessment of sick day burden, and effectiveness of seasonal influenza against infection and time off work. Data are also integrated into UKHSA nosocomial modelling. Ethics and disseminationThe protocol was approved by the Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (IRAS ID 284460, REC Reference 20SC0230) on 14/11/2022. Participants were informed in advance. As the frequency and method of sampling remained the same, implied consent processes were approved by the committee. Participants returning to the study give informed consent. Regular reports to advisory groups and peer-reviewed publications are planned to disseminate findings and inform decision making. Trial registration number: ISRCTN11041050. Strengths and limitations of this study- The positioning of this sub-study, led by public health agencies in collaboration with a network of NHS sites, facilitates horizon scanning enabling rapid adaptation of the study protocol and deployment to conduct relevant scientific research in a cohort of healthcare workers - To achieve target recruitment, deployment of a new postal pathway is underway, allowing for more direct communication between the central research team and participants - The multi-disciplinary partnerships including a network of academic centres established and embedded by SIREN can now be leveraged and extended to explore Flu and RSV - Decentralised study delivery, with testing at a network of NHS sites has both strengths and limitations. This includes enabling more in-depth relationships and communications between participants and their local research teams, however, introduce additional communication, governance, and data sharing requirements. - Some demographics are over-represented such as female staff, nurses and doctors, and some are under-represented such as staff from ethnic minorities, porters and estates. This is partly the consequence of a rapid recruitment drive at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Serological outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection by vaccination status and variant in England (preprint)

Background Throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several vaccines have been rolled out and distinct variants with different severity and immune profiles emerged in England. Using data from enhanced surveillance of COVID-19 in vaccine eligible individuals we investigated the antibody response following SARS-CoV-2 infection according to vaccination status and variant. Methods PCR-positive eligible individuals were identified from community PCR testing data in England between February 2021 and April 2022 and contacted by nurses to complete questionnaires at recruitment and 21 days post recruitment. Individuals were sent self-sampling kits and self-sampled nasal/oropharyngeal swabs were taken day 1, day 3 and day 7 post-recruitment as well as acute (day 1), convalescent (follow-up) serum and oral fluid samples. Regression analyses were used to investigate how N antibody seroconversion differs by vaccine status, and to investigate how N and S antibody levels differ by vaccine status overall and stratified by variants. Interval-censored analyses and regression analyses were used to investigate the effect of acute S antibody levels on the duration of positivity, the cycle threshold values, the self-reported symptom severity and the number of symptoms reported. Results A total of 1,497 PCR positive individuals were included. A total of 369 (24.7%) individuals were unvaccinated, 359 (24.0%) participants were infected with Alpha, 762 (50.9%) with Delta and 376 (25.2%) with Omicron. The median age of participants was 49 years old (IQR 39-57). Convalescent anti-N antibody levels were lower in vaccinated individuals and convalescent anti-S antibody levels were higher in vaccinated individuals and increased with the number of doses received. Acute anti-S antibody level increased with the number of doses received. Higher acute anti-S antibody levels were associated with a shorter duration of positivity (overall and for the Delta variant). Higher acute anti-S antibody levels were also associated with higher Ct values (overall and for the Alpha and Delta variants). There was no association between the acute anti-S antibody level and self-reported symptom severity. Individuals with higher acute anti-S antibody level were less likely to report six or more symptoms (overall and for Delta variant). Conclusion Understanding the characteristics of the antibody response, its dynamics over time and the immunity it confers is important to inform future vaccination strategies and policies. Our findings suggest that vaccination is associated with high acute anti-S antibody level but reduced convalescent anti-N antibody level. High anti-S antibody level is associated with reduced duration of infection, reduced infectiousness and may also be associated with reduced symptoms severity and number of symptoms.

