Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 1639, 2022 03 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1758236

ABSTRACT

Small trials have suggested that heterologous vaccination with first-dose ChAdOx1 and second-dose BNT162b2 may generate a better immune response than homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. In this cohort analysis, we use linked data from Catalonia (Spain), where those aged <60 who received a first dose of ChAdOx1 could choose between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 for their second dose. Comparable cohorts were obtained after exact-matching 14,325/17,849 (80.3%) people receiving heterologous vaccination to 14,325/149,386 (9.6%) receiving homologous vaccination by age, sex, region, and date of second dose. Of these, 464 (3.2%) in the heterologous and 694 (4.8%) in the homologous groups developed COVID-19 between 1st June 2021 and 5th December 2021. The resulting hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) is 0.66 [0.59-0.74], favouring heterologous vaccination. The two groups had similar testing rates and safety outcomes. Sensitivity and negative control outcome analyses confirm these findings. In conclusion, we demonstrate that a heterologous vaccination schedule with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 was more efficacious than and similarly safe to homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. Most of the infections in our study occurred when Delta was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in Spain. These data agree with previous phase 2 randomised trials.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , /therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , /therapeutic use , Humans , Vaccination/adverse effects , Vaccination/methods
2.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(1)2021 Dec 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1614022

ABSTRACT

(1) Background: In epidemiological terms, it has been possible to calculate the savings in health resources and the reduction in the health effects of COVID vaccines. Conducting an economic evaluation, some studies have estimated its cost-effectiveness; the vaccination shows highly favorable results, cost-saving in some cases. (2) Methods: Cost-benefit analysis of the vaccination campaign in the North Metropolitan Health Region (Catalonia). An epidemiological model based on observational data and before and after comparison is used. The information on the doses used and the assigned resources (conventional hospital beds, ICU, number of tests) was extracted from administrative data from the largest primary care provider in the region (Catalan Institute of Health). A distinction was made between the social perspective and the health system. (3) Results: the costs of vaccination are estimated at 137 million euros (€48.05/dose administered). This figure is significantly lower than the positive impacts of the vaccination campaign, which are estimated at 470 million euros (€164/dose administered). Of these, 18% corresponds to the reduction in ICU discharges, 16% to the reduction in conventional hospital discharges, 5% to the reduction in PCR tests and 1% to the reduction in RAT tests. The monetization of deaths and cases that avoid sequelae account for 53% and 5% of total savings, respectively. The benefit/cost ratio is estimated at 3.4 from a social perspective and 1.4 from a health system perspective. The social benefits of vaccination are estimated at €116.67 per vaccine dose (€19.93 from the perspective of the health system). (4) Conclusions: The mass vaccination campaign against COVID is cost-saving. From a social perspective, most of these savings come from the monetization of the reduction in mortality and cases with sequelae, although the intervention is equally widely cost-effective from the health system perspective thanks to the reduction in the use of resources. It is concluded that, from an economic perspective, the vaccination campaign has high social returns.

3.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-292668

ABSTRACT

Small trials have suggested that heterologous vaccination with first-dose ChAdOx1 and second-dose BNT162b2 may generate a better immune response than homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. We used linked data from Catalonia (Spain), where those aged <60 who received a first dose of ChAdOx1 could choose between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 for their second dose. Comparable cohorts were obtained after exact-matching 14,325/17,849 (80.3%) people receiving heterologous vaccination to 14,325/149,386 (9.6%) receiving homologous vaccination by age, sex, region, and date of second dose. Of these, 238 (1.7%) in the heterologous and 389 (2.7%) in the homologous groups developed COVID-19 between 1st June 2021 and 11th October 2021. The resulting hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) was 0.61 [ 0.52-0.71 ], favouring heterologous vaccination, with a Number Needed to Treat of 94.9 [ 71.8 - 139.8 ]. The two groups had similar testing rates and safety outcomes. Sensitivity and negative control outcome analyses confirmed these findings. In conclusion, we demonstrate that a heterologous vaccination schedule with ChAdOx1 followed by BNT162b2 was more efficacious than and similarly safe to homologous vaccination with two doses of ChAdOx1. Most of the infections in our study occurred when Delta was the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in Spain. These data agree with previous phase 2 randomised trials.

4.
BMJ ; 374: n1868, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1365155

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine associations of BNT162b2 vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital admission and death with covid-19 among nursing home residents, nursing home staff, and healthcare workers. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Nursing homes and linked electronic medical record, test, and mortality data in Catalonia on 27 December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 28 456 nursing home residents, 26 170 nursing home staff, and 61 791 healthcare workers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were followed until the earliest outcome (confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospital admission or death with covid-19) or 26 May 2021. Vaccination status was introduced as a time varying exposure, with a 14 day run-in after the first dose. Mixed effects Cox models were fitted to estimate hazard ratios with index month as a fixed effect and adjusted for confounders including sociodemographics, comorbidity, and previous medicine use. RESULTS: Among the nursing home residents, SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in 2482, 411 were admitted to hospital with covid-19, and 450 died with covid-19 during the study period. In parallel, 1828 nursing home staff and 2968 healthcare workers were found to have SARS-CoV-2 infection, but fewer than five were admitted or died with covid-19. The adjusted hazard ratio for SARS-CoV-2 infection after two doses of vaccine was 0.09 (95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.11) for nursing home residents, 0.20 (0.17 to 0.24) for nursing home staff, and 0.13 (0.11 to 0.16) for healthcare workers. Adjusted hazard ratios for hospital admission and mortality after two doses of vaccine were 0.05 (0.04 to 0.07) and 0.03 (0.02 to 0.04), respectively, for nursing home residents. Nursing home staff and healthcare workers recorded insufficient events for mortality analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination was associated with 80-91% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 infection in all three cohorts and greater reductions in hospital admissions and mortality among nursing home residents for up to five months. More data are needed on longer term effects of covid-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/mortality , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Homes for the Aged/statistics & numerical data , Nursing Homes/statistics & numerical data , Patient Admission/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Proportional Hazards Models , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Spain/epidemiology , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL