Protection against Omicron from Vaccination and Previous Infection in a Prison System.

BACKGROUND: Information regarding the protection conferred by vaccination and previous infection against infection with the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is limited. METHODS: We evaluated the protection conferred by mRNA vaccines and previous infection against infection with the omicron variant in two high-risk populations: residents and staff in the California state prison system. We used a retrospective cohort design to analyze the risk of infection during the omicron wave using data collected from December 24, 2021, through April 14, 2022. Weighted Cox models were used to compare the effectiveness (measured as 1 minus the hazard ratio) of vaccination and previous infection across combinations of vaccination history (stratified according to the number of mRNA doses received) and infection history (none or infection before or during the period of B.1.617.2 [delta]-variant predominance). A secondary analysis used a rolling matched-cohort design to evaluate the effectiveness of three vaccine doses as compared with two doses. RESULTS: Among 59,794 residents and 16,572 staff, the estimated effectiveness of previous infection against omicron infection among unvaccinated persons who had been infected before or during the period of delta predominance ranged from 16.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1 to 23.7) to 48.9% (95% CI, 41.6 to 55.3). Depending on previous infection status, the estimated effectiveness of vaccination (relative to being unvaccinated and without previous documented infection) ranged from 18.6% (95% CI, 7.7 to 28.1) to 83.2% (95% CI, 77.7 to 87.4) with two vaccine doses and from 40.9% (95% CI, 31.9 to 48.7) to 87.9% (95% CI, 76.0 to 93.9) with three vaccine doses. Incremental effectiveness estimates of a third (booster) dose (relative to two doses) ranged from 25.0% (95% CI, 16.6 to 32.5) to 57.9% (95% CI, 48.4 to 65.7) among persons who either had not had previous documented infection or had been infected before the period of delta predominance. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings in two high-risk populations suggest that mRNA vaccination and previous infection were effective against omicron infection, with lower estimates among those infected before the period of delta predominance. Three vaccine doses offered significantly more protection than two doses, including among previously infected persons.

Incidence of Severe COVID-19 Illness Following Vaccination and Booster With BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S Vaccines.

Importance: Evidence describing the incidence of severe COVID-19 illness following vaccination and booster with BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S vaccines is needed, particularly for high-risk populations. Objective: To describe the incidence of severe COVID-19 illness among a cohort that received vaccination plus a booster vaccine dose. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of adults receiving care at Veterans Health Administration facilities across the US who received a vaccination series plus 1 booster against SARS-CoV-2, conducted from July 1, 2021, to May 30, 2022. Patients were eligible if they had received a primary care visit in the prior 2 years and had documented receipt of all US Food and Drug Administration-authorized doses of the initial mRNA vaccine or viral vector vaccination series after December 11, 2020, and a subsequent documented booster dose between July 1, 2021, and April 29, 2022. The analytic cohort consisted of 1 610 719 participants. Exposures: Receipt of any combination of mRNA-1273 (Moderna), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), and Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) primary vaccination series and a booster dose. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes were breakthrough COVID-19 (symptomatic infection), hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia and/or death, and hospitalization with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and/or death. A subgroup analysis of nonoverlapping populations included those aged 65 years or older, those with high-risk comorbid conditions, and those with immunocompromising conditions. Results: Of 1 610 719 participants, 1 100 280 (68.4%) were aged 65 years or older and 132 243 (8.2%) were female; 1 133 785 (70.4%) had high-risk comorbid conditions, 155 995 (9.6%) had immunocompromising conditions, and 1 467 879 (91.1%) received the same type of mRNA vaccine (initial series and booster). Over 24 weeks, 125.0 (95% CI, 123.3-126.8) per 10 000 persons had breakthrough COVID-19, 8.9 (95% CI, 8.5-9.4) per 10 000 persons were hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia or died, and 3.4 (95% CI, 3.1-3.7) per 10 000 persons were hospitalized with severe pneumonia or died. For high-risk populations, incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia or death was as follows: aged 65 years or older, 1.9 (95% CI, 1.4-2.6) per 10 000 persons; high-risk comorbid conditions, 6.7 (95% CI, 6.2-7.2) per 10 000 persons; and immunocompromising conditions, 39.6 (95% CI, 36.6-42.9) per 10 000 persons. Subgroup analyses of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia or death by time after booster demonstrated similar incidence estimates among those aged 65 years or older and with high-risk comorbid conditions but not among those with immunocompromising conditions. Conclusions and Relevance: In a US cohort of patients receiving care at Veterans Health Administration facilities during a period of Delta and Omicron variant predominance, there was a low incidence of hospitalization with COVID-19 pneumonia or death following vaccination and booster with any of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or Ad26.COV2.S vaccines.

