Protection of prior natural infection compared to mRNA vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 in Qatar

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUNDProtection conferred by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination has not been investigated in rigorously controlled studies. We compared head-to-head protection conferred by natural infection to that from the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar, between February 28, 2020 and March 6, 2022. METHODSTwo national matched retrospective target-trial cohort studies were conducted to compare incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization and death among those with a documented primary infection to incidence among those with a two-dose primary-series vaccination. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTSThe overall adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) for infection was 0.46 (95% CI 0.45-0.48) comparing those with a prior infection to those vaccinated with BNT162b2, and 0.51 (95% CI 0.48-0.53) comparing those with a prior infection to those vaccinated with mRNA-1273. For BNT162b2, the AHR decreased gradually from 0.55 (95% CI 0.46-0.65) in the fourth month after primary infection/vaccination to 0.31 (95% CI 0.27-0.37) in the eighth month, while for mRNA-1273, it decreased from 0.80 (95% CI 0.59-1.07) to 0.35 (95% CI 0.29-0.41) over the same time period. During the Omicron wave, the AHR was [~]0.50 for BNT162b2 and [~]0.60 for mRNA-1273. The overall AHR for any severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 (against all variants) was 0.32 (95% CI 0.10-1.00) for BNT162b2, and 0.58 (95% CI 0.14-2.43) for mRNA-1273. CONCLUSIONSNatural infection was associated with stronger and more durable protection against infection, regardless of the variant, than mRNA primary-series vaccination. Nonetheless, vaccination remains the safest and optimal tool of protection against infection and COVID-19 hospitalization and death.