Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 295
Filter
1.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 816, 2022 Nov 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2108747

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The elderly are highly vulnerable to severe COVID-19. Waning immunity and emergence of Omicron have caused concerns about reduced effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. The objective was to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe COVID-19 among the elderly. METHODS: This nationwide, register-based cohort analysis included all residents aged 70 years and over in Finland. The follow-up started on December 27, 2020, and ended on March 31, 2022. The outcomes of interest were COVID-19-related hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) admission timely associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. VE was estimated as one minus the hazard ratio comparing the vaccinated and unvaccinated and taking into account time since vaccination. Omicron-specific VE was evaluated as the effectiveness observed since January 1, 2022. RESULTS: The cohort included 896,220 individuals. Comirnaty (BioNTech/Pfizer) VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization was 93% (95% CI 89-95%) and 85% (95% CI 82-87%) 14-90 and 91-180 days after the second dose; VE increased to 95% (95% CI 94-96%) 14-60 days after the third dose. VE of other homologous and heterologous three dose series was similar. Protection against severe COVID-19 requiring ICU treatment was even better. Since January 1, 2022, Comirnaty VE was 98% (95% CI 92-99%) and 92% (95% CI 87-95%) 14-90 and 91-180 days after the second and 98% (95% CI 95-99%) 14-60 days after the third dose. CONCLUSIONS: VE against severe COVID-19 is high among the elderly. It waned slightly after two doses, but a third restored the protection. VE against severe COVID-19 remained high even after the emergence of Omicron.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Aged , Humans , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Finland/epidemiology , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2
2.
Vaccine ; 40(46): 6664-6669, 2022 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination. METHODS: We calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE - at on average 6 months after vaccination - as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2). RESULTS: The overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI -28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI -44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week. CONCLUSION: VE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2 , Immunization Programs , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control
3.
Int J Infect Dis ; 125: 58-60, 2022 Oct 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2105081

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate COVID-19 messenger RNA vaccine effectiveness during the Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods in Japan. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study among individuals aged 16-64 years during two periods: the Delta-predominant period (July 1-December 31, 2021) and the Omicron-predominant period (January 1-March 29, 2022). RESULTS: When comparing individuals who were vaccinated with those who were unvaccinated, the effectiveness of a second dose against symptomatic infection was 89.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 80.5-94.7%) during the Delta-predominant period and 21.2% (95% CI: 11.0-30.3%) during the Omicron-predominant period. The effectiveness of a third dose against symptomatic infection was 71.8% (95% CI: 60.1-80.1%) during the Omicron-predominant period. CONCLUSION: Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection decreased during the Omicron-predominant period but was maintained by a third dose.

4.
Public Health ; 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2105783

ABSTRACT

Objectives The study set out to measure public understanding of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and how effectiveness wanes with time since vaccination. Because perceived VE is a strong predictor of vaccine uptake, measuring perceptions can inform public health policy and communications. Study Design Online randomised experiment. Method The study was undertaken in Ireland, which has high vaccination rates. A nationally representative sample (n=2,000) responded to a scenario designed to measure perceptions of COVID-19 VE against mortality. The length of time since vaccination in the scenario was randomly varied across four treatment arms (2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months). Results The public underestimates VE, with substantial variation in perceptions. A majority (57%) gave responses implying perceived VE against mortality of 0-85%, i.e. below scientific estimates. Among this group, mean perceived VE was just 49%. Over a quarter (26%) gave responses implying perceived VE greater than 95%, i.e. above scientific estimates. Comparing the four treatment groups, responses took no account of vaccine waning. Perceived VE was actually higher 9 months after vaccination than 2 weeks after vaccination. Conclusion Despite high vaccination rates, most of the public in Ireland underestimates VE. Furthermore, the general public has not absorbed the concept of vaccine waning in the months following vaccination. Both misperceptions may reduce vaccine uptake, unless public health authorities act to correct them through improved communication.