Estimating the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death: a cohort study based on the 2021 Census, England. (preprint)

Objective: To estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against hospitalisation for COVID-19 and death involving COVID-19 in England using linked population level data sources including the 2021 Census. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: England, 21 March 2021 to 20 March 2022. Participants: Individuals alive and aged 16+ on 21 March 2021, resident in England, enumerated in the 2021 Census as a usual resident, and able to link to an NHS number. A sample of 583,840 individuals was used for the analysis. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination: first dose, second dose and third dose/first booster dose, with categories for time since each dose. Main outcome measures: Hospitalisation for COVID-19 or death involving COVID-19. An adjusted Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the hazard ratio for the outcomes for vaccinated participants for different doses and time since dose compared to unvaccinated individuals. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1 minus hazard ratio)x 100%. A control outcome of non-COVID-19 death was also assessed. Results: Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation for COVID-19 was 52.1% (95% confidence interval 51.3% to 52.8%) for a first dose, 55.6% (55.2% to 56.1%) for a second dose and 77.6% (77.3% to 78.0%) for a third dose, with a decrease in vaccine effectiveness 3+ months after the third dose. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 mortality was 58.7% (52.7% to 63.9%) for a first dose, 88.5% (87.5% to 89.5%) for a second dose and 93.2% (92.9% to 93.5%) for a third dose, with evidence of waning 3+ months after the second and third doses. For the second dose, which is the most comparable across the different time-periods, vaccine effectiveness was higher against COVID-19 hospitalisation but slightly lower against COVID-19 mortality in the Omicron dominant period than the period before the Omicron variant became dominant. Vaccine effectiveness against both COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality was higher in general for mRNA vaccines than non mRNA vaccines, however this could be influenced by the different populations given each vaccine vector. Non-zero VE against non-COVID-19 mortality indicates that residual confounding may impact the results, despite the inclusion of up-to-date socio-demographic adjustments and various sources of health data, with possible frailty bias, confounding by indication and a healthy vaccinee effect observed. Conclusions: The vaccine effectiveness estimates show increased protection with number of doses and a high level of protection against both COVID-19 hospitalisation and mortality for the third/booster dose, as would be expected from previous research. However, despite the various sources of health data used to adjust the models, the estimates for different breakdowns and for non-COVID-19 mortality expose residual confounding by health status, which should be considered when interpreting estimates of vaccine effectiveness.

Long-term duration of protection of ancestral-strain monovalent vaccines and effectiveness of the bivalent BA.1 boosters against COVID-19 hospitalisation during a period of BA.5, BQ.1, CH.1.1. and XBB.1.5 circulation in England (preprint)

Abstract Background Bivalent BA.1 booster vaccines were offered to adults aged 50 years and older and clinically vulnerable individuals as part of the autumn COVID-19 booster vaccination programme 2022 in England. Methods A test-negative case-control study was used to estimate the duration of protection of the monovalent vaccines against hospitalisation as compared to those unvaccinated. In addition, the incremental VE of the bivalent BA.1 booster vaccines was estimated relative to those with waned immunity where the last dose was at least 6 months prior amongst those aged 50 years and older. Findings The protection conferred by the monovalent vaccines was well maintained long-term: absolute VE against hospitalisation amongst those aged 65 years and older who had received at least 3 doses plateaued from 6 months after the last dose at around 50%. Incremental VE (in addition to the protection from earlier vaccines) of the bivalent BA.1 boosters against hospitalisation peaked at 53.0% (95% C.I.; 47.9-57.5%) (equivalent to an absolute VE of approximately 75%) before waning to around 35.9% (95% C.I.; 31.4-40.1%) after 10 or more weeks. Interpretation This study provides evidence of the long-term duration of protection of the monovalent vaccines, suggesting individuals at lower risk of severe disease who did not receive a booster in autumn 2022 may not require regular re-vaccination. Furthermore, this study finds good evidence that the bivalent BA.1 booster vaccines are highly effective against hospitalisation amongst those aged 50 years and older with the sub-lineages of Omicron present in the autumn/winter of 2022 in England. Funding None.

Effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines against severe disease with Omicron sub-lineages BA.4 and BA.5 in England (preprint)

