Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.08.25.22278443

ABSTRACT

Background: The decline in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) is well established, however the impact of variant-specific immune evasion and waning protection remains unclear. Here, we use whole-genome-sequencing (WGS) to tease apart the contribution of these factors on the decline observed following the introduction of the Delta variant. Further, we evaluate the utility of calendar-period-based variant classification as an alternative to WGS. Methods: We conducted a test-negative-case-control study among people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in the Yale New Haven Health System between April 1 and August 24, 2021. Variant classification was performed using WGS and secondarily by calendar-period. We estimated VE as one minus the ratio comparing the odds of infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Results: Overall, 2,029 cases (RT-PCR positive, sequenced samples) and 343,985 controls (negative RT-PCRs) were included. VE 14-89 days after 2nd dose was significantly higher against WGS-classified Alpha infection (84.4%, 95% confidence interval: 75.6-90.0%) than Delta infection (68.9%, CI: 58.0-77.1%, p-value: 0.013). The odds of WGS-classified Delta infection were significantly higher 90-149 than 14-89 days after 2nd dose (Odds ratio: 1.6, CI: 1.2-2.3). While estimates of VE against calendar-period-classified infections approximated estimates against WGS-classified infections, calendar-period-based classification was subject to outcome misclassification (35% during Alpha period, 4% during Delta period). Conclusions: These findings suggest that both waning protection and variant-specific immune evasion contributed to the lower effectiveness. While estimates of VE against calendar-period-classified infections mirrored that against WGS-classified infections, our analysis highlights the need for WGS when variants are co-circulating and misclassification is likely.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Genomic Instability , Hepatitis D
2.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.05.19.22275339

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the Connecticut Department of Corrections (DOC) COVID-19 vaccine program within jails. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among people who were incarcerated in a DOC-operated jail between February 2 and November 8, 2021, and were eligible for vaccination at the time of incarceration (intake). We compared the vaccination rates before and after incarceration using an age-adjusted survival analysis with a time-varying exposure of incarceration and an outcome of vaccination. Results: During the study period, 3,716 people spent at least 1 night in jail and were eligible for vaccination at intake. Of these residents, 136 were vaccinated prior to incarceration, 2,265 had a recorded vaccine offer, and 476 were vaccinated while incarcerated. The age-adjusted hazard of vaccination following incarceration was significantly higher than prior to incarceration (12.5; 95% CI: 10.2-15.3). Conclusions: We found that residents were more likely to become vaccinated in jail than the community. Though these findings highlight the utility of vaccination programs within jails, the low level of vaccination in this population speaks to the need for additional program development within jails and the community.


Subject(s)
COVID-19
3.
medrxiv; 2022.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2022.04.19.22274056

ABSTRACT

Importance: The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness of a primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among previously infection people. Design: Test-negative case-control study. Setting: Yale New Haven Health System facilities serving southern Connecticut communities. Participants: Vaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022. Exposure: COVID-19 mRNA primary and booster vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: We conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 variant infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary vaccination during the period before and during booster eligibility (14-149 and [≥]150 days, respectively, after 2nd dose) and of booster vaccination ([≥]14 days after booster dose). To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people. Results: Overall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 6.1% and 7.8% had a prior infection. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (95% CI, 7.1-56.1%) and 28.5% (95% CI, 20.0-36.2%) for people with and without prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination was 45.8% (95% CI, 20.0-63.2%) and 56.9% (95% CI, 52.1-61.2%) in people with and without prior infection, respectively. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.56-1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.46-0.56). Conclusions and Relevance: Primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection in people without prior infection, it was not associated with additional protection among people with prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Hallucinations , Infections
4.
medrxiv; 2021.
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppzbmed-10.1101.2021.04.07.21255081

ABSTRACT

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported. Methods We performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Findings For the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case- control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate. Interpretation Evidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented. Funding Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus Research in Context Evidence before this study We searched PubMed for articles published from inception of the pandemic until April 3, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms “P.1” AND “vaccine” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Additionally, we searched for “CoronaVac” AND “SARS-CoV-2”. Early studies have found plasma from convalescent COVID-19 patients and sera from vaccinated individuals have reduced neutralisation of the SARS-CoV-2 variant, Gamma or P.1, compared with strains isolated earlier in the pandemic. Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1, and CoronaVac are the only vaccines for which such data has been published to date. No studies reported effectiveness of any vaccine on reducing the risk of infection or disease among individuals exposed to P.1 or in settings of high P.1 transmission. Added value of this study This study finds that vaccination with CoronaVac was 49.4% (95% CI 13.2 to 71.9) effective at preventing COVID-19 in a setting with likely high prevalence of the Gamma Variant of Concern. However, an analysis of effectiveness by dose was underpowered and failed to find significant effectiveness of the two-dose schedule of CoronaVac (estimated VE 37.1%, 95% CI -53.3 to 74.2). Implications of all the available evidence These findings are suggestive for the effectiveness of CoronaVac in healthcare workers in the setting of widespread P.1 transmission but must be strengthened by observational studies in other settings and populations. Based on this evidence, there is a need to implement sustained non-pharmaceutical interventions even as vaccination campaigns continue.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome , COVID-19
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL