RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vaccines were developed and deployed to combat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This study aimed to characterize patterns in the protection provided by the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mRNA vaccines against a spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 infection symptoms and severities. METHODS: A national, matched, test-negative, case-control study was conducted in Qatar between January 1 and December 18, 2021, utilizing a sample of 238,896 PCR-positive tests and 6,533,739 PCR-negative tests. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated against asymptomatic, symptomatic, severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), critical COVID-19, and fatal COVID-19 infections. Data sources included Qatar's national databases for COVID-19 laboratory testing, vaccination, hospitalization, and death. RESULTS: Effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 75.6% (95% CI: 73.6-77.5) against asymptomatic infection and 76.5% (95% CI: 75.1-77.9) against symptomatic infection. Effectiveness against each of severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19 infections surpassed 90%. Immediately after the second dose, all categories-namely, asymptomatic, symptomatic, severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19-exhibited similarly high effectiveness. However, from 181 to 270 days post-second dose, effectiveness against asymptomatic and symptomatic infections declined to below 40%, while effectiveness against each of severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19 infections remained consistently high. However, estimates against fatal COVID-19 often had wide 95% confidence intervals. Analogous patterns were observed in three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination and two- and three-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results. CONCLUSION: A gradient in vaccine effectiveness exists and is linked to the symptoms and severity of infection, providing higher protection against more symptomatic and severe cases. This gradient intensifies over time as vaccine immunity wanes after the last vaccine dose. These patterns appear consistent irrespective of the vaccine type or whether the vaccination involves the primary series or a booster.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Vacuna BNT162 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/inmunología , Vacuna BNT162/inmunología , Vacuna BNT162/administración & dosificación , Qatar/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Masculino , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273/inmunología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Adulto , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Adulto Joven , Adolescente , Anciano , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Vacunación/métodosRESUMEN
Introduction: Reinfections are increasingly becoming a feature in the epidemiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, accurately defining reinfection poses methodological challenges. Conventionally, reinfection is defined as a positive test occurring at least 90 days after a previous infection diagnosis. Yet, this extended time window may lead to an underestimation of reinfection occurrences. This study investigated the prospect of adopting an alternative, shorter time window for defining reinfection. Methods: A longitudinal study was conducted to assess the incidence of reinfections in the total population of Qatar, from February 28, 2020 to November 20, 2023. The assessment considered a range of time windows for defining reinfection, spanning from 1 day to 180 days. Subgroup analyses comparing first versus repeat reinfections and a sensitivity analysis, focusing exclusively on individuals who underwent frequent testing, were performed. Results: The relationship between the number of reinfections in the population and the duration of the time window used to define reinfection revealed two distinct dynamical domains. Within the initial 15 days post-infection diagnosis, almost all positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 were attributed to the original infection. However, surpassing the 30-day post-infection threshold, nearly all positive tests were attributed to reinfections. A 40-day time window emerged as a sufficiently conservative definition for reinfection. By setting the time window at 40 days, the estimated number of reinfections in the population increased from 84,565 to 88,384, compared to the 90-day time window. The maximum observed reinfections were 6 and 4 for the 40-day and 90-day time windows, respectively. The 40-day time window was appropriate for defining reinfection, irrespective of whether it was the first, second, third, or fourth occurrence. The sensitivity analysis, confined to high testers exclusively, replicated similar patterns and results. Discussion: A 40-day time window is optimal for defining reinfection, providing an informed alternative to the conventional 90-day time window. Reinfections are prevalent, with some individuals experiencing multiple instances since the onset of the pandemic.