The Omicron sub-lineages BA.4 and BA.5 were first detected in England in April 2022. A case surge followed despite England having recently experienced waves with BA.1 and BA.2. This study used a whole population test-negative case-control study design to estimate the effectiveness of the vaccines currently in use as part of the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme against hospitalisation following infection with BA.4 and BA.5 as compared to BA.2 during a period of co-circulation. Incremental VE was estimated in those vaccinated with either a third or fourth dose as compared to individuals with waned immunity who had received their second dose at least 25 weeks prior. Vaccination status was included as an independent variable and effectiveness was defined as 1-odds of vaccination in cases/odds of vaccination in controls. During the study period, there were 32,845 eligible tests from hospitalised individuals. Of these, 25,862 were negative (controls), 3,432 were BA.2, 273 were BA.4, 947 were BA.5 and 2,331 were either BA.4 or BA.5 cases. There was no evidence of reduced VE against hospitalisation for BA.4 or BA.5 as compared to BA.2. The incremental VE was 56.8% (95% C.I.; 24.0-75.4%), 59.9% (95% C.I.; 45.6-70.5%) and 52.4% (95% C.I.; 43.2-60.1%) for BA.4, BA.5 and BA.2, respectively, at 2 to 14 weeks after a third or fourth dose. VE against hospitalisation with BA.4/5 or BA.2 was slightly higher for the mRNA-1273 booster than the BNT162b2 booster at all time-points investigated, but confidence intervals overlapped. These data provide reassuring evidence of the protection conferred by the current vaccines against severe disease with BA.4 and BA.5.

Protection against symptomatic disease with the delta and omicron BA.1/BA.2 variants of SARS-CoV-2 after infection and vaccination in adolescents: national observational test-negative case control study, August 2021 to March 2022, England (preprint)

Background Little is known about the protection following prior infection with different SARS-CoV-2 variants, COVID-19 vaccination, and a combination of the two (hybrid immunity) in adolescents. Methods We used national SARS-CoV-2 testing and COVID-19 mRNA vaccination data in England to estimate protection following previous infection and vaccination against symptomatic PCR-confirmed delta and omicron (BA.1 or BA.2) variants in 11-17-year-olds using a test-negative case-control design. Findings By 31 March 2022, 63.6% of 16-17-year-olds and 48.2% of 12-15-year-olds had received more than one COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose. Between 08 August 2021 and 31 March 2022, 1,161,704 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-tests were successfully linked to COVID-19 vaccination status. In unvaccinated adolescents, prior infection with wildtype, alpha or delta provided greater protection against subsequent delta infection than subsequent omicron; prior omicron infection provided had the highest protection against omicron reinfection (59.3%; 95%CI: 46.7-69.0). In infection-naive adolescents, vaccination provided lower protection against symptomatic omicron infection than delta, peaking at 64.5% (95%CI; 63.6-65.4) 2-14 days after dose two and 62.9% (95%CI; 60.5-65.1) 2-14 weeks after dose three, with rapidly waning protection after each dose. Previously infected and vaccinated adolescents had the highest protection, irrespective of primary infecting SARS-CoV-2 strain. The highest protection against omicron was observed in vaccinated adolescents with prior omicron infection, reaching 96.4% (95%CI, 84.4-99.1) at 15-24 weeks post dose two. Interpretation All variants provide some protection against symptomatic reinfection and vaccination adds to protection. Vaccination provides low-to-moderate protection against symptomatic omicron infection, with waning protection after each dose, while hybrid immunity provides the most robust protection.

Effectiveness of ChAdOx1-S COVID-19 Booster Vaccination against the Omicron and Delta variants in England (preprint)

BackgroundDespite the potential widespread global use of the ChAdOx1-S booster, to date there are no published data on the real-world effectiveness. VE studies have found one and two doses of the ChAdOx1-S vaccine to be highly effective, and clinical trial data have demonstrated enhanced immunity following a ChAdOx1-S booster. In England, some individuals received a ChAdOx1-S booster where vaccination with mRNA vaccines was clinically contraindicated. MethodsThe demographic characteristics of those who received a ChAdOx1-S booster were compared to those who received a BNT162b2 booster. A test-negative case control design was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness of the ChAdOx1-S booster against symptomatic disease and hospitalisation in England. FindingsThose who received a ChAdOx1-S booster were more likely to be female (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.67 (1.64-1.71)), in a clinical risk group (adjusted OR 1.58 (1.54-1.63)), in the CEV group (adjusted OR 1.84 (1.79-1.89)) or severely immunosuppressed (adjusted OR 2.05 (1.96-2.13)). Protection against symptomatic disease in those aged 65 years and older peaked at 66.1% (16.6 to 86.3%) and 68.5% (65.7 to 71.2%) amongst those who received the ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2 booster vaccines, respectively. Protection waned to 44.5% (22.4 to 60.2%) and 54.1% (50.5 to 57.5%) after 5-9 weeks. Protection against hospitalisation following Omicron infection peaked at 82.3% (64.2 to 91.3%) after receiving a ChAdOx1-S booster, as compared to 90.9% (88.7 to 92.7%) for those who received a BNT162b2 booster. InterpretationDifferences in the population boosted with ChAdOx1-S in England renders direct comparison of vaccine effectiveness by manufacturer challenging. Nonetheless, this study supports the use of the ChAdOx1-S booster for protection against severe disease with COVID-19 in settings that have not yet offered booster doses and suggests that those who received ChAdOx1-S as a booster in England do not require re-vaccination ahead of others. FundingUKHSA