5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Sep 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2107379

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A prospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California was conducted to evaluate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of a booster-dose vs. 2-dose primary series of mRNA-1273 in immunocompetent individuals during periods of Delta and Omicron predominance. METHODS: Immunocompetent adults who received a booster dose of mRNA-1273 from October through December 2021 were matched 1:1 to randomly selected 2-dose mRNA-1273 recipients by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and second dose date, and followed up through January 2022. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), comparing outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 hospitalization and hospital death) in the booster-dose and 2-dose groups. Adjusted rVE (%) was calculated as (1-aHR)x100. aHRs and rVEs were also estimated for SARS-CoV-2 infection by subgroups (age, sex, race/ethnicity, history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, pregnancy, chronic diseases), and for SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 disease by month of follow-up. RESULTS: The study included 431,328 booster-dose vaccinated adults matched to 431,328 2-dose vaccinated adults. rVE was 61.3% (95%CI: 60.5-62.2%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection, 89.0% (86.2-91.2%) against COVID-19 hospitalization, and 96.0% (68.0-99.5%) against COVID-19 hospital death. rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection ranged from 55.6% to 66.7% across all subgroups. rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased from 67.1% (0-<1 month of follow-up) to 30.5% (2-<3 months). For COVID-19 hospitalization, rVE decreased from 91.2% (0-<1 month) to 78.7% (2-<3 months). CONCLUSIONS: Among immunocompetent adults, the mRNA-1273 booster conferred additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 disease compared to the 2-dose mRNA-1273 primary series during periods of Delta and Omicron predominance.

6.
J Med Virol ; : e28280, 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2103644

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 breakthrough infection in highly vaccinated populations raises study on the effectiveness for inactivated vaccine, including effectiveness of the vaccine dose, the continuance of effectiveness, the effectiveness against severe/critical coronavirus disease 2019 and against secondary attacks. A population of 10 870 close contacts were investigated in a Delta variant's epidemic. The effectiveness of vaccination was estimated in a test-negative case-control study. In addition, serum was used to detect neutralizing antibodies, to explore their correlation to effectiveness. The vaccine effectiveness (VE) values were estimated for populations aged 12 years or older. The overall adjusted VE was 56.2% and a two-dose vaccine was more effective than a one-dose vaccine (56.7% vs. 43.8%). In addition, the population that got the second dose vaccine within 2 months showed higher VE than the population vaccinated for longer than 2 months (61.5% vs. 52.3%). Among the population who vaccinated 2 doses or within 2 months, a higher level of neutralizing antibodies was observed. For infected cases, vaccinated populations showed lower rates of transmission (2.63% vs. 4.36%). Further, those vaccinated cases, who were not found causing transmission, had a higher level of antibodies. The study provided a full view of the effectiveness of inactivated vaccines in a real-world setting. The time-related VE against infection and lower transmission of breakthrough vaccinated cases were observed, which may indicate that a necessity of a booster vaccine to maintain the effectiveness and high level of neutralizing antibody.

7.
J Infect Dis ; 226(9): 1556-1561, 2022 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097370

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To inform public health policy, it is critical to monitor coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine effectiveness (VE), including against acquiring infection. METHODS: We estimated VE using self-reported vaccination in a retrospective cohort of repeat blood donors who donated during the first half of 2021, and we demonstrated a viable approach for monitoring VE via serological surveillance. RESULTS: Using Poisson regression, we estimated an overall VE of 88.8% (95% confidence interval, 86.2-91.1), adjusted for demographic covariates and variable baseline risk. CONCLUSIONS: The time since first reporting vaccination, age, race and/or ethnicity, region, and calendar time were statistically significant predictors of incident infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , United States , Retrospective Studies , Blood Donors , Vaccine Efficacy , Cohort Studies
8.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097335

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with historically low influenza circulation during the 2020-2021 season, followed by increase in influenza circulation during the 2021-2022 US season. The 2a.2 subgroup of the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b subclade that predominated was antigenically different from the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand the effectiveness of the 2021-2022 vaccine against hospitalized influenza illness, a multi-state sentinel surveillance network enrolled adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) and tested for influenza by a molecular assay. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was measured by comparing the odds of current season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. A separate analysis was performed to illustrate bias introduced by including SARS-CoV-2 positive controls. RESULTS: A total of 2334 patients, including 295 influenza cases (47% vaccinated), 1175 influenza- and SARS-CoV-2 negative controls (53% vaccinated), and 864 influenza-negative and SARS-CoV-2 positive controls (49% vaccinated), were analyzed. Influenza VE was 26% (95%CI: -14 to 52%) among adults aged 18-64 years, -3% (95%CI: -54 to 31%) among adults aged ≥65 years, and 50% (95%CI: 15 to 71%) among adults 18-64 years without immunocompromising conditions. Estimated VE decreased with inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls. CONCLUSIONS: During a season where influenza A(H3N2) was antigenically different from the vaccine virus, vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of influenza hospitalization in younger immunocompetent adults. However, vaccination did not provide protection in adults ≥65 years of age. Improvements in vaccines, antivirals, and prevention strategies are warranted.

9.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; : 1-16, 2022 Nov 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2097134

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccines have been highly effective in reducing morbidity and mortality during the pandemic. However, the emergence of the Omicron variant and subvariants as the globally dominant strains have raised doubts about the effectiveness of currently available vaccines and prompted debate about potential future vaccination strategies. AREAS COVERED: Using the publicly available IVAC VIEW-hub platform, we reviewed 52 studies on vaccine effectiveness (VE) after booster vaccinations. VE were reported for SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection, severe disease and death and stratified by vaccine schedule and age. In addition, a non-systematic literature review of safety was performed to identify single or multi-country studies investigating adverse event rates for at least two of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines. EXPERT OPINION: Booster shots of the current COVID-19 vaccines provide consistently high protection against Omicron-related severe disease and death. Additionally, this protection appears to be conserved for at least 3 months, with a small but significant waning after that. The positive risk-benefit ratio of these vaccines is well established, giving us confidence to administer additional doses as required. Future vaccination strategies will likely include a combination of schedules based on risk profile, as overly frequent boosting may be neither beneficial nor sustainable for the general population.

10.
Infectious Disease Clinics of North America ; 2022.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2095440
11.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 10(11)2022 Oct 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090396

ABSTRACT

Several studies have reported the waning effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. This study aims to demonstrate the applicability of the screening method for estimating vaccine effectiveness (VE) in a pandemic. We report VE in Hungary, estimated with the screening method, in 2021, covering a period of Alpha and the Delta variant, including the booster dose roll-out. Hungary is in a unique position to use six different vaccines in the same population. All vaccines provided a high level of protection initially, which declined over time. While the picture is different in each age group, the waning of immunity is apparent for all vaccines, especially in the younger age groups and the Sinopharm, Sputnik-V, and AstraZeneca vaccines, which performed similarly. This is clearly reversed by booster doses, more prominent for those three vaccines, where the decline in protection is more evident. Overall, two vaccines, Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna, tend to produce the best results in all age groups, even with waning immunity considered. Using the screening method in future pandemic waves is worthwhile, especially in countries struggling with a lack of resources or when there is a need to deliver VE results within a short timeframe due to urgent decision-making.

12.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(21)2022 Oct 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2090129

ABSTRACT

The duration of protection of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection has been evaluated in previous studies, but uncertainty remains about the persistence of effectiveness over time and the ideal timing for booster doses. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection in health care workers (HCWs) at a tertiary hospital depending on time elapsed since the completion of a two-dose vaccination regimen. We conducted a case-control with negative test study between 25 January and 12 December 2021 that included 1404 HCWs who underwent an active infection diagnostic test (AIDT) to rule out SARS-CoV-2 infection due to COVID-19 suspicion or prior close contact with patients diagnosed with COVID-19. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection 12 to 120 days after completing the full two-dose vaccination regimen was 91.9%. Then, aVE decreased to 63.7% between 121 to 240 days after completing the full two-dose regimen and to 37.2% after 241 days since the second dose. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs remains highly effective after 12 to 120 days have elapsed since the administration of two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine; however, effectiveness decreases as time elapses since its administration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2 , Health Personnel
13.
Información Tecnológica ; 33(5):135-144, 2022.
Article in Spanish | Academic Search Complete | ID: covidwho-2090504

ABSTRACT

The main objective of this research study is to determine the most influential variables in the COVID-19 vaccination process within the adult Colombian population that are active on social media by using data mining techniques and by applying the J48 algorithm through the Weka platform. For this purpose, a dependent variable is analyzed (Will the vaccine be applied?) along with 10 independent variables. An online survey via social media is applied to survey 200 Colombians between ages 20 to 60. The results show with a 97% confidence that the most influential causes for resisting vaccines are: mobility difficulty, vaccine effectiveness, secondary side effects, and fear of dying. In conclusion, the data mining techniques applied here reveal the main reasons why people in Colombia are not getting vaccinated against COVID-19. (English) [ FROM AUTHOR]

