Methods to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, with an emphasis on quasi-experimental approaches. / Métodos para avaliação da efetividade de vacinas para COVID-19 com ênfase em abordagens quase-experimentais.

The evaluation of vaccine effectiveness is conducted with real-world data. They are essential to monitor the performance of vaccination programmes over time, and in the context of the emergence of new variants. Until now, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines has been assessed based on classic methods, such as cohort and test-negative case-control studies, which may often not allow for adequate control of inherent biases in the assignment of vaccination campaigns. The aim of this review was to discuss the study designs available to evaluate vaccine effectiveness, highlighting quasi-experimental studies, which seek to mimic randomized trials, by introducing an exogenous component to allocate to treatment, in addition to the advantages, limitations, and applicability in the context of Brazilian data. The use of quasi-experimental approaches, such as interrupted time series, difference-in-differences, propensity scores, instrumental variables, and regression discontinuity design, are relevant due to the possibility of providing more accurate estimates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. This is especially important in scenarios such as the Brazilian, which characterized by the use of various vaccines, with the respective numbers and intervals between doses, applied to different age groups, and introduced at different times during the pandemic.

A avalição da efetividade de vacinas é feita com dados do mundo real e é essencial para monitorar o desempenho dos programas de vacinação ao longo do tempo bem como frente a novas variantes. Até o momento, a avaliação da efetividade das vacinas para COVID-19 tem sido baseada em métodos clássicos como estudos de coorte e caso controle teste-negativo, que muitas vezes podem não permitir o adequado controle dos vieses intrínsecos da alocação das campanhas de vacinação. O objetivo dessa revisão foi discutir os desenhos de estudo disponíveis para avaliação de efetividade das vacinas, enfatizando os estudos quase-experimentais, que buscam mimetizar os estudos aleatorizados ao introduzir um componente exógeno para atribuição ao tratamento, bem como suas vantagens, limitações e aplicabilidade no contexto dos dados brasileiros. O emprego de métodos quase-experimentais, incluindo as séries temporais interrompidas, o método de diferença em diferenças, escore de propensão, variáveis instrumentais e regressão descontínua, são relevantes pela possibilidade de gerar estimativas mais acuradas da efetividade de vacinas para COVID-19 em cenários como o brasileiro, que se caracteriza pelo uso de várias vacinas, com respectivos número e intervalos entre doses, aplicadas em diferentes faixas etárias e em diferentes momentos da pandemia.

Spatio-temporal relative risks and priority areas for visceral leishmaniasis control in Brazil, between 2001 and 2020.

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a pressing public health problem in Brazil. The proper implementation of disease control programs in priority areas is a challenge for healthcare managers. The present study aimed to analyze the spatio-temporal distribution and identify high risk areas of VL occurrence in the Brazilian territory. We analyzed data regarding new cases with confirmed diagnosis of VL in Brazilian municipalities, from 2001 to 2020, extracted from the Brazilian Information System for Notifiable Diseases. The Local Index of Spatial Autocorrelation (LISA) was used to identify contiguous areas with high incidence rates in different periods of the temporal series. Clusters of high spatio-temporal relative risks were identified using the scan statistics. The accumulated incidence rate in the analyzed period was 33.53 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The number of municipalities that reported cases showed an upward trend from 2001 onward, although there was a decrease in 2019 and 2020. According to LISA, the number of municipalities considered a priority increased in Brazil and in most states. Priority municipalities were predominantly concentrated in the states of Tocantins, Maranhão, Piauí, and Mato Grosso do Sul, in addition to more specific areas of Pará, Ceará, Piauí, Alagoas, Pernambuco, Bahia, São Paulo, Minas Gerais, and Roraima. The spatio-temporal clusters of high-risk areas varied throughout the time series and were relatively higher in the North and Northeast regions. Recent high-risk areas were found in Roraima and municipalities in northeastern states. VL expanded territorially in Brazil in the 21st century. However, there is still a considerable spatial concentration of cases. The areas identified in the present study should be prioritized for disease control actions.

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against severe cases and deaths in Brazil from 2021 to 2022: a registry-based study

Background Brazil started the COVID-19 mass vaccination in January 2021 with CoronaVac and ChAdOx1, followed by BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines. By the end of 2021, more than 317 million vaccine doses were administered in the adult population. This study aimed at estimating the effectiveness of the primary series of COVID-19 vaccination and booster shots in protecting against severe cases and deaths in Brazil during the first year of vaccination. Methods A cohort dataset of over 158 million vaccination and severe cases records linked from official national registries was analyzed via a mixed-effects Poisson model, adjusted for age, state of residence, time after immunization, and calendar time to estimate the absolute vaccine effectiveness of the primary series of vaccination and the relative effectiveness of the booster. The method permitted analysis of effectiveness against hospitalizations and deaths, including in the periods of variant dominance. Findings Vaccine effectiveness against severe cases and deaths remained over 25% and 50%, respectively, after 19 weeks from primary vaccination of BNT162b2, ChAdOx1, or CoronaVac vaccines. The boosters conferred greater protection than the primary series of vaccination, with heterologous boosters providing marginally greater protection than homologous. The effectiveness against hospitalization during the Omicron dominance in the 60+ years old population started at 61.7% (95% CI, 26.1–86.2) for ChAdOx1, 95.6% (95% CI, 82.4–99.9) for CoronaVac, and 72.3% (95% CI, 51.4–87.4) for the BNT162b2 vaccine. Interpretation This study provides real-world evidence of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in Brazil, including during the Omicron wave, demonstrating protection even after waning effectiveness. Comparisons of the effectiveness among different vaccines require caution due to potential bias effects related to age groups, periods in the pandemic, and eventual behavioural changes. Funding 10.13039/501100006507Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (10.13039/501100003593CNPq), 10.13039/501100004586Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ), 10.13039/100011893Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia da Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovação e Insumos Estratégicos em Saúde do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil (DECIT/SCTIE/MS).

The effect of BCG vaccination on infection and antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2 – The results of ProBCG: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial in Brazil

Introduction Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine was considered as a tool against SARS-CoV-2 based on the concept of trained immunity, which could be useful against emerging pathogens. Methods A multicenter double-blinded randomized clinical trial recruited health care workers (HCW) in Brazil. The incidence rates of COVID-19, clinical manifestations, absenteeism, and adverse events among HCW receiving BCG vaccine (Moreau or Moscow strains) or placebo were compared. BCG vaccine-mediated immune response before and after implementing specific vaccines for COVID-19 (CoronaVac® or CovishieldTM) was analyzed. Cox proportional hazard and linear mixed effect modelling were used. Results 264 volunteers were included for analysis (BCG=134 and placebo=130). Placebo group presented a COVID-19 cumulative incidence of 0.75% versus 0.52% of BCG. Moreau strain also presented a higher incidence rate (1.60% x 0.22%). BCG did not show a protective hazard ratio against COVID-19. In addition, the log(IgG) level against SARS-CoV-2 presented a higher increase in the BCG group, whether or not participants had COVID-19, but also without statistical significance. Conclusion Our results suggest a BCG's tendency of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and higher IgG levels when compared to placebo. The clinical trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT04659941).

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against severe cases and deaths in Brazil from 2021 to 2022: a registry-based study.

Background: Brazil started the COVID-19 mass vaccination in January 2021 with CoronaVac and ChAdOx1, followed by BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines. By the end of 2021, more than 317 million vaccine doses were administered in the adult population. This study aimed at estimating the effectiveness of the primary series of COVID-19 vaccination and booster shots in protecting against severe cases and deaths in Brazil during the first year of vaccination. Methods: A cohort dataset of over 158 million vaccination and severe cases records linked from official national registries was analyzed via a mixed-effects Poisson model, adjusted for age, state of residence, time after immunization, and calendar time to estimate the absolute vaccine effectiveness of the primary series of vaccination and the relative effectiveness of the booster. The method permitted analysis of effectiveness against hospitalizations and deaths, including in the periods of variant dominance. Findings: Vaccine effectiveness against severe cases and deaths remained over 25% and 50%, respectively, after 19 weeks from primary vaccination of BNT162b2, ChAdOx1, or CoronaVac vaccines. The boosters conferred greater protection than the primary series of vaccination, with heterologous boosters providing marginally greater protection than homologous. The effectiveness against hospitalization during the Omicron dominance in the 60+ years old population started at 61.7% (95% CI, 26.1-86.2) for ChAdOx1, 95.6% (95% CI, 82.4-99.9) for CoronaVac, and 72.3% (95% CI, 51.4-87.4) for the BNT162b2 vaccine. Interpretation: This study provides real-world evidence of the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in Brazil, including during the Omicron wave, demonstrating protection even after waning effectiveness. Comparisons of the effectiveness among different vaccines require caution due to potential bias effects related to age groups, periods in the pandemic, and eventual behavioural changes. Funding: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ), Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia da Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovação e Insumos Estratégicos em Saúde do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil (DECIT/SCTIE/MS).

The effect of BCG vaccination on infection and antibody levels against SARS-CoV-2-The results of ProBCG: a multicenter randomized clinical trial in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: Evatuate if Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine could be used as a tool against SARS-CoV-2 based on the concept of trained immunity. METHODS: A multicenter, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial recruited health care workers (HCWs) in Brazil. The incidence rates of COVID-19, clinical manifestations, absenteeism, and adverse events among HCWs receiving BCG vaccine (Moreau or Moscow strains) or placebo were compared. BCG vaccine-mediated immune response before and after implementing specific vaccines for COVID-19 (CoronaVac or COVISHIELD) was analyzed. Cox proportional hazard and linear mixed effect modeling were used. RESULTS: A total of 264 volunteers were included for analysis (BCG = 134 and placebo = 130). The placebo group presented a COVID-19 cumulative incidence of 0.75% vs 0.52% of BCG. The Moreau strain also presented a higher incidence rate (1.60% × 0.22%). BCG did not show a protective hazard ratio against COVID-19. In addition, the log (immunoglobulin G) level against SARS-CoV-2 presented a higher increase in the BCG group, whether or not participants had COVID-19, but also without statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that BCG has a tendency of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and higher immunoglobulin G levels than placebo. The clinical trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT04659941).

The incidence and geographical spread of SARS-CoV-2 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil based on RT-PCR test results.

INTRODUCTION: Rio de Janeiro has hardly experienced coronavirus disease. METHODS: Here, 87,442 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test results for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were reported among Rio de Janeiro residents (March to September 2020). RESULTS: Overall, RT-PCR positivity of 44.6% decreased over time towards 20%. Positivity was greater among males (OR=1.22; 95%CI:1.19-1.26); Black (OR=1.10; 95%CI:1.02-1.19), Brown (OR=1.16; 95%CI:1.10-1.22), and indigenous people (OR=2.11; 95%CI:0.88-5.03) compared to Whites and increased with age; with epidemic spread from the capital to inland regions. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 keeps spreading in Rio de Janeiro, and reopening of activities may fuel the epidemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in tuberculosis preventive treatment in Brazil: a retrospective cohort study using secondary data.

Background: Disruptions in tuberculosis services have been reported around the world since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the pandemic's effect on tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) has been poorly explored. We compared TPT-notified prescriptions and outcomes before and during the pandemic in Brazil. Methods: Retrospective cohort using secondary data from the Brazilian TPT information system in five cities with over 1000 notifications. The number of TPT prescriptions was analysed from 6 months after healthcare workers' training, in 2018, to July 2021. The proportion of TPT outcomes by the date of treatment initiation was analysed up to the end of 2020, as most outcomes of TPT started in 2021 were still unknown in July 2021. Joinpoint regression was used to evaluate trends. Findings: 14,014 TPT prescriptions were included, most from São Paulo (8032) and Rio de Janeiro (3187). Compared to the same epidemiological weeks in 2019, the number of TPT prescribed in 2020 increased in Rio de Janeiro (82%) and São Paulo (14%) and decreased in Recife (65%), Fortaleza (31%) and Manaus (44%). In 2021, however, there was a 93% reduction in TPT prescriptions in all cities. The proportion of completed TPT remained constant (median = 74%). Interpretation: The COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil was associated with a dramatic decrease in TPT prescriptions in 2021. Treatment adherence remained constant, suggesting that health services were able to keep people on treatment but did not perform well in providing opportunities for people to enter care. Efforts are needed to expand access to TPT. Funding: Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, CNPq.