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron and Delta hospitalisation: test negative case-control study (preprint)

Background The omicron (B.1.1.529) variant has been associated with reduced vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection and mild disease with rapid waning, even after a third dose, nevertheless omicron has also been associated with milder disease than previous variants. With previous variants protection against severe disease has been substantially higher than protection against infection. Methods We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate VE against hospitalisation with the omicron and delta variants using community and in hospital testing linked to hospital records. As a milder disease, there may be an increasing proportion of hospitalised individuals with Omicron as an incidental finding. We therefore investigated the impact of using more specific and more severe hospitalisation indicators on VE. Results Among 18 to 64 year olds using all Covid-19 cases admitted via emergency care VE after a booster peaked at 82.4% and dropped to 53.6% by 15+ weeks after the booster; using all admissions for >= 2 days stay with a respiratory code in the primary diagnostic field VE ranged from 90.9% down to 67.4%; further restricting to those on oxygen/ventilated/on intensive care VE ranged from 97.1% down to 75.9%. Among 65+ year olds the equivalent VE estimates were 92.4% down to 76.9%; 91.3% down to 85.3% and 95.8% down to 86.8%. Conclusions With generally milder disease seen with Omicron, in particular in younger adults, contamination of hospitalisations with incidental cases is likely to reduce VE estimates against hospitalisation. VE estimates improve and waning and waning is more limited when definitions of hospitalisation that are more specific to severe respiratory disease are used.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness against the Omicron BA.2 variant in England (preprint)

The BA.1 sub-lineage of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant, first detected in the UK in mid-November 2021, rapidly became the dominant strain partly due to reduced vaccine effectiveness. An increase in a second Omicron sub-lineage BA.2 was observed in early January 2022. In this study we use a test-negative case control study design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease with BA.1 and BA.2 after one or two doses of BNT162b2, ChAdOx1-S or mRNA-1273, and after booster doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 during a period of co-circulation. Overall, there was no evidence that vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease is reduced following infection with the BA.2 sub-lineage as compared to BA.1. Furthermore, similar rates of waning were observed after the second and booster dose for each sub-lineage. These data provide reassuring evidence of the effectiveness of the vaccines currently in use against symptomatic disease caused by BA.2.

Protective effect of a first SARS-CoV-2 infection from reinfection: a matched retrospective cohort study using PCR testing data in England (preprint)

The duration of immunity after first SARS-CoV-2 infection and the extent to which prior immunity prevents reinfection is uncertain and remains an important question within the context of new variants. Using a retrospective population-based matched observational study approach, we identified cases with a first PCR positive test between 01 March 2020 and 30 September 2020 and cases were matched by age, sex, upper tier local authority of residence and testing route to individuals testing negative in the same week (controls) by PCR. After a 90-day pre-follow up period for cases and controls, any subsequent positive tests up to 31 December 2020 and deaths within 28 days of testing positive were identified, this encompassed an essentially vaccine-free period. There were 517,870 individuals in the matched cohort with 2,815 reinfection cases and 12,098 first infections. The protective effect of a prior SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive episode was 78% (OR 0.22, 0.21-0.23). Protection rose to 82% (OR 0.18, 0.17-0.19) after a sensitivity analysis excluded 934 individuals with a first test between March and May and a subsequent positive test between June and September 2020. Amongst individuals testing positive by PCR during follow-up, reinfection cases had 77% lower odds of symptoms at the second episode (adjusted OR 0.23, 0.20-0.26) and 45% lower odds of dying in the 28 days after reinfection (adjusted OR 0.55, 0.42-0.71). Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection offered protection against reinfection in this population. There was some evidence that reinfections increased with the Alpha variant compared to the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 variant highlighting the importance of continued monitoring as new variants emerge.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of concern (preprint)