14.
Int J Epidemiol ; 2022 Oct 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2087786

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been shown to provide protection against COVID-19 hospitalization and death. However, some evidence suggests that notable waning in effectiveness against these outcomes occurs within months of vaccination. We undertook a pooled analysis across the four nations of the UK to investigate waning in vaccine effectiveness (VE) and relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against severe COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: We carried out a target trial design for first/second doses of ChAdOx1(Oxford-AstraZeneca) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) with a composite outcome of COVID-19 hospitalization or death over the period 8 December 2020 to 30 June 2021. Exposure groups were matched by age, local authority area and propensity for vaccination. We pooled event counts across the four UK nations. RESULTS: For Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1 and Dose 1 of BNT162b2, VE/rVE reached zero by approximately Days 60-80 and then went negative. By Day 70, VE/rVE was -25% (95% CI: -80 to 14) and 10% (95% CI: -32 to 39) for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, respectively, and 42% (95% CI: 9 to 64) and 53% (95% CI: 26 to 70) for Doses 1 and 2 of BNT162b2, respectively. rVE for Dose 2 of BNT162b2 remained above zero throughout and reached 46% (95% CI: 13 to 67) after 98 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: We found strong evidence of waning in VE/rVE for Doses 1 and 2 of ChAdOx1, as well as Dose 1 of BNT162b2. This evidence may be used to inform policies on timings of additional doses of vaccine.

15.
Clin Epidemiol ; 14: 1167-1175, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2084726

ABSTRACT

Purpose: Vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are often conducted after the introduction of new vaccines to ensure they provide protection in real-world settings. Control of confounding is often needed during the analyses, which is most efficiently done through multivariable modeling. When many confounders are being considered, it can be challenging to know which variables need to be included in the final model. We propose an intuitive Bayesian model averaging (BMA) framework for this task. Patients and Methods: Data were used from a matched case-control study that aimed to assess the effectiveness of the Lyme vaccine post-licensure. Cases were residents of Connecticut, 15-70 years of age with confirmed Lyme disease. Up to 2 healthy controls were matched to each case subject by age. All participants were interviewed, and medical records were reviewed to ascertain immunization history and evaluate potential confounders. BMA was used to systematically search for potential models and calculate the weighted average VE estimate from the top subset of models. The performance of BMA was compared to three traditional single-best-model-selection methods: two-stage selection, stepwise elimination, and the leaps and bounds algorithm. Results: The analysis included 358 cases and 554 matched controls. VE ranged between 56% and 73% and 95% confidence intervals crossed zero in <5% of all candidate models. Averaging across the top 15 models, the BMA VE was 69% (95% CI: 18-88%). The two-stage, stepwise, and leaps and bounds algorithm yielded VE of 71% (95% CI: 21-90%), 73% (95% CI: 26-90%), and 74% (95% CI: 27-91%), respectively. Conclusion: This paper highlights how the BMA framework can be used to generate transparent and robust estimates of VE. The BMA-derived VE and confidence intervals were similar to those estimated using traditional methods. However, by incorporating model uncertainty into the parameter estimation, BMA can lend additional rigor and credibility to a well-designed study.

16.
Vaccine ; 40(48): 6979-6986, 2022 Nov 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2082297

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls. METHODS: Adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group. RESULTS: 5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls. CONCLUSIONS: Despite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Adult , United States/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing , Vaccine Efficacy , Case-Control Studies , Hospitalization , Syndrome
17.
BMC Med ; 20(1): 400, 2022 10 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2079421

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the effectiveness of inactivated and Ad5-nCoV COVID-19 vaccines in real-world use-especially against Omicron variants in SARS-CoV-2 infection-naïve population. METHODS: A matched case-control study was conducted among people aged ≥ 3 years between 2 December 2021 and 13 May 2022. Cases were SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals, individuals with severe/critical COVID-19, or COVID-19-related deaths. Controls were selected from consecutively test-negative individuals at the same time as cases were diagnosed and were exact-matched on year-of-age, gender, birthplace, illness onset date, and residential district in ratios of 1:1 with infected individuals and 4:1 with severe/critical COVID-19 and COVID-19-related death. Additionally, two subsets were constructed to analyze separate vaccine effectiveness (VE) of inactivated vaccines (subset 1) and Ad5-vectored vaccine (subset 2) against each of the three outcomes. RESULTS: Our study included 612,597 documented SARS-CoV-2 infections, among which 1485 progressed to severe or critical illness and 568 died. Administering COVID-19 vaccines provided limited protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection across all age groups (overall VE: 16.0%, 95% CI: 15.1-17.0%) but high protection against severe/critical illness (88.6%, 85.8-90.8%) and COVID-19-related death (91.6%, 86.8-94.6%). In subset 1, inactivated vaccine showed 16.3% (15.4-17.2%) effective against infection, 88.6% (85.8-90.9%) effective against severe/critical COVIID-19, and 91.7% (86.9-94.7%) against COVID-19 death. Booster vaccination with inactivated vaccines enhanced protection against severe COVID-19 (92.7%, 90.1-94.6%) and COVID-19 death (95.9%, 91.4-98.1%). Inactivated VE against infection began to wane 12 weeks after the last dose, but two and three doses sustained high protection levels (> 80%) against severe/critical illness and death, while subset 2 showed Ad5-vectored vaccine was 13.2% (10.9-15.5%) effective against infection and 77.9% (15.6-94.2%) effective against severe/critical COVIID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world study found high and durable two- and three-dose inactivated VE against Omicron-associated severe/critical illness and death across all age groups, but lower effectiveness against Omicron infection, which reinforces the critical importance of full-series vaccination and timely booster dose administration for all eligible individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , Humans , Antibodies, Viral , Case-Control Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Critical Illness , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Inactivated , Severity of Illness Index
18.
J Travel Med ; 2022 Oct 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2077808

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In view of limited evidence that specifically addresses vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the older population, this study aims to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older adults during the Omicron BA.2 outbreak. METHODS: This case-control study analysed data available between January and March 2022 from the electronic health databases in Hong Kong and enrolled individuals aged 60 or above. Each case was matched with up to 10 controls by age, sex, index date and Charlson Comorbidity Index for the four outcomes (COVID-19 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe complications, and all-cause mortality) independently. Conditional logistic regression was conducted to evaluate VE of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against COVID-19-related outcomes within 28 days after COVID-19 infection among participants stratified by age groups (60-79, ≥ 80 years old). RESULTS: A dose-response relationship between the number of vaccine doses received and protection against severe or fatal disease was observed. Highest VE (95% CI) against COVID-19 infection was observed in individuals aged ≥80 who received three doses of BNT162b2 [75.5% (73.1%-77.7%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [53.9% (51.0%-56.5%)] compared to those in the younger age group who received three doses of BNT162b2 [51.1% (49.9%-52.4%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [2.0% (-0.1%-4.1%)]. VE (95% CI) was higher for other outcomes, reaching 91.9% (89.4%-93.8%) and 86.7% (84.3%-88.8%) against COVID-19-related hospitalisation; 85.8% (61.2%-94.8%) and 89.8% (72.4%-96.3%) against COVID-19-related severe complications; and 96.4% (92.9%-98.2%) and 95.0% (92.1%-96.8%) against COVID-19-related mortality after three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older vaccine recipients, respectively. A similar dose-response relationship was established in younger vaccine recipients and after stratification by sex and Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: Both BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccination were effective in protecting older adults against COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-related severe outcomes amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and VE increased further with the third dose.

19.
J Infect Dis ; 226(11): 1924-1933, 2022 Nov 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2077787

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Understanding how booster vaccination can prevent moderate and severe illness without hospitalization is crucial to evaluate the full advantage of mRNA boosters. METHODS: We followed 85 801 participants (aged 31-81 years) in 2 large population-based cohorts during the Omicron BA.1/2 wave. Information on home testing, PCR testing, and symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was extracted from biweekly questionnaires covering the period 12 January 2022 to 7 April 2022. Vaccination status and data on previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were obtained from national registries. Cox regression was used to estimate the effectiveness of booster vaccination compared to receipt of 2-dose primary series >130 days previously. RESULTS: The effectiveness of booster vaccination increased with increasing severity of COVID-19 and decreased with time since booster vaccination. The effectiveness against severe COVID-19 was reduced from 80.9% shortly after booster vaccination to 63.4% in the period >90 days after vaccination. There was hardly any effect against mild COVID-19. The effectiveness tended to be lower among subjects aged ≥60 years than those aged <50 years. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-based study to evaluate booster effectiveness against self-reported mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19. Our findings contribute valuable information on duration of protection and thus timing of additional booster vaccinations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccination
20.
J Infect Dis ; 226(8): 1382-1384, 2022 Oct 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2077786

ABSTRACT

There is limited evidence on vaccine effectiveness against asymptomatic or mild Omicron infections. We estimated that recent third doses of messenger RNA or inactivated vaccines reduced the risk of self-reported infection by 52% (95% confidence interval, 17%-73%) among randomly sampled adults during the Omicron BA.2-dominated surge in Hong Kong.


Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hong Kong/epidemiology , Humans , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccines, Inactivated
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL