Relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine up to four months post administration in individuals aged 80 years or more in Italy: A retrospective matched cohort study

Several countries started a 2nd booster COVID-19 vaccination campaign targeting the elderly population, but evidence around its effectiveness is still scarce. This study aims to estimate the relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the population aged ≥ 80 years in Italy, during predominant circulation of the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariants.We linked routine data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system. On each day between 11 April and 6 August 2022, we matched 1:1, according to several demographic and clinical characteristics, individuals who received the 2nd booster vaccine dose with individuals who received the 1st booster vaccine dose at least 120 days earlier. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) between the two groups, calculating the relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) as (1 – risk ratio)X100.Based on the analysis of 831,555 matched pairs, we found that a 2nd booster dose of mRNA vaccine, 14–118 days post administration, was moderately effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to a 1st booster dose administered at least 120 days earlier [14.3 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.2–20.2]. RVE decreased from 28.5 % (95 % CI: 24.7–32.1) in the time-interval 14–28 days to 7.6 % (95 % CI: ?14.1 to 18.3) in the time-interval 56–118 days. However, RVE against severe COVID-19 was higher (34.0 %, 95 % CI: 23.4–42.7), decreasing from 43.2 % (95 % CI: 30.6–54.9) to 27.2 % (95 % CI: 8.3–42.9) over the same time span.Although RVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection was much reduced 2–4 months after a 2nd booster dose, RVE against severe COVID-19 was about 30 %, even during prevalent circulation of the Omicron BA.5 subvariant. The cost-benefit of a 3rd booster dose for the elderly people who received the 2nd booster dose at least four months earlier should be carefully evaluated.     

Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) following AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) COVID-19 vaccination – A risk–benefit analysis for people < 60 years in Australia

The AstraZeneca ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine is associated with Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) in 3/100,000 vaccinations with high fatality rates reported in many countries. We conducted a risk–benefit analysis for Australians aged 18–59 years, comparing the risk of vaccination versus infection, and rate of TTS to other vaccines which prompted policy change following rare adverse events – rotavirus, smallpox and oral polio vaccines. COVID-19 deaths over 12 months range from 0 to 417 in current and future worst case scenarios. In the past 15 months 20 COVID-19 deaths occurred in people < 60 years compared to 890 deaths over 60 years. The estimated possible number of TTS cases is 347, with vaccine-related deaths ranging from 17 to 153 if 80% of adults 18–59 years are vaccinated. The reported rate of TTS is in the same range as rare but serious adverse events associated with other vaccines that have been subject to policy change. In Australia, the potential risks of the AZD1222 vaccine in younger adults, who are at low risk of dying from COVID-19, may outweigh the benefits.     

Risk-benefit analysis of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine in Australia using a Bayesian network modelling framework

Thrombosis and Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) has been associated with the AstraZencea (AZ) COVID-19 vaccine (Vaxzevria). Australia has reported low TTS incidence of < 3/100,000 after the first dose, with case fatality rate (CFR) of 5–6%. Risk-benefit analysis of vaccination has been challenging because of rapidly evolving data, changing levels of transmission, and variation in rates of TTS, COVID-19, and CFR between age groups. We aim to optimise risk–benefit analysis by developing a model that enables inputs to be updated rapidly as evidence evolves. A Bayesian network was used to integrate local and international data, government reports, published literature and expert opinion. The model estimates probabilities of outcomes under different scenarios of age, sex, low/medium/high transmission (0.05%/0.45%/5.76% of population infected over 6 months), SARS-CoV-2 variant, vaccine doses, and vaccine effectiveness. We used the model to compare estimated deaths from AZ vaccine-associated TTS with i) COVID-19 deaths prevented under different scenarios, and ii) deaths from COVID-19 related atypical severe blood clots (cerebral venous sinus thrombosis & portal vein thrombosis). For a million people aged ≥ 70 years where 70% received first dose and 35% received two doses, our model estimated < 1 death from TTS, 25 deaths prevented under low transmission, and > 3000 deaths prevented under high transmission. Risks versus benefits varied significantly between age groups and transmission levels. Under high transmission, deaths prevented by AZ vaccine far exceed deaths from TTS (by 8 to > 4500 times depending on age). Probability of dying from COVID-related atypical severe blood clots was 58–126 times higher (depending on age and sex) than dying from TTS. To our knowledge, this is the first example of the use of Bayesian networks for risk–benefit analysis for a COVID-19 vaccine. The model can be rapidly updated to incorporate new data, adapted for other countries, extended to other outcomes (e.g., severe disease), or used for other vaccines.     