Abstract Background A rapid increase in cases due to the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant in highly vaccinated populations has raised concerns about the effectiveness of current vaccines. Methods We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic disease caused by the Omicron and Delta variants in England. VE was calculated after primary immunisation with two BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 doses, and at 2+ weeks following a BNT162b2 booster. Results Between 27 November and 06 December 2021, 581 and 56,439 eligible Omicron and Delta cases respectively were identified. There were 130,867 eligible test-negative controls. There was no effect against Omicron from 15 weeks after two ChAdOx1 doses, while VE after two BNT162b2 doses was 88.0% (95%CI: 65.9 to 95.8%) 2-9 weeks after dose 2, dropping to between 34 and 37% from 15 weeks post dose 2.From two weeks after a BNT162b2 booster, VE increased to 71.4% (95%CI: 41.8 to 86.0%) for ChAdOx1 primary course recipients and 75.5% (95%CI: 56.1 to 86.3%) for BNT162b2 primary course recipients. For cases with Delta, VE was 41.8% (95%CI: 39.4-44.1%) at 25+ weeks after two ChAdOx1 doses, increasing to 93.8% (95%CI: 93.2-94.3%) after a BNT162b2 booster. With a BNT162b2 primary course, VE was 63.5% (95%CI: 61.4 to 65.5%) 25+ weeks after dose 2, increasing to 92.6% (95%CI: 92.0-93.1%) two weeks after the booster. Conclusions Primary immunisation with two BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 doses provided no or limited protection against symptomatic disease with the Omicron variant. Boosting with BNT162b2 following either primary course significantly increased protection.

Adolescent vaccination with BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine and effectiveness of the first dose against COVID-19: national test-negative case-control study, England (preprint)

Adolescents in the UK were recommended to have their first dose of mRNA vaccine during a period of high community transmission due to the highly transmissible Delta variant, followed by a second dose at an extended interval of 8-12 weeks. We used national SARS-CoV-2 testing, vaccination and hospitalisation data to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) using a test-negative case-control design, against PCR-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 in England. VE against symptomatic disease increased to 80% within two weeks of the first dose of BNT162b2 vaccine (higher than in adults aged 18-64 years) and then declines rapidly to 40% within 8 weeks (similar to adults). Early data in 16-17-year-olds also indicate high protection against hospitalisation and a rapid increase in VE against symptomatic COVID-19 after the second dose. Our data highlight the importance of the second vaccine dose for protection against symptomatic COVID-19 and raise important questions about the objectives of an adolescent immunisation programme. If prevention of infection is the primary aim, then regular COVID-19 vaccine boosters will be required.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 against SARS-CoV-2 household transmission - a prospective cohort study in England (preprint)

Background: The ability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to protect against infection and onward transmission determines whether immunisation can control global circulation. We estimated effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 vaccines against acquisition and transmission of the Alpha and Delta variants in a prospective household study in England. Methods: Adult index cases in the community and their household contacts took oral-nasal swabs on days 1, 3 and 7 after enrolment. Swabs were tested by RT-qPCR with genomic sequencing conducted on a subset. We used Bayesian logistic regression to infer vaccine effectiveness against acquisition and transmission, adjusted for age, vaccination history and variant. Findings: Between 2 February 2021 and 10 September 2021 213 index cases and 312 contacts were followed up. After excluding households lacking genomic proximity (N=2) or with unlikely serial intervals (N=16), 195 households with 278 contacts remained of whom 113 (41%) became PCR positive. Delta lineages were 4.6 times (95% Credible Interval: 1.5 - 20.1) more transmissible than Alpha; contacts older than 18 years were 2.0 times (1.4 - 3.3) more likely to acquire infection than children. Effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against transmission of Delta was 31% (-3%, 61%) and 42% (14%, 69%) for ChAdOx1, similar to their effectiveness for Alpha. Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 71% (12%,95%) vs 24% (-2%, 64%) respectively for BNT162b2 and 26% (-39%, 73%) vs 14% (-5%, 46%) respectively for ChAdOx1. Interpretation: BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 reduce transmission of the Delta variant from breakthrough infections in the household setting though their protection against infection is low. Funding: This study was funded by the UK Health Security Agency (formerly Public Health England) as part of the COVID-19 response.