Odds of Hospitalization for COVID-19 After 3 vs 2 Doses of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine by Time Since Booster Dose.

This study assesses the association between COVID-19 mRNA booster immunization compared with vaccination with the primary mRNA vaccination series alone and odds of hospitalization for COVID-19.

Household Secondary Attack Rates of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant, South Korea, February 2022.

We studied the effect of booster vaccinations on reducing household transmission of SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1529 (Omicron) variant in a February 2022 sampling of contacts in South Korea. The secondary attack rate was lower for vaccinated versus unvaccinated contacts, and booster vaccination resulted in a lower incidence rate ratio.

Fourth Dose of BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Setting.

BACKGROUND: With large waves of infection driven by the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), alongside evidence of waning immunity after the booster dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) vaccine, several countries have begun giving at-risk persons a fourth vaccine dose. METHODS: To evaluate the early effectiveness of a fourth dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine for the prevention of Covid-19-related outcomes, we analyzed data recorded by the largest health care organization in Israel from January 3 to February 18, 2022. We evaluated the relative effectiveness of a fourth vaccine dose as compared with that of a third dose given at least 4 months earlier among persons 60 years of age or older. We compared outcomes in persons who had received a fourth dose with those in persons who had not, individually matching persons from these two groups with respect to multiple sociodemographic and clinical variables. A sensitivity analysis was performed with the use of parametric Poisson regression. RESULTS: The primary analysis included 182,122 matched pairs. Relative vaccine effectiveness in days 7 to 30 after the fourth dose was estimated to be 45% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44 to 47) against polymerase-chain-reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 55% (95% CI, 53 to 58) against symptomatic Covid-19, 68% (95% CI, 59 to 74) against Covid-19-related hospitalization, 62% (95% CI, 50 to 74) against severe Covid-19, and 74% (95% CI, 50 to 90) against Covid-19-related death. The corresponding estimates in days 14 to 30 after the fourth dose were 52% (95% CI, 49 to 54), 61% (95% CI, 58 to 64), 72% (95% CI, 63 to 79), 64% (95% CI, 48 to 77), and 76% (95% CI, 48 to 91). In days 7 to 30 after a fourth vaccine dose, the difference in the absolute risk (three doses vs. four doses) was 180.1 cases per 100,000 persons (95% CI, 142.8 to 211.9) for Covid-19-related hospitalization and 68.8 cases per 100,000 persons (95% CI, 48.5 to 91.9) for severe Covid-19. In sensitivity analyses, estimates of relative effectiveness against documented infection were similar to those in the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A fourth dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine was effective in reducing the short-term risk of Covid-19-related outcomes among persons who had received a third dose at least 4 months earlier. (Funded by the Ivan and Francesca Berkowitz Family Living Laboratory Collaboration at Harvard Medical School and Clalit Research Institute.).

Vaccination strategies for measles control and elimination: time to strengthen local initiatives.

BACKGROUND: Through a combination of strong routine immunization (RI), strategic supplemental immunization activities (SIA) and robust surveillance, numerous countries have been able to approach or achieve measles elimination. The fragility of these achievements has been shown, however, by the resurgence of measles since 2016. We describe trends in routine measles vaccine coverage at national and district level, SIA performance and demographic changes in the three regions with the highest measles burden. FINDINGS: WHO-UNICEF estimates of immunization coverage show that global coverage of the first dose of measles vaccine has stabilized at 85% from 2015 to 19. In 2000, 17 countries in the WHO African and Eastern Mediterranean regions had measles vaccine coverage below 50%, and although all increased coverage by 2019, at a median of 60%, it remained far below levels needed for elimination. Geospatial estimates show many low coverage districts across Africa and much of the Eastern Mediterranean and southeast Asian regions. A large proportion of children unvaccinated for MCV live in conflict-affected areas with remote rural areas and some urban areas also at risk. Countries with low RI coverage use SIAs frequently, yet the ideal timing and target age range for SIAs vary within countries, and the impact of SIAs has often been mitigated by delays or disruptions. SIAs have not been sufficient to achieve or sustain measles elimination in the countries with weakest routine systems. Demographic changes also affect measles transmission, and their variation between and within countries should be incorporated into strategic planning. CONCLUSIONS: Rebuilding services after the COVID-19 pandemic provides a need and an opportunity to increase community engagement in planning and monitoring services. A broader suite of interventions is needed beyond SIAs. Improved methods for tracking coverage at the individual and community level are needed together with enhanced surveillance. Decision-making needs to be decentralized to develop locally-driven, sustainable strategies for measles control and elimination.