Efficacy and safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in participants with a history of cancer: subgroup analysis of a global phase 3 randomized clinical trial

IntroductionIndividuals with an underlying malignancy have high risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes. In clinical trials, COVID-19 vaccines were safe and efficacious against infection, hospitalization, and death, but most trials excluded participants with cancer. We report results from participants with a history of past or active neoplasm (malignant or benign/unknown) and up to 6 months’ follow-up post-dose 2 from the placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial of the 2-dose BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.Patients and methodsBetween July 2020–January 2021, 46,429 participants aged ≥ 12 years were randomized at 152 sites in 6 countries. Healthy participants with pre-existing stable neoplasm could participate; those receiving immunosuppressive therapy were excluded. Data are reported for participants, aged ≥ 16 years for safety and ≥ 12 years for efficacy, who had any history of neoplasm at baseline (data cut-off: March 13, 2021). Adverse-event (AE) data are controlled for follow-up time before unblinding and reported as incidence rates (IRs) per 100 person-years follow-up.ResultsAt baseline, 3813 participants had a history of neoplasm; most common malignancies were breast (n = 460), prostate (n = 362), and melanoma (n = 223). Four BNT162b2 and 71 placebo recipients developed COVID-19 from 7 days post-dose 2; vaccine efficacy was 94.4% (95% CI: 85.2, 98.5) after up to 6 months’ follow-up post-dose 2. This compares favorably with vaccine efficacy of 91.1% in the overall trial population after the same follow-up. AEs were reported at IRs of 95.4 (BNT162b2) and 48.3 (placebo) per 100 person-years. Most common AEs were reactogenicity events (injection-site pain, fatigue, pyrexia). Three BNT162b2 and 1 placebo recipients withdrew because of vaccine-related AEs. No vaccine-related deaths were reported.ConclusionIn participants with past or active neoplasms, BNT162b2 vaccine has a similar efficacy and safety profile as in the overall trial population. These results can inform BNT162b2 use during the COVID-19 pandemic and future trials in participants with cancer.Clinical trial number: NCT04368728.     

mRNA-based COVID-19 booster vaccination is highly effective and cost-effective in Australia

BackgroundAustralia implemented an mRNA-based booster vaccination strategy against the COVID-19 Omicron variant in November 2021. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the booster strategy over 180 days.MethodsWe developed a decision-analytic Markov model of COVID-19 to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a booster strategy (administered 3 months after 2nd dose) in those aged ≥ 16 years, from a healthcare system perspective. The willingness-to-pay threshold was chosen as A$ 50,000.ResultsCompared with 2-doses of COVID-19 vaccines without a booster, Australia's booster strategy would incur an additional cost of A$0.88 billion but save A$1.28 billion in direct medical cost and gain 670 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in 180 days of its implementation. This suggested the booster strategy is cost-saving, corresponding to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.45 and a net monetary benefit of A$0.43 billion. The strategy would prevent 1.32 million new infections, 65,170 hospitalisations, 6,927 ICU admissions and 1,348 deaths from COVID-19 in 180 days. Further, a universal booster strategy of having all individuals vaccinated with the booster shot immediately once their eligibility is met would have resulted in a gain of 1,599 QALYs, a net monetary benefit of A$1.46 billion and a benefit-cost ratio of 1.95 in 180 days.ConclusionThe COVID-19 booster strategy implemented in Australia is likely to be effective and cost-effective for the Omicron epidemic. Universal booster vaccination would have further improved its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.     

Safety of simultaneous vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines in the Vaccine Safety Datalink

IntroductionSafety data on simultaneous vaccination (SV) with primary series monovalent COVID-19 vaccines and other vaccines are limited. We describe SV with primary series COVID-19 vaccines and assess 23 pre-specified health outcomes following SV among persons aged ≥5 years in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD).MethodsWe utilized VSD’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance data from December 11, 2020-May 21, 2022. Analyses assessed frequency of SV. Rate ratios (RRs) were estimated by Poisson regression when the number of outcomes was ≥5 across both doses, comparing outcome rates between COVID-19 vaccinees receiving SV and COVID-19 vaccinees receiving no SV in the 1–21 days following COVID-19 vaccine dose 1 and 1–42 days following dose 2 by SV type received (“All SV”, “Influenza SV”, “Non-influenza SV”).ResultsSV with COVID-19 vaccines was not common practice (dose 1: 0.7 % of 8,455,037 persons, dose 2: 0.3 % of 7,787,013 persons). The most frequent simultaneous vaccines were influenza, HPV, Tdap, and meningococcal. Outcomes following SV with COVID-19 vaccines were rare (total of 56 outcomes observed after dose 1 and dose 2). Overall rate of outcomes among COVID-19 vaccinees who received SV was not statistically significantly different than the rate among those who did not receive SV (6.5 vs. 6.8 per 10,000 persons). Statistically significant elevated RRs were observed for appendicitis (2.09; 95 % CI, 1.06–4.13) and convulsions/seizures (2.78; 95 % CI, 1.10–7.06) in the “All SV” group following dose 1, and for Bell’s palsy (2.82; 95 % CI, 1.14–6.97) in the “Influenza SV” group following dose 2.ConclusionCombined pre-specified health outcomes observed among persons who received SV with COVID-19 vaccine were rare and not statistically significantly different compared to persons who did not receive SV with COVID-19 vaccine. Statistically significant adjusted rate ratios were observed for some individual outcomes, but the number of outcomes was small and there was no adjustment for multiple testing.     

Immunogenicity of heterologous inactivated and adenoviral-vectored COVID-19 vaccine: Real-world data

Limited data are available on the responses to heterologous vaccine regimens for SARS-CoV-2, especially among countries using inactivated and adenoviral-vectored vaccines. A total of 77 participants who received heterologous inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac) and adenoviral-vectored vaccine (AZD1222) were enrolled in our study. There were two comparison groups vaccinated with the homologous CoronaVac (N = 79) and AZD1222 (N = 78) regimen. All sera samples were tested for anti-receptor-binding-domain IgG (anti-RBD IgG) using a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). The neutralizing activity in a subset of serum samples was tested against the original Wuhan strain and variants of concern, B.1.1.7, B.1.617.2 and B.1.351, using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-based surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT). The heterologous CoronaVac/AZD1222 vaccine induced higher levels of anti-RBD IgG than that of two-dose homologous CoronaVac or AZD1222 vaccines (p < 0.001). Sera samples of the CoronaVac/AZD1222 vaccine recipients elicited higher neutralizing antibody activity against the original Wuhan and all variants of concern than in the recipients of the two-dose CoronaVac. The heterologous CoronaVac followed by AZD1222 is an alternative regimen to combat with the SARS-CoV-2 variants in case of vaccine shortage with improved immunogenicity compared to the homologous CoronaVac regimen.     

Evaluation of mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination,Utah 2021

IntroductionIn order to evaluate trends in death after COVID-19 vaccination we analyzed the timing of death relative to vaccination date and the causes of death in vaccinated Utahns in 2021.MethodsWe matched people in the Utah immunization registry with documented COVID-19 vaccinations between December 18, 2020 and December 31, 2021 to Utah’s 2021 vital statistics death records. Vaccinated people were categorized as having one, two, or ≥ three COVID-19 vaccine doses in a time-updated metric. We examined crude mortality rates by dosing groups in two-week intervals for all deaths, and by COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 causes, within the 44 weeks following receipt of the most recent vaccine.ResultsWe identified 2,072,908 individuals who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine of whom 10,997 died in 2021. Only 17.5 % of the total vaccinated population was age 65+, while 80.9 % of those who died were over 65. In the four weeks following the first or second vaccination, all-cause mortality was low and then stabilized for the remainder of the evaluation period at a bi-weekly average of 33.0 and 39.0 deaths/100,000 people for one and two doses, respectively. Typical seasonal variation in death was observed among those with two doses. Small sample size precluded analysis of those with ≥ three doses, but trends were similar.ConclusionsMortality rates in the 44 weeks following the COVID-19 vaccination did not show trends suggesting an increase in mortality related to COVID-19 vaccination, reinforcing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. This represents an accessible approach for local evaluation.     

Effectiveness of adenovirus type 5 vectored and inactivated COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19, COVID-19 pneumonia,and severe COVID-19 caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant: Evidence from an outbreak in Yunnan,China, 2021

BackgroundIn partial response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, countries around the world are conducting large-scale vaccination campaigns. Real-world estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant are still limited. An outbreak in Ruili city of China provided an opportunity to evaluate VE against the Delta variant of two types of COVID-19 vaccines in use in China and globally – inactivated (CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV) and adenovirus type 5 vectored (Convidecia) vaccines.MethodsWe estimated VE using a retrospective cohort study two months after the Ruili vaccination campaign (median: 63 days). Close contacts of infected people (Chinese nationality, 18 years and above) were included to assess VE against symptomatic Covid-19, COVID-19 pneumonia, and severe COVID-19. We calculated the relative risks (RR) of the outcomes for unvaccinated compared with fully vaccinated individuals. We used logistic regression analyses to estimate adjusted VEs, controlling for gender and age group (18–59 years and 60 years and over).We compared unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals on duration of RT-PCR positivity and Ct value.FindingsThere were 686 close contacts eligible for VE estimates. Adjusted VE of ad5-vectored vaccine was 61.5% (95% CI, 9.5–83.6) against symptomatic COVID-19, 67.9% (95%CI: 1.7–89.9) against pneumonia, and 100% (95%CI: 36.6–100) against severe/critical illness. For the two inactivated vaccines, combined VE was 74.6% (95% CI, 36.0–90.0) against symptomatic COVID-19, 76.7% (95% CI: 19.3–93.3) against pneumonia, and 100% (95% CI: 47.6–100) against severe/critical COVID-19. There were no statistically significant differences in VE between two inactivated vaccines for symptomatic COVID-19 and for pneumonia, nor were there statistically significant differences between inactivated and ad5-vectored VE in any of the three outcomes. The median durations of RT-PCR positivity were 17 days for fifteen people vaccinated with an inactivated vaccine, 18 days for forty-four people vaccinated with the Ad5 vectored vaccine, and 26 days for eleven unvaccinated individuals. InterpretationThese results provide reassuring evidence that the three vaccines are effective at preventing Delta-variant COVID-19 in short term following vaccination campaign, and are most effective at preventing more serious illness. The findings of reduced duration of RT-PCR positivity and length of hospital stay associated with full vaccination suggests potential saving of health-care system resources.     

The demand for a COVID-19 vaccine in Ecuador

In Latin America, the country of Ecuador was one of the first and most severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate the demand for a COVID-19 vaccine in Ecuador by estimating individuals’ willingness to pay (WTP) for the vaccine, and by assessing the effect of vaccine attributes (duration of protection and efficacy) and individuals’ characteristics on this valuation. The sample used (N = 1,050) was obtained through an online survey conducted from April 2 to April 7, 2020. Two levels of vaccine efficacy (70% and 98%) and two levels of vaccine duration of protection (1 and 20 years) were considered. The willingness to pay estimates were obtained using a double-bounded dichotomous-choice contingent valuation format. Survey results show that a very large proportion of individuals (at least 97%) were willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine, and at least 85% of individuals were willing to pay a positive amount for that vaccine. Conservative estimates of the average WTP values ranged from USD 147.61 to 196.65 and the median WTP from USD 76.9 to 102.5. Only the duration of protection was found to influence individuals’ WTP for the vaccine (p < 0.01). On average, respondents were willing to pay 30% more for a COVID-19 vaccine with 20 years of protection relative to the vaccine with 1 year of protection. Regression results show that WTP for the vaccine was associated with income, employment status, the perceived probability of needing hospitalization if contracting the virus causing COVID-19, and region of residence.     

Acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine based on the health belief model: A population-based survey in Hong Kong

BackgroundVaccines for COVID-19 are anticipated to be available by 2021. Vaccine uptake rate is a crucial determinant for herd immunity. We examined factors associated with acceptance of vaccine based on (1). constructs of the Health Belief Model (HBM), (2). trust in the healthcare system, new vaccine platforms and manufacturers, and (3). self-reported health outcomes.MethodsA population-based, random telephone survey was performed during the peak of the third wave of COVID-19 outbreak (27/07/2020 to 27/08/2020) in Hong Kong. All adults aged ≥ 18 years were eligible. The survey included sociodemographic details; self-report health conditions; trust scales; and self-reported health outcomes. Multivariable regression analyses were applied to examine independent associations. The primary outcome is the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsWe conducted 1200 successful telephone interviews (response rate 55%). The overall vaccine acceptance rate after adjustment for population distribution was 37.2% (95% C.I. 34.5–39.9%). The projected acceptance rates exhibited a “J-shaped” pattern with age, with higher rates among young adults (18–24 years), then increased linearly with age. Multivariable regression analyses revealed that perceived severity, perceived benefits of the vaccine, cues to action, self-reported health outcomes, and trust in healthcare system or vaccine manufacturers were positive correlates of acceptance; whilst perceived access barriers and harm were negative correlates. Remarkably, perceived susceptibility to infection carried no significant association, whereas recommendation from Government (aOR = 10.2, 95% C.I. 6.54 to 15.9, p < 0.001) was as the strongest driving factor for acceptance. Other key obstacles of acceptance included lack of confidence on newer vaccine platforms (43.4%) and manufacturers without track record (52.2%), which are of particular relevance to the current context.ConclusionsGovernmental recommendation is an important driver, whereas perceived susceptibility is not associated with acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine. These HBM constructs and independent predictors inform evidence-based formulation and implementation of vaccination strategies.     

Relative effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination with 3 compared to 2 doses against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) among an Australian population with low prior rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection

BackgroundWe estimate effectiveness of 3 versus 2 vaccine doses against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron in a mostly infection-naiive but highly vaccinated Australian population.MethodsCohort study of adults aged 40+ years resident in Sydney followed from 1 January 2022 for SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation or death using linked immunisation, disease notification and hospitalisation registers. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and corresponding relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) were estimated comparing 3 to 2 vaccine dose recipients by time since dose receipt, vaccine brand, and prior infection. Absolute risk reductions and numbers needed to boost by age groups were calculated.Results2,053,123 infection-naiive individuals (mean age 59 years) were followed for 327,272 person-years for infection and 224,269 person-years for severe outcomes (hospitalisation/death). There were 175,849 infections and 4113 hospitalisations/deaths. Compared to individuals receiving dose 2 within the last 3 months, rVE in dose 3 recipients was 7% (95% CI 5–9%) against infection and 65% (95%CI 61–69%) against hospitalisation/death. Almost all dose 3 recipients had an mRNA vaccine; there was little difference in dose 3 rVE by primary course vaccine brand (ChAdOx1 versus BNT162b2). Over the 6-week follow-up, we estimated one hospitalisation/death was avoided for every 192 adults aged ≥70 years boosted with dose 3 in the infection-naiive cohort. The aHR for hospitalisation/death from Omicron was 0.12 (95 %CI 0.07–0.23) for 2-dose recipients with a prior Delta infection compared with 2-dose recipients with no prior infection.ConclusionsReceipt of a third COVID-19 vaccine dose in adults aged 40 years and above significantly reduced hospitalisations and deaths from SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infections in a primarily infection-naiive population.     

Safety of the NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 vaccine in randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials

BackgroundNVX-CoV2373 (Nuvaxovid™ or the Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine, Adjuvanted), the first protein-based COVID-19 vaccine, received emergency use authorization (EUA) as a primary series/booster and is available globally. NVX-CoV2373 primary series demonstrated efficacy rates of 89.7–90.4 % and an acceptable safety profile. This article summarizes safety in adult recipients (aged ≥ 18 years) of primary series NVX-CoV2373 in four randomized placebo-controlled trials.MethodsAll participants who received NVX-CoV2373 primary series or placebo (pre-crossover) were included according to actual received treatment. The safety period was from Day 0 (first vaccination) to unblinding/receipt of EUA-approved/crossover vaccine, end of each study (EOS), or last visit date/cutoff date minus 14 days. The analysis reviewed local and systemic solicited adverse events (AEs) within 7 days after NVX-CoV2373 or placebo; unsolicited AEs from after Dose 1 to 28 days after Dose 2; serious AEs (SAEs), deaths, AEs of special interest, and vaccine-related medically attended AEs from Day 0 through end of follow-up (incidence rate per 100 person-years).FindingsPooled data from 49,950 participants (NVX-CoV2373, n = 30,058; placebo, n = 19,892) were included. Solicited reactions after any dose were more frequent in NVX-CoV2373 recipients (local, 76 %/systemic, 70 %) than placebo recipients (local, 29 %/systemic, 47 %), and were mostly of mild-to-moderate severity. Grade 3+ reactions were infrequent, with greater frequency in NVX-CoV2373 recipients (local, 6.28 %/systemic, 11.36 %) than placebo recipients (local, 0.48 %/systemic, 3.58 %). SAEs and deaths occurred with similarly low frequency in NVX-CoV2373 (SAEs: 0.91 %, deaths: 0.07 %) and placebo recipients (SAEs: 1.0 %, deaths: 0.06 %).InterpretationTo date, NVX-CoV2373 has displayed an acceptable safety profile in healthy adults.FundingSupported by Novavax, Inc.     

Immunogenicity and safety of a SARS-CoV-2 inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) co-administered with an inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine: A randomized,open-label,controlled study in healthy adults aged 18 to 59 years in China

BackgroundStudies are needed for evidence of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine co-administered with influenza vaccine.MethodsA randomized, open-label, controlled study was conducted in Zhejiang Province, China. Eligible healthy adults aged 18–59 years underwent randomization at a ratio of 1:1:2 to receive inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (IIV4) either concomitantly with the first (C1 subgroup) or the second (C2 subgroup) dose of CoronaVac, or 14 days after the first dose of CoronaVac (S group). The primary purpose of the study was to prove the non-inferiority in seroconversion rate of antibody against SARS-CoV-2.ResultsOverall, 480 participants were enrolled, with 120, 120, and 240 randomly assigned to the C1, C2, and S groups, respectively. As lower bound of the two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference for the seroconversion rate of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 was over ?10%, the immune response for CoronaVac in the C group (93.1% [89.0, 96.0]) was non-inferior to that in the S group (95.2% [91.5, 97.6]) in the per-protocol set. A lower GMT of antibody against SARS-CoV-2 was observed in the C group as compared to the S group (27.5 vs. 38.1, P = 0.0001). Decrease of immune response to CoronaVac was mainly observed in participants received IIV4 concomitantly with their second dose of CoronaVac (C2 subgroup), with a seroconversion rate of 89.7% (95CI: 82.6%-94.5%) and a GMT of 23.3. The occurrences of vaccine related adverse reactions were no more than 20% and comparable among different groups. Most of the adverse reactions were mild and moderate.ConclusionCo-administration of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine and seasonal influenza vaccine, especially the administration regimen that the seasonal influenza vaccine co-administered with the first dose of the inactivated COVID-19 vaccine, would be feasible.     

Vaccine effectiveness and duration of protection of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines against Delta and Omicron BA.1 symptomatic and severe COVID-19 outcomes in adults aged 50 years and over in France

