Effectiveness of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in children and adolescents: a large-scale observational study.

Background: Policymakers urgently need evidence to adequately balance the costs and benefits of mass vaccination against COVID-19 across all age groups, including children and adolescents. In this study, we aim to assess the effectiveness of CoronaVac's primary series among children and adolescents in Chile. Methods: We used a large prospective national cohort of about two million children and adolescents 6-16 years to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) in preventing laboratory-confirmed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), hospitalisation, and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) associated with COVID-19. We compared the risk of individuals treated with a complete primary immunization schedule (two doses, 28 days apart) with the risk of unvaccinated individuals during the follow-up period. The study was conducted in Chile from June 27, 2021, to January 12, 2022, when the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant was predominant but other variants of concern were co-circulating, including Omicron. We used inverse probability-weighted survival regression models to estimate hazard ratios of complete immunization over the unvaccinated status, accounting for time-varying vaccination exposure and adjusting for relevant demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical confounders. Findings: The estimated adjusted vaccine effectiveness for the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in children aged 6-16 years was 74.5% (95% CI, 73.8-75.2), 91.0% (95% CI, 87.8-93.4), 93.8% (95% CI, 87.8-93.4) for the prevention of COVID-19, hospitalisation, and ICU admission, respectively. For the subgroup of children 6-11 years, the vaccine effectiveness was 75.8% (95% CI, 74.7-76.8) for the prevention of COVID-19 and 77.9% (95% CI, 61.5-87.3) for the prevention of hospitalisation. Interpretation: Our results suggest that a complete primary immunization schedule with the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine provides effective protection against severe COVID-19 disease for children 6-16 years. Funding: Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo (ANID) Millennium Science Initiative Program and Fondo de Financiamiento de Centros de Investigación en Áreas Prioritarias (FONDAP).

Neutralizing antibodies induced by homologous and heterologous boosters in CoronaVac vaccinees in Chile.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of a booster dose on the humoral response in individuals inoculated with a complete schedule of any SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, we evaluated the neutralizing antibody (NAb) titers of homologous or heterologous booster doses over a 90-days period in CoronaVac vaccinees from three centers in Santiago, Chile. METHODS: Individuals previously inoculated with two doses of CoronaVac (N = 523) were recruited in the context of the REFUERZO clinical trial (NCT04992182) and received either placebo (N=129), or a booster dose of CoronaVac (N=134), BNT162b2 (N=133) or ChAdOx1 (N=127). Pseudovirus neutralizing antibody titers (pVNT) were determined at baseline (day 0) as well as days 14, 30, 60 and 90 post booster administration. RESULTS: Inoculating a booster dose increases the pVNTs titers at days 14 and 30 in all groups, (13.5 and 12.0 fold increase for the CoronaVac group; 247.0 and 212.3 fold increase for the BTN162b2 group; and 89.1 and 128.1 fold increased for ChAdOx1 at each time point, respectively) with a decline observed at days 60 and 90. However, while pVNTs remained significantly higher for the BTN162b2 and ChAdOx1 groups at days 60 and 90, neutralizing antibody titers reached baseline levels in the CoronaVac group at 90 days post-inoculation. CONCLUSIONS: A single heterologous booster (BTN162b2 or ChAdOx1) in individuals who completed the CoronaVac primary series resulted in an important increase in NAb titers remaining significantly higher at least for 90 days. These data may directly impact middle- and low-income countries currently using CoronaVac as the main vaccination strategy.

First wave of SARS-CoV-2 in Santiago Chile: Seroprevalence, asymptomatic infection and infection fatality rate.

BACKGROUND: The first wave of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Chile occurred during the cold season reaching a peak by the end of June 2020, with 80 % of the cases concentrated in its capital, Santiago. The main objective of this study was to estimate the attack rate during this first wave of SARS-CoV-2 in a large, densely populated city with more than seven million inhabitants. Since the number of confirmed cases provides biased information due to individuals' potential self-selection, mostly related to asymptomatic patients and testing access, we measured antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 to assess infection prevalence during the first wave in the city, as well as estimate asymptomatic cases, and infection fatality ratio. To our knowledge this is one of the few population-based cross-sectional serosurvey during the first wave in a highly affected emerging country. The challenges of pandemic response in urban settings in a capital city like Santiago, with heterogeneous subpopulations and high mobility through public transportation, highlight the necessity of more accurate information regarding the first waves of new emerging diseases. METHODS: From April 24 to June 21, 2020, 1326 individuals were sampled from a long-standing panel of household representatives of Santiago. Immunochromatographic assays were used to detect IgM and IgG antibody isotypes. RESULTS: Seroprevalence reached 6.79 % (95 %CI 5.58 %-8.26 %) in the first 107 days of the pandemic, without significant differences among sex and age groups; this figure indicates an attack rate 2.8 times higher than the one calculated with registered cases. It also changes the fatality rate estimates, from a 2.33 % case fatality rate reported by MOH to an estimated crude 1.00 % (CI95 % 0.97-1.03) infection fatality rate (adjusted for test performance 1.66 % [CI95 % 1.61-1.71]). Most seropositive were symptomatic (81,1 %). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high number of cases registered, mortality rates, and the stress produced over the health system, the vast majority of the people remained susceptible to potential new epidemic waves. We contribute to the understanding of the initial spread of emerging epidemic threats. Consequently, our results provide better information to design early strategies that counterattack new health challenges in urban contexts.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac in children 3-5 years of age during the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron outbreak in Chile.

The outbreak of the B.1.1.529 lineage of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (Omicron) has caused an unprecedented number of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases, including pediatric hospital admissions. Policymakers urgently need evidence of vaccine effectiveness in children to balance the costs and benefits of vaccination campaigns, but, to date, the evidence is sparse. Leveraging a population-based cohort in Chile of 490,694 children aged 3-5 years, we estimated the effectiveness of administering a two-dose schedule, 28 days apart, of Sinovac's inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac). We used inverse probability-weighted survival regression models to estimate hazard ratios of symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalization and admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for children with complete immunization over non-vaccination, accounting for time-varying vaccination exposure and relevant confounders. The study was conducted between 6 December 2021 and 26 February 2022, during the Omicron outbreak in Chile. The estimated vaccine effectiveness was 38.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 36.5-39.9) against symptomatic COVID-19, 64.6% (95% CI, 49.6-75.2) against hospitalization and 69.0% (95% CI, 18.6-88.2) against ICU admission. The effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was modest; however, protection against severe disease was high. These results support vaccination of children aged 3-5 years to prevent severe illness and associated complications and highlight the importance of maintaining layered protections against SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Effectiveness of homologous and heterologous booster doses for an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: a large-scale prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Several countries have authorised or begun using a booster vaccine dose against COVID-19. Policy makers urgently need evidence of the effectiveness of additional vaccine doses and its clinical spectrum for individuals with complete primary immunisation schedules, particularly in countries where the primary schedule used inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. METHODS: Using individual-level data, we evaluated a prospective, observational, national-level cohort of individuals (aged ≥16 years) affiliated with the Fondo Nacional de Salud insurance programme in Chile, to assess the effectiveness of CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech), AZD1222 (Oxford-AstraZeneca), or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine boosters in individuals who had completed a primary immunisation schedule with CoronaVac, compared with unvaccinated individuals. Individuals administered vaccines from Feb 2, 2021, to the prespecified study end date of Nov 10, 2021, were evaluated; we excluded individuals with a probable or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (RT-PCR or antigen test) on or before Feb 2, 2021, and individuals who had received at least one dose of any COVID-19 vaccine before Feb 2, 2021. We estimated the vaccine effectiveness of booster doses against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 (symptomatic COVID-19) cases and COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalisation, admission to the intensive care unit [ICU], and death We used inverse probability-weighted and stratified survival regression models to estimate hazard ratios, accounting for time-varying vaccination status and adjusting for relevant demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical confounders. We estimated the change in hazard from unvaccinated status to vaccinated status associated with the primary immunisation series and a booster vaccine. FINDINGS: 11 174 257 individuals were eligible for this study, among whom 4 127 546 completed a primary immunisation schedule (two doses) with CoronaVac and received a booster dose during the study period. 1 921 340 (46·5%) participants received an AZD1222 booster, 2 019 260 (48·9%) received a BNT162b2 booster, and 186 946 (4·5%) received a homologous booster with CoronaVac. We calculated an adjusted vaccine effectiveness (weighted stratified Cox model) in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 of 78·8% (95% CI 76·8-80·6) for a three-dose schedule with CoronaVac, 96·5% (96·2-96·7) for a BNT162b2 booster, and 93·2% (92·9-93·6) for an AZD1222 booster. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, ICU admission, and death was 86·3% (83·7-88·5), 92·2% (88·7-94·6), and 86·7% (80·5-91·0) for a homologous CoronaVac booster, 96·1% (95·3-96·9), 96·2% (94·6-97·3), and 96·8% (93·9-98·3) for a BNT162b2 booster, and 97·7% (97·3-98·0), 98·9% (98·5-99·2), and 98·1% (97·3-98·6) for an AZD1222 booster. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that a homologous or heterologous booster dose for individuals with a complete primary vaccination schedule with CoronaVac provides a high level of protection against COVID-19, including severe disease and death. Heterologous boosters showed higher vaccine effectiveness than a homologous booster for all outcomes, providing additional support for a mix-and-match approach. FUNDING: Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo through the Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico, Millennium Science Initiative Program, and Fondo de Financiamiento de Centros de Investigación en Áreas Prioritarias.

Duration of effectiveness of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease: results of a systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Knowing whether COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes is crucial for informing vaccine policy, such as the need for and timing of booster doses. We aimed to systematically review the evidence for the duration of protection of COVID-19 vaccines against various clinical outcomes, and to assess changes in the rates of breakthrough infection caused by the delta variant with increasing time since vaccination. METHODS: This study was designed as a systematic review and meta-regression. We did a systematic review of preprint and peer-reviewed published article databases from June 17, 2021, to Dec 2, 2021. Randomised controlled trials of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and observational studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness were eligible. Studies with vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates at discrete time intervals of people who had received full vaccination and that met predefined screening criteria underwent full-text review. We used random-effects meta-regression to estimate the average change in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness 1-6 months after full vaccination. FINDINGS: Of 13 744 studies screened, 310 underwent full-text review, and 18 studies were included (all studies were carried out before the omicron variant began to circulate widely). Risk of bias, established using the risk of bias 2 tool for randomised controlled trials or the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool was low for three studies, moderate for eight studies, and serious for seven studies. We included 78 vaccine-specific vaccine efficacy or effectiveness evaluations (Pfizer-BioNTech-Comirnaty, n=38; Moderna-mRNA-1273, n=23; Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S, n=9; and AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria, n=8). On average, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased from 1 month to 6 months after full vaccination by 21·0 percentage points (95% CI 13·9-29·8) among people of all ages and 20·7 percentage points (10·2-36·6) among older people (as defined by each study, who were at least 50 years old). For symptomatic COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 24·9 percentage points (95% CI 13·4-41·6) in people of all ages and 32·0 percentage points (11·0-69·0) in older people. For severe COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 10·0 percentage points (95% CI 6·1-15·4) in people of all ages and 9·5 percentage points (5·7-14·6) in older people. Most (81%) vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates against severe disease remained greater than 70% over time. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against severe disease remained high, although it did decrease somewhat by 6 months after full vaccination. By contrast, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against infection and symptomatic disease decreased approximately 20-30 percentage points by 6 months. The decrease in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness is likely caused by, at least in part, waning immunity, although an effect of bias cannot be ruled out. Evaluating vaccine efficacy or effectiveness beyond 6 months will be crucial for updating COVID-19 vaccine policy. FUNDING: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations.

Tool for Estimating the Probability of Having COVID-19 With 1 or More Negative RT-PCR Results.

Early case detection and isolation of infected individuals are critical to controlling coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is considered the gold standard for the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, but false negatives do occur. We built a user-friendly online tool to estimate the probability of having COVID-19 with negative RT-PCR results and thus avoid preventable transmission.

Effectiveness of an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Chile.

BACKGROUND: Mass vaccination campaigns to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) are occurring in many countries; estimates of vaccine effectiveness are urgently needed to support decision making. A countrywide mass vaccination campaign with the use of an inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine (CoronaVac) was conducted in Chile starting on February 2, 2021. METHODS: We used a prospective national cohort, including participants 16 years of age or older who were affiliated with the public national health care system, to assess the effectiveness of the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine with regard to preventing Covid-19 and related hospitalization, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and death. We estimated hazard ratios using the extension of the Cox proportional-hazards model, accounting for time-varying vaccination status. We estimated the change in the hazard ratio associated with partial immunization (≥14 days after receipt of the first dose and before receipt of the second dose) and full immunization (≥14 days after receipt of the second dose). Vaccine effectiveness was estimated with adjustment for individual demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The study was conducted from February 2 through May 1, 2021, and the cohort included approximately 10.2 million persons. Among persons who were fully immunized, the adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 65.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.2 to 66.6) for the prevention of Covid-19 and 87.5% (95% CI, 86.7 to 88.2) for the prevention of hospitalization, 90.3% (95% CI, 89.1 to 91.4) for the prevention of ICU admission, and 86.3% (95% CI, 84.5 to 87.9) for the prevention of Covid-19-related death. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectively prevented Covid-19, including severe disease and death, a finding that is consistent with results of phase 2 trials of the vaccine. (Funded by Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo and others.).