Duration of Effectiveness of Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 Infection and COVID-19 Disease: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Regression (preprint)

Background: Knowing whether and to what extent COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes is critical to informing vaccine policy, such as the need for and timing of booster doses. Methods: We performed a systematic review from June 17 to October 27, 2021, using a structured search strategy of multiple databases. Studies with vaccine efficacy or effectiveness (VE) estimates for any WHO Emergency-Use-Listed COVID-19 vaccine at discrete time intervals after full vaccination and meeting pre-defined screening criteria underwent full-text review and risk of bias assessment. Random effects meta-regression was used to estimate the average change in VE from one to six months after full vaccination. Findings: Of 9,261 studies screened, 217 underwent full text review, and 14 were included in analyses. Vaccines evaluated were Pfizer/BioNTech-Comirnaty (n=11), Moderna-mRNA-1273 (n=8), Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S (n=3), and AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria (n=2). On average, VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased between 1 and 6 months after full vaccination by 18·5 percentage points (95% CI 8·4-33·4, p=0·0006) among persons of all ages and 19·9 percentage points (95% CI 9·2-36·7, p=0·0007) among older persons; for symptomatic COVID-19 disease, VE decreased by 25·4 (95% CI 13·7-42·5) and 32·0 percentage points (95% CI 11·0-69·0), respectively; and for severe COVID-19 disease, VE decreased by 8·0 (95% CI 3·6-15·2) and 9·7 percentage points (95% CI 5·9-14·7), respectively. The majority of VE estimates against severe disease remained over 70% for all time points. Interpretation: COVID-19 vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against COVID-19 severe disease remained high (>70%) in most studies in the six months after full vaccination, although it did decrease some (on average, 8-10 percentage points) between one and six months after full vaccination. In contrast, VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19 disease decreased approximately 20-30 percentage points during the six months after vaccination. The decrease in VE is likely due, at least in part, to waning immunity, although we cannot rule out the effect of bias. Continued follow-up of VE beyond six months is critical for updating COVID-19 vaccine policy. . Funding Information: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI)Declaration of Interests: MMH reports research grants from World Health Organization (WHO, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), Asian Development Bank (ADB), Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), and Pfizer (all paid to the institution). RA reports a contract from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a grant from the Chile Ministry of Science, and consulting fees from Mayo Clinic and Chile Ministry of Health. YG reports research grants from the United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF) and Israel Science Foundation. MJG reports research grants from South African Medical Research Council and BMGF (all paid to the institution) and participation on a data safety monitoring board for a study on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2-associated hospitalization and death. AH reports research grants from United States-Israel BSF. KLO serves as the Secretariat for the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization. MDK reports research grants from WHO, CEPI, ADB, and Pfizer (all paid to the institution) and consultancy fees from Merck. All other authors have nothing to declare.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control study (preprint)

Background In September 2021, the UK Government introduced a booster programme targeting individuals over 50 and those in a clinical risk group. Individuals were offered either a full dose of the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine or a half dose of the mRNA-1273 (Spikevax, Moderna) vaccine, irrespective of the vaccine received as the primary course Methods We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate the Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) of the booster dose BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) in those aged over 50 against symptomatic disease in post booster time intervals compared to individuals at least 140 days post a second dose with no booster dose recorded. In a secondary analysis, we also compared to unvaccinated individuals and to the 2 to 6 day period after a booster dose was received. Analyses were stratified by which primary doses had been received and any mixed primary courses were excluded. Results The relative VE estimate in the 14 days after the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) booster dose, compared to individuals that received a two-dose primary course, was 87.4 (95% confidence interval 84.9-89.4) in those individuals who received two doses ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria, AstraZeneca) as a primary course and 84.4 (95% confidence interval 82.8-85.8) in those individuals who received two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) as a primary course. Using the 2-6 day period post the booster dose as the baseline gave similar results. The absolute VE from 14 days after the booster, using the unvaccinated baseline, was 93.1(95% confidence interval 91.7-94.3) in those with ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria, AstraZeneca) as their primary course and 94.0 (93.4-94.6) for BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) as their primary course. Conclusions Our study provides real world evidence of significant increased protection from the booster vaccine dose against symptomatic disease in those aged over 50 year of age irrespective of which primary course was received.