Effectiveness of mRNA boosters after homologous primary series with BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 against symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 in Brazil and Scotland: A test-negative design case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Brazil and Scotland have used mRNA boosters in their respective populations since September 2021, with Omicron's emergence accelerating their booster program. Despite this, both countries have reported substantial recent increases in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. The duration of the protection conferred by the booster dose against symptomatic Omicron cases and severe outcomes is unclear. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a test-negative design, we analyzed national databases to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a primary series (with ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2) plus an mRNA vaccine booster (with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) against symptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the period of Omicron dominance in Brazil and Scotland compared to unvaccinated individuals. Additional analyses included stratification by age group (18 to 49, 50 to 64, ≥65). All individuals aged 18 years or older who reported acute respiratory illness symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 1, 2022, and April 23, 2022, in Brazil and Scotland were eligible for the study. At 14 to 29 days after the mRNA booster, the VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection of ChAdOx1 plus BNT162b2 booster was 51.6%, (95% confidence interval (CI): [51.0, 52.2], p < 0.001) in Brazil and 67.1% (95% CI [65.5, 68.5], p < 0.001) in Scotland. At ≥4 months, protection against symptomatic infection waned to 4.2% (95% CI [0.7, 7.6], p = 0.02) in Brazil and 37.4% (95% CI [33.8, 40.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland. VE against severe outcomes in Brazil was 93.5% (95% CI [93.0, 94.0], p < 0.001) at 14 to 29 days post-booster, decreasing to 82.3% (95% CI [79.7, 84.7], p < 0.001) and 98.3% (95% CI [87.3, 99.8], p < 0.001) to 77.8% (95% CI [51.4, 89.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland for the same periods. Similar results were obtained with the primary series of BNT162b2 plus homologous booster. Potential limitations of this study were that we assumed that all cases included in the analysis were due to the Omicron variant based on the period of dominance and the limited follow-up time since the booster dose. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that mRNA boosters after a primary vaccination course with either mRNA or viral-vector vaccines provided modest, short-lived protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron but substantial and more sustained protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months.

Estimated COVID-19 severe cases and deaths averted in the first year of the vaccination campaign in Brazil: A retrospective observational study.

Background: A nationwide Severe Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination campaign was initiated in Brazil in January 2021 with CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) followed by BNT162b2 mRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines. Here we provide estimates of the number of severe cases and deaths due to coronavirus disease (COVID-19) averted during the first year of the mass vaccination campaign in Brazil. Methods: Data on COVID-19 vaccination and COVID-19-related illness and death were obtained from the Brazilian Ministry of Health and used to estimate the direct effects of the vaccination campaign on the number of severe cases and deaths due to COVID-19 occurring between January 17, 2021 and January 31, 2022. To this end, we compared the daily age-specific rates between the unvaccinated population and the "at least partly vaccinated" population (received at least one dose of a two-dose vaccine), as well as other two vaccination subgroups, "fully vaccinated" (completed the one- or two-dose vaccine schedule), and "boosted-vaccinated" (fully vaccinated and recipients of booster dose) populations. Findings: We estimated that 74% (n = 875,846; 95% confidence interval, CI 843,383-915,709) of total expected cases of severe COVID-19 and 82% (n = 303,129; 95% CI 284,019-321,681) of total expected deaths due to COVID-19 were averted in the first year of the national vaccination campaign. The averted burden was heterogeneous between age groups and higher in the more populous states. However, outcome rate differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups were higher in the less populated states. Interpretation: The first year of the COVID-19 vaccination program in Brazil saved the lives of at least 303,129 adults. The results highlight the need for future vaccination campaigns, including those required in the current pandemic, to rapidly achieve high uptake, particularly among the elderly and residents of the least populous regions. Funding: Ministry of Health (Brazil).

Effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, BNT162b2, and Ad26.COV2.S among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in Brazil: a test-negative, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among individuals without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with previous infection is less clear. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of four COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, and death for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Using national COVID-19 notification, hospitalisation, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we did a test-negative, case-control study to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac [Sinovac], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZeneca], Ad26.COV2.S [Janssen], and BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNtech]) for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched cases with RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 with up to ten controls with negative RT-PCR tests who presented with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests done at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity and the odds of hospitalisation or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2020, and Nov 11, 2021, we identified 213 457 individuals who had a subsequent, symptomatic illness with RT-PCR testing done at least 90 days after their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection and after the vaccination programme started. Among these, 30 910 (14·5%) had a positive RT-PCR test consistent with reinfection, and we matched 22 566 of these cases with 145 055 negative RT-PCR tests from 68 426 individuals as controls. Among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 39·4% (95% CI 36·1-42·6) for CoronaVac, 56·0% (51·4-60·2) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 44·0% (31·5-54·2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64·8% (54·9-72·4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose than after the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalisation or death 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 81·3% (75·3-85·8) for CoronaVac, 89·9% (83·5-93·8) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 57·7% (-2·6 to 82·5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89·7% (54·3-97·7) for BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: All four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The provision of a full vaccine series to individuals after recovery from COVID-19 might reduce morbidity and mortality. FUNDING: Brazilian National Research Council, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Generalitat de Catalunya.

Efficacy and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines for death prevention: A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is consistent evidence that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have statistical and clinical significant efficacy to prevent incident and severe cases of COVID-19, although different outcomes were analyzed and different risk reductions were observed. However, randomized control trials (RCT) were not designed or powered to assess whether the vaccines prevent deaths, even though this was a secondary or exploratory outcome across many studies. Early real-world observational data suggest that these vaccines are highly effective in reducing hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Our objective is to summarize and appraise-the existing evidence on the efficacy and real-world effectiveness of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccines currently approved for full or limited use to prevent all-cause and COVID-19-attributed mortality. METHODS: The population consists of persons with a record of vaccination status and the outcome of interest. Randomized controlled trials, comparative cohort and case-control studies reporting vaccination with any of the vaccines approved (intervention) will be eligible. The primary outcome will be all cause deaths. COVID-19-attributed deaths and deaths attributable to the vaccination (adverse event deaths) will be secondary outcomes. We will compare deaths occurring in vaccinated persons versus those non-vaccinated or having received placebo. Studies in any language will be eligible. Two independent reviewers will screen for inclusion and assess quality of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and the ROBINS-1 tool, as appropriate. Hazard ratios will be calculated. Assessment of statistical heterogeneity amongst the studies will be done using I2 and prediction intervals, as well as visual inspection of the forest plots. Publication bias will be assessed using a funnel plot and Egger statistical test if we have more than 10 studies in a forest plot. We have followed the PRISMA-Protocol checklist for the current protocol, which is registered at Prospero (York University, CRD42021262211).

CoronaVac vaccine is effective in preventing symptomatic and severe COVID-19 in pregnant women in Brazil: a test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: More doses of CoronaVac have been administered worldwide than any other COVID-19 vaccine. However, the effectiveness of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines in pregnant women is still unknown. We estimated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 in pregnant women in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative design study in all pregnant women aged 18-49 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil from March 15, 2021, to October 03, 2021, linking records of negative and positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests to national vaccination records. We also linked records of test-positive cases with notifications of severe, hospitalised or fatal COVID-19. Using logistic regression, we estimated the adjusted odds ratio and VE against symptomatic COVID-19 and against severe COVID-19 by comparing vaccine status in test-negative subjects to test-positive symptomatic cases and severe cases. RESULTS: Of the 19,838 tested pregnant women, 7424 (37.4%) tested positive for COVID-19 and 588 (7.9%) had severe disease. Only 83% of pregnant women who received the first dose of CoronaVac completed the vaccination scheme. A single dose of the CoronaVac vaccine was not effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19. The effectiveness of two doses of CoronaVac was 41% (95% CI 27.1-52.2) against symptomatic COVID-19 and 85% (95% CI 59.5-94.8) against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: A complete regimen of CoronaVac in pregnant women was effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 and highly effective against severe illness in a setting that combined high disease burden and marked COVID-19-related maternal deaths.