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants calls for continuous monitoring of vaccine effectiveness (VE). We estimated the absolute effectiveness of complete 2-dose primary vaccination and booster vaccination with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and the duration of protection against Delta and Omicron BA.1 symptomatic infection and severe outcomes. French residents aged ≥50 years, who presented with SARS-CoV-2-like symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 between June 6, 2021 and February 10, 2022 were included. A test-negative study was conducted to estimate VE against symptomatic infection, using conditional logistic regression models. Cox proportional hazard regressions were performed to assess additional protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes (any hospitalization, and intensive care units [ICU] admission or in-hospital death). In total, 273 732 cases and 735 919 controls were included. VE against symptomatic infection after 2-doses vaccination was 86% (95% CI: 75–92%) for Delta and 70% (58–79%) for Omicron, 7–30 days post vaccination. Protection waned over time, reaching 60% (57–63%) against Delta and 20% (16.–24%) for Omicron BA.1 > 120 days after vaccination. The booster dose fully restored protection against symtpomatic Delta infection (95% [81–99%]) but only partially against symptomatic Omicron BA.1 infection (63% [59–67%]). VE against Delta-related severe outcomes was above 95% with 2 doses, and persisted for at least four months. Protection against any Omicron BA.1-hospitalization was 92% (65%-99%) at 8–30 days, and 82% (67%-91%) > 120 days from the second dose. Against BA.1 ICU admission or in-patient death, VE stood at 98% (0–100%) at 8–30 days, and was 90% (40–99%) > 120 days from the second dose. Protection confered by mRNA vaccines against severe disease caused by either Delta or Omicron BA.1 appeared high and sustained over time. Protection against symptomatic diseases after 2 doses decreased rapidly, especially against Omicron BA.1. A booster dose restored high protection against Delta but only a partial one against Omicron BA.1.     

Short-term safety of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines with respect to all-cause mortality in the older population in Norway

BackgroundThere have been concerns about COVID-19 vaccination safety among frail older individuals. We investigated the relationship between COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and mortality among individuals aged ≥ 70 years and whether mortality varies across four groups of health services used.MethodsIn this nationwide cohort study, we included 688,152 individuals aged ≥ 70 years at the start of the Norwegian vaccination campaign (December 27, 2020). We collected individual-level data from the Norwegian Emergency Preparedness Register for COVID-19. Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals were matched (1:1 ratio) on the date of vaccination based on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. The main outcome was all-cause mortality during 21 days after first dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Kaplan-Meier survival functions were estimated for the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. We used Cox proportional-hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of death between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs), overall and by use of health services (none, home-based, short- and long-term nursing homes) and age group.ResultsBetween December 27, 2020, and March 31, 2021, 420,771 older individuals (61.1%) were vaccinated against COVID-19. The Kaplan-Meier estimates based on the matched study sample showed a small absolute risk difference in all-cause mortality between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, with a lower mortality in the vaccinated group (overall HR 0.28 [95% CI: 0.24–0.31]). Similar results were obtained in analyses stratified by use of health services and age group.ConclusionWe found no evidence of increased short-term mortality among vaccinated individuals in the older population after matching on sociodemographic and clinical characteristics affecting vaccination and mortality.     

COVID-19 vaccine coverage disparities in rural and farm children

BackgroundThe risks of severe outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) are elevated in unvaccinated individuals. It remains crucial to understand patterns of COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in younger and remote populations where coverage often lags. This study examined disparities in COVID-19 vaccine coverage in farm children and adolescents.MethodsA cross-sectional analysis was conducted in patients of the Marshfield Clinic Health System (MCHS) in Wisconsin. The sample included children/adolescents age 5–17 years who were eligible for COVID-19 vaccine initiation for ≥ 90 days (as of September 30, 2022), stratified by those who lived vs did not live on a farm. Outcomes included COVID-19 vaccine initiation, series completion, and booster receipt. Multivariable regression was used to examine associations between COVID-19 vaccination and farm, as well as rural and non-rural, residence.ResultsThere were 47,104 individuals (5% farm residents) in the sample. Overall, 33% of participants initiated and 31% completed the COVID-19 vaccine series. After adjustment, farm residence was associated with significantly lower odds of COVID-19 vaccine initiation (aOR [95% CI] = 0.68 [0.61, 0.75], p < 0.001), series completion (aOR = 0.67 [0.60, 0.75], p < 0.001), and booster receipt (aOR = 0.73 [0.61, 0.88], p = 0.001). Secondary analyses found COVID-19 vaccine coverage was lowest in young children who lived on dairy farms.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccine coverage is low in north-central Wisconsin children and adolescents. Those who live on farms have significantly lower likelihood of COVID-19 vaccine initiation, series completion, and booster receipt compared to non-farm counterparts. Farm families are an underserved group and require more effective public health interventions designed to prevent COVID-19.     