Evaluation of two fluorescence immunoassays for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 antigen-new tool to detect infective COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Real-Time Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) is currently the only recommended diagnostic method for SARS-CoV-2. However, rapid immunoassays for SARS-CoV-2 antigen could significantly reduce the COVID-19 burden currently weighing on laboratories around the world. METHODS: We evaluated the performance of two rapid fluorescence immunoassays (FIAs), SOFIA SARS Antigen FIA (Quidel Corporation, San Diego, CA, USA) and STANDARD F COVID-19 Ag FIA (SD Biosensor Inc., Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea), which use an automated reader. The study used 64 RT-PCR characterized clinical samples (32 positive; 32 negative), which consisted of nasopharyngeal swabs in universal transport medium. RESULTS: Of the 32 positive specimens, all from patients within 5 days of symptom onset, the Quidel and SD Biosensor assays detected 30 (93.8%) and 29 (90.6%) samples, respectively. Among the 27 samples with high viral loads (Ct ≤ 25), the two tests had a sensitivity of 100%. Specificity was 96.9% for both kits. CONCLUSION: The high performance of the evaluated FIAs indicates a potential use as rapid and PCR-independent tools for COVID-19 diagnosis in early stages of infection. The excellent sensitivity to detect cases with viral loads above ~106 copies/mL (Ct values ≤ 25), the estimated threshold of contagiousness, suggests that the assays might serve to rapidly identify infective individuals.

Covid-19 in South America: clinical and epidemiological characteristics among 381 patients during the early phase of the pandemic in Santiago, Chile.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the characteristics of the Covid-19 pandemic in different geographical regions, ethnic and socioeconomic settings are of emerging importance. This study presents the demographic and clinical features of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients in a large private healthcare center in Santiago, Chile, during the first month of the pandemic. METHODS: We analyzed the demographics, laboratory and clinical characteristics including severity and outcome of all patients diagnosed with Covid-19 during the first month of the pandemic. SARS-2-CoV infection was confirmed by RT-PCR in nosopharyngeal samples. The primary outcome was a composite of ICU admission or all-cause, in-hospital mortality. Clinical and laboratory parameters of hospitalized patients were analyzed regarding their association with the primary outcome. RESULTS: From March 3 to April 4, 2020, 3679 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in our hospital. Of those, 381 had Covid-19 and were included into this analysis. Most patients (99.2%) were Chileans, 12% returning from recent travel. The median age was 39 years (IQR 31-49) and 52% were female. A total of 88 patients (23.1%) were hospitalized; 18 (3.7%) required ICU and/or died. The overall mortality was 0.7%. Increased body mass index (BMI) and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) were independently associated with ICU care or death. CONCLUSION: During the first weeks of the pandemic in Chile, most Covid-19 patients were young, with low rates of hospitalization, ICU requirement, and fatality. BMI and CRP on admission were predictors for severity. Our data provide important information on the clinical course and outcome of Covid-19 in a Latin American setting.

Evaluation of a novel antigen-based rapid detection test for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory samples.

OBJECTIVES: In the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the development and validation of rapid and easy-to-perform diagnostic methods are of high priority. This study was performed to evaluate a novel rapid antigen detection test (RDT) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory samples. METHODS: The fluorescence immunochromatographic SARS-CoV-2 antigen test (Bioeasy Biotechnology Co., Shenzhen, China) was evaluated using universal transport medium with nasopharyngeal (NP) and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs from suspected COVID-19 cases. Diagnostic accuracy was determined in comparison to SARS-CoV-2 real-time (RT)-PCR. RESULTS: A total of 127 samples were included; 82 were RT-PCR-positive. The median patient age was 38 years, 53.5% were male, and 93.7% were from the first week after symptom onset. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 93.9% (95% confidence interval 86.5-97.4%) and 100% (95% confidence interval 92.1-100%), respectively, with a diagnostic accuracy of 96.1% and Kappa coefficient of 0.9. Sensitivity was significantly higher in samples with high viral loads. CONCLUSIONS: The RDT evaluated in this study showed a high sensitivity and specificity in samples mainly obtained during the first week of symptoms and with high viral loads, despite the use of a non-validated sample material. The assay has the potential to become an important tool for early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, particularly in situations with limited access to molecular methods.