Influence of age on the effectiveness and duration of protection of Vaxzevria and CoronaVac vaccines: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Aging influences COVID-19 severity and response to vaccination, but previous vaccine effectiveness (VE) analyzes lack the power to evaluate its role in subgroups within the elderly age group. Here we analyzed the impact of age on viral vector and inactivated virus vaccines' effectiveness, the main platforms used in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We report a retrospective longitudinal study of 75,919,840 Brazilian vaccinees from January 18 to July 24, 2021, evaluating documented infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), COVID-19-related hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death. Negative binomial regression models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics were used for VE estimation. FINDINGS: The overall analyzes of full vaccination showed VE against hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death of 91·4% (95%CI:90·1-92·5), 91·1% (95%CI:88·9-92·9) and 92·3% (95%CI:90·5-93·7) for Vaxzevria and 71·2% (95%CI:70·0-72·4), 72·2% (95%CI:70·2-74·0) and 73·7% (95%CI:72·1-75·2) for CoronaVac, respectively. VE for all outcomes is progressively lower with age. In fully-Vaxzevria-vaccinated individuals aged <60 years, VE against death was 96.5% (95%CI:82.1-99.3) versus 68·5% (95%CI:40·0-83·4) in those ≥90 years. Among fully-CoronaVac-vaccinated individuals, VE against death was 84.8% (95%CI:77.1-89.9) in those <60 years compared to 63.5 (95%CI 58.7-67.7) for vaccinees aged 80-89 years and 48·6%; (95%CI:35·0-59·3) for individuals aged ≥90 years. Post-vaccination daily cumulative incidence curves for all outcomes showed increased risk from younger to elder decades of life. There was no increase in the incidence of hospitalisation for individuals <60 years vaccinated during the same period as those aged ≥90 years. INTERPRETATION: Although both vaccines have been effective in protecting against infection, hospitalization and death; Vaxzevria and CoronaVac demonstrated high effectiveness against severe outcomes for individuals up to 79 years of age. Our results reinforce the idea that booster doses should be carefully considered in elders. FUNDING: This study was partially supported by a donation from the "Fazer o bem faz bem" program.

Two-dose ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine protection against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths over time: a retrospective, population-based cohort study in Scotland and Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, but whether this reflects waning or new SARS-CoV-2 variants-especially delta (B.1.617.2)-is unclear. We investigated the association between time since two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in Scotland (where delta was dominant), with comparative analyses in Brazil (where delta was uncommon). METHODS: In this retrospective, population-based cohort study in Brazil and Scotland, we linked national databases from the EAVE II study in Scotland; and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign, Acute Respiratory Infection Suspected Cases, and Severe Acute Respiratory Infection/Illness datasets in Brazil) for vaccination, laboratory testing, clinical, and mortality data. We defined cohorts of adults (aged ≥18 years) who received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and compared rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19 hospital admission or death) across fortnightly periods, relative to 2-3 weeks after the second dose. Entry to the Scotland cohort started from May 19, 2021, and entry to the Brazil cohort started from Jan 18, 2021. Follow-up in both cohorts was until Oct 25, 2021. Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and vaccine effectiveness, with 95% CIs. FINDINGS: 1 972 454 adults received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Scotland and 42 558 839 in Brazil, with longer follow-up in Scotland because two-dose vaccination began earlier in Scotland than in Brazil. In Scotland, RRs for severe COVID-19 increased to 2·01 (95% CI 1·54-2·62) at 10-11 weeks, 3·01 (2·26-3·99) at 14-15 weeks, and 5·43 (4·00-7·38) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. The pattern of results was similar in Brazil, with RRs of 2·29 (2·01-2·61) at 10-11 weeks, 3·10 (2·63-3·64) at 14-15 weeks, and 4·71 (3·83-5·78) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Scotland, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 83·7% (95% CI 79·7-87·0) at 2-3 weeks, to 75·9% (72·9-78·6) at 14-15 weeks, and 63·7% (59·6-67·4) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Brazil, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 86·4% (85·4-87·3) at 2-3 weeks, to 59·7% (54·6-64·2) at 14-15 weeks, and 42·2% (32·4-50·6) at 18-19 weeks. INTERPRETATION: We found waning vaccine protection of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths in both Scotland and Brazil, this becoming evident within three months of the second vaccine dose. Consideration needs to be given to providing booster vaccine doses for people who have received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem Programme; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Seroprevalence of IgG and IgM anti-SARS-CoV-2 among voluntary blood donors in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Background: In Brazil, mathematical models for derivingestimates and projections of COVID-19 cases have been developed without data on asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We estimated the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in the State of Rio de Janeiro. Methods: Data were collected on 2,857 blood donors from April 14 to 27, 2020. We report the crude prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the weighted prevalence by the total state population, and adjusted prevalence estimates for test sensitivity and specificity. To establish the correlates of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, we used logistic regression models. The analysis included period and site of blood collection, sociodemographic characteristics, and place of residence. Results: The proportion of SARS-Cov-2 positive tests without any adjustment was 4.0% (95% CI 3.3-4.7%), and the weighted prevalence was 3.8% (95% CI 3.1-4.5%). Further adjustment by test sensitivity and specificity produced lower estimates, 3.6% (95% CI 2.7-4.4%) and 3.3% (95% CI 2.6-4.1%), respectively. The variable most significantly associated with the crude prevalence was the period of blood collection: the later the period, the higher the prevalence. Regarding socio-demographic characteristics, the younger the blood donors, the higher the prevalence, and the lower the educational level, the higher the odds of a positive SARS-Cov-2 antibody. Similar results were found for the weighted prevalence. Discussion: Although our findings resulted from a convenience sample, they match some basic premises: the increasing trend over time, since the epidemic curve in the state is still on the rise;the higher prevalence among the youngest who are more likely to circulate;and the higher prevalence among the less educated as they have more difficulties in following the social distancing recommendations. Despite the study limitations, it is possible to infer that protective levels of natural herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 are far from being reached in Rio de Janeiro. (AU)

Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

OBJECTIVE To estimate the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. METHODS Data were collected on 2,857 blood donors from April 14 to 27, 2020. This study reports crude prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, population weighted prevalence for the state, and prevalence adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity. Logistic regression models were used to establish the correlates of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. For the analysis, we considered collection period and site, sociodemographic characteristics, and place of residence. RESULTS The proportion of positive tests for SARS-Cov-2, without any adjustment, was 4.0% (95%CI 3.3-4.7%), and the weighted prevalence was 3.8% (95%CI 3.1-4.5%). We found lower estimates after adjusting for test sensitivity and specificity: 3.6% (95%CI 2.7-4.4%) for the non-weighted prevalence, and 3.3% (95%CI 2.6-4.1%) for the weighted prevalence. Collection period was the variable most significantly associated with crude prevalence: the later the period, the higher the prevalence. Regarding sociodemographic characteristics, the younger the blood donor, the higher the prevalence, and the lower the education level, the higher the odds of testing positive for SARS-Cov-2 antibody. We found similar results for weighted prevalence. CONCLUSIONS Our findings comply with some basic premises: the increasing trend over time, as the epidemic curve in the state is still on the rise; and the higher prevalence among both the youngest, for moving around more than older age groups, and the less educated, for encountering more difficulties in following social distancing recommendations. Despite the study limitations, we may infer that Rio de Janeiro is far from reaching the required levels of herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2.

Seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To estimate the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. METHODS Data were collected on 2,857 blood donors from April 14 to 27, 2020. This study reports crude prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, population weighted prevalence for the state, and prevalence adjusted for test sensitivity and specificity. Logistic regression models were used to establish the correlates of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. For the analysis, we considered collection period and site, sociodemographic characteristics, and place of residence. RESULTS The proportion of positive tests for SARS-Cov-2, without any adjustment, was 4.0% (95%CI 3.3-4.7%), and the weighted prevalence was 3.8% (95%CI 3.1-4.5%). We found lower estimates after adjusting for test sensitivity and specificity: 3.6% (95%CI 2.7-4.4%) for the non-weighted prevalence, and 3.3% (95%CI 2.6-4.1%) for the weighted prevalence. Collection period was the variable most significantly associated with crude prevalence: the later the period, the higher the prevalence. Regarding sociodemographic characteristics, the younger the blood donor, the higher the prevalence, and the lower the education level, the higher the odds of testing positive for SARS-Cov-2 antibody. We found similar results for weighted prevalence. CONCLUSIONS Our findings comply with some basic premises: the increasing trend over time, as the epidemic curve in the state is still on the rise;and the higher prevalence among both the youngest, for moving around more than older age groups, and the less educated, for encountering more difficulties in following social distancing recommendations. Despite the study limitations, we may infer that Rio de Janeiro is far from reaching the required levels of herd immunity against SARS-CoV-2.