Age-Dependent Effects of COVID-19 Vaccine and of Healthcare Burden on COVID-19 Deaths,Tokyo, Japan

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against death in Japan remains unknown. Furthermore, although evidence indicates that healthcare capacity influences case-fatality risk (CFR), it remains unknown whether this relationship is mediated by age. With a modeling study, we analyzed daily COVID-19 cases and deaths during January–August 2021 by using Tokyo surveillance data to jointly estimate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against death and age-specific CFR. We also examined daily healthcare operations to determine the association between healthcare burden and age-specific CFR. Among fully vaccinated patients, vaccine effectiveness against death was 88.6% among patients 60–69 years of age, 83.9% among patients 70–79 years of age, 83.5% among patients 80–89 years of age, and 77.7% among patients >90 years of age. A positive association of several indicators of healthcare burden with CFR among patients >70 years of age suggested an age-dependent effect of healthcare burden on CFR in Japan.     

Immunogenicity of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine in New Zealand adults

BackgroundThere is very little known about SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immune responses in New Zealand populations at greatest risk for serious COVID-19 disease.MethodsThis prospective cohort study assessed immunogenicity in BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine recipients in New Zealand without previous COVID-19, with enrichment for Māori, Pacific peoples, older adults ≥ 65 years of age, and those with co-morbidities. Serum samples were analysed at baseline and 28 days after second dose for presence of quantitative anti-S IgG by chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and for neutralizing capacity against Wuhan, Beta, Delta, and Omicron BA.1 strains using a surrogate viral neutralisation assay.Results285 adults with median age of 52 years were included. 55% were female, 30% were Māori, 28% were Pacific peoples, and 26% were ≥ 65 years of age. Obesity, cardiac and pulmonary disease and diabetes were more common than in the general population. All participants received 2 doses of BNT162b2 vaccine. At 28 days after second vaccination, 99.6% seroconverted to the vaccine, and anti-S IgG and neutralising antibody levels were high across gender and ethnic groups. IgG and neutralising responses declined with age. Lower responses were associated with age ≥ 75 and diabetes, but not BMI. The ability to neutralise the Omicron BA.1 variant in vitro was severely diminished but maintained against other variants of concern.ConclusionsVaccine antibody responses to BNT162b2 were generally robust and consistent with international data in this COVID-19 naïve cohort with representation of key populations at risk for COVID-19 morbidity. Subsequent data on response to boosters, durability of responses and cellular immune responses should be assessed with attention to elderly adults and diabetics.     

Neutralization of Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.5 by a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in a Japanese nursing home cohort

The sustained epidemic of Omicron subvariants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a worldwide concern, and older adults are at high risk. We conducted a prospective cohort study to assess the immunogenicity of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) in nursing home residents and staff between May 2021 and December 2022. A total of 335 SARS-CoV-2 naïve individuals, including 141 residents (median age: 88 years) and 194 staff (median age: 44 years) participated. Receptor-binding domain (RBD) and nucleocapsid (N) protein IgG and neutralizing titer (NT) against the Wuhan strain, Alpha and Delta variants, and Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 subvariants were measured in serum samples drawn from participants after the second and third doses of mRNA vaccine using SARS-CoV-2 pseudotyped virus. Breakthrough infection (BTI) was confirmed by a notification of COVID-19 or a positive anti-N IgG result in serum after mRNA vaccination. Fifty-one participants experienced SARS-CoV-2 BTI during the study period. The RBD IgG and NTs against Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 were markedly increased in SARS CoV-2 naïve participants 2 months after the third dose of mRNA vaccine, compared to those 5 months after the second dose, and declined 5 months after the third dose. The decline in RBD IgG and NT against Omicron BA.1 and BA.5 in SARS-CoV-2 naïve participants after the second and the third dose was particularly marked in those aged ≥ 80 years. BTIs during the BA.5 epidemic period, which occurred between 2 and 5 months after the third dose, induced a robust NT against BA.5 even five months after the booster dose vaccination. Further studies are required to assess the sustainability of NTs elicited by Omicron-containing bivalent mRNA booster vaccine in older adults.