RESUMEN
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to use infection testing databases to rapidly estimate effectiveness of prior infection in preventing reinfection ($P{E}_S$) by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants. Mathematical modeling was used to demonstrate a theoretical foundation for applicability of the test-negative, case-control study design to derive $P{E}_S$. Apart from the very early phase of an epidemic, the difference between the test-negative estimate for $P{E}_S$ and true value of $P{E}_S$ was minimal and became negligible as the epidemic progressed. The test-negative design provided robust estimation of $P{E}_S$ and its waning. Assuming that only 25% of prior infections are documented, misclassification of prior infection status underestimated $P{E}_S$, but the underestimate was considerable only when >50% of the population was ever infected. Misclassification of latent infection, misclassification of current active infection, and scale-up of vaccination all resulted in negligible bias in estimated $P{E}_S$. The test-negative design was applied to national-level testing data in Qatar to estimate $P{E}_S$ for SARS-CoV-2. $P{E}_S$ against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Beta variants was estimated at 97.0% (95% CI: 93.6-98.6) and 85.5% (95% CI: 82.4-88.1), respectively. These estimates were validated using a cohort study design. The test-negative design offers a feasible, robust method to estimate protection from prior infection in preventing reinfection.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We investigated the contribution of age, coexisting medical conditions, sex, and vaccination to incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and of severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 in older adults since pandemic onset. METHODS: A national retrospective cohort study was conducted in the population of Qatar aged ≥50 years between February 5, 2020 and June 15, 2023. Adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) for infection and for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes were estimated through Cox regression models. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence was 25.01% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.86-25.15%) for infection and 1.59% (95% CI: 1.55-1.64%) for severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 after a follow-up duration of 40.9 months. Risk of infection varied minimally by age and sex but increased significantly with coexisting conditions. Risk of infection was reduced with primary-series vaccination (AHR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.90-0.93) and further with first booster vaccination (AHR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.74-0.77). Risk of severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 increased exponentially with age and linearly with coexisting conditions. AHRs for severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.7-0.97) for one dose, 0.15 (95% CI: 0.13-0.17) for primary-series vaccination, and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08-0.14) for first booster vaccination. Sensitivity analysis restricted to only Qataris yielded similar results. CONCLUSION: Incidence of severe COVID-19 in older adults followed a dynamic pattern shaped by infection incidence, variant severity, and population immunity. Age, sex, and coexisting conditions were strong determinants of infection severity. Vaccine protection against severe outcomes showed a dose-response relationship, highlighting the importance of booster vaccination for older adults.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Retrospectivos , Vacunación , ComorbilidadRESUMEN
Laboratory evidence suggests a possibility of immune imprinting for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We investigated the differences in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of persons who had a primary Omicron infection, but different vaccination histories using matched, national, retrospective, cohort studies. Adjusted hazard ratio for reinfection incidence, factoring adjustment for differences in testing rate, was 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.39 to 0.49] comparing history of two-dose vaccination to no vaccination, 1.47 (95% CI: 1.23 to 1.76) comparing history of three-dose vaccination to two-dose vaccination, and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.68) comparing history of three-dose vaccination to no vaccination. Divergence in cumulative incidence curves increased markedly when the incidence was dominated by BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2.75* Omicron subvariants. The history of primary-series vaccination enhanced immune protection against Omicron reinfection, but history of booster vaccination compromised protection against Omicron reinfection. These findings do not undermine the public health utility of booster vaccination.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Reinfección , Humanos , Reinfección/prevención & control , Estudios Retrospectivos , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , VacunaciónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: We assessed short-, medium-, and long-term all-cause mortality risks after a primary SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: A national, matched, retrospective cohort study was conducted in Qatar to assess risk of all-cause mortality in the national SARS-CoV-2 primary infection cohort compared with the national infection-naïve cohort. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Analyses were stratified by vaccination status and clinical vulnerability status. RESULTS: Among unvaccinated persons, within 90 days after primary infection, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) comparing mortality incidence in the primary-infection cohort with the infection-naïve cohort was 1.19 (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.39). aHR was 1.34 (1.11-1.63) in persons more clinically vulnerable to severe COVID-19 and 0.94 (0.72-1.24) in those less clinically vulnerable. Beyond 90 days after primary infection, aHR was 0.50 (0.37-0.68); aHR was 0.41 (0.28-0.58) at 3-7 months and 0.76 (0.46-1.26) at ≥8 months. The aHR was 0.37 (0.25-0.54) in more clinically vulnerable persons and 0.77 (0.48-1.24) in less clinically vulnerable persons. Among vaccinated persons, mortality incidence was comparable in the primary-infection versus infection-naïve cohorts, regardless of clinical vulnerability status. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 mortality was primarily driven by an accelerated onset of death among individuals who were already vulnerable to all-cause mortality, but vaccination prevented these accelerated deaths.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Qatar/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Background: Waning of natural infection protection and vaccine protection highlight the need to evaluate changes in population immunity over time. Population immunity of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or of COVID-19 vaccination are defined, respectively, as the overall protection against reinfection or against breakthrough infection at a given point in time in a given population. Methods: We estimated these population immunities in Qatar's population between July 1, 2020 and November 30, 2022, to discern generic features of the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Effectiveness of previous infection, mRNA primary-series vaccination, and mRNA booster (third-dose) vaccination in preventing infection were estimated, month by month, using matched, test-negative, case-control studies. Findings: Previous-infection effectiveness against reinfection was strong before emergence of Omicron, but declined with time after a wave and rebounded after a new wave. Effectiveness dropped after Omicron emergence from 88.3% (95% CI: 84.8-91.0%) in November 2021 to 51.0% (95% CI: 48.3-53.6%) in December 2021. Primary-series effectiveness against infection was 84.0% (95% CI: 83.0-85.0%) in April 2021, soon after introduction of vaccination, before waning gradually to 52.7% (95% CI: 46.5-58.2%) by November 2021. Effectiveness declined linearly by â¼1 percentage point every 5 days. After Omicron emergence, effectiveness dropped from 52.7% (95% CI: 46.5-58.2%) in November 2021 to negligible levels in December 2021. Booster effectiveness dropped after Omicron emergence from 83.0% (95% CI: 65.6-91.6%) in November 2021 to 32.9% (95% CI: 26.7-38.5%) in December 2021, and continued to decline thereafter. Effectiveness of previous infection and vaccination against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 were generally >80% throughout the study duration. Interpretation: High population immunity against infection may not be sustained beyond a year, but population immunity against severe COVID-19 is durable with slow waning even after Omicron emergence. Funding: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, Qatar University Biomedical Research Center, and Qatar University Internal Grant ID QUCG-CAS-23/24-114.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Protection against SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 of previous infection, mRNA two-dose vaccination, mRNA three-dose vaccination, and hybrid immunity of previous infection and vaccination were investigated in Qatar for the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. METHODS: Six national, matched, test-negative, case-control studies were conducted between January 18 and December 18, 2021 on a sample of 239,120 PCR-positive tests and 6,103,365 PCR-negative tests. FINDINGS: Effectiveness of previous infection against Alpha, Beta, and Delta reinfection was 89.5% (95% CI: 85.5-92.3%), 87.9% (95% CI: 85.4-89.9%), and 90.0% (95% CI: 86.7-92.5%), respectively. Effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Alpha, Beta, and Delta infection was 90.5% (95% CI, 83.9-94.4%), 80.5% (95% CI: 79.0-82.0%), and 58.1% (95% CI: 54.6-61.3%), respectively. Effectiveness of three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Delta infection was 91.7% (95% CI: 87.1-94.7%). Effectiveness of hybrid immunity of previous infection and two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 97.4% (95% CI: 95.4-98.5%) against Beta infection and 94.5% (95% CI: 92.8-95.8%) against Delta infection. Effectiveness of previous infection and three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 98.1% (95% CI: 85.7-99.7%) against Delta infection. All five forms of immunity had >90% protection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 regardless of variant. Similar effectiveness estimates were observed for mRNA-1273. A mathematical model accurately predicted hybrid immunity protection by assuming that the individual effects of previous infection and vaccination acted independently. INTERPRETATION: Hybrid immunity, offering the strongest protection, was mathematically predicted by assuming that the immunities obtained from previous infection and vaccination act independently, without synergy or redundancy. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, Qatar University Biomedical Research Center, and Qatar University Internal Grant ID QUCG-CAS-23/24-114.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Hepatitis D , Humanos , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , ARN Mensajero , Vacunación , Inmunidad AdaptativaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate all-cause mortality, COVID-19 mortality and all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A national, retrospective cohort analysis and national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted between 5 February 2020 and 19 September 2022. RESULTS: There were 5025 deaths during a follow-up time of 5 247 220 person-years, of which 675 were COVID-19 related. Incidence rates were 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) per 1000 person-years for all-cause mortality, 0.13 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.14) per 1000 person-years for COVID-19 mortality and 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.85) per 1000 person-years for all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality. Adjusted HR, comparing all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 0.38 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.44), highest for Filipinos at 0.56 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.69) and was 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.58) for craft and manual workers (CMWs). Adjusted HR, comparing COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 1.54 (95% CI 0.97 to 2.44), highest for Nepalese at 5.34 (95% CI 1.56 to 18.34) and was 1.86 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.60) for CMWs. Incidence rate of all-cause mortality for each nationality group was lower than the crude death rate in the country of origin. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of non-COVID-19 death was low and was lowest among CMWs, perhaps reflecting the healthy worker effect. Risk of COVID-19 death was also low, but was highest among CMWs, largely reflecting higher exposure during first epidemic wave, before advent of effective COVID-19 treatments and vaccines.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Qatar/epidemiología , Pandemias , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Accurate determination of the immediate causes of death in patients with COVID-19 is important for optimal care and mitigation strategies. METHODS: All deaths in Qatar between March 01, 2020, and August 31, 2022, flagged for likely relationship to COVID-19 were reviewed by two independent, trained reviewers using a standardized methodology to determine the immediate and contributory causes of death. RESULTS: Among 749 flagged deaths, the most common admitting diagnoses were respiratory tract infection (91%) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE, 2.3%). The most common immediate causes of death were COVID-19 pneumonia (66.2%), MACE (7.1%), hospital-associated pneumonia (HAP, 6.8%), bacteremia (6.3%), disseminated fungal infection (DFI, 5.2%), and thromboembolism (4.5%). After COVID-19 pneumonia, MACE was the predominant cause of death in the first 2 weeks but declined thereafter. No death occurred due to bacteremia, HAP, or DFI in the first week after hospitalization, but became increasingly common with increased length of stay in the hospital accounting for 9%, 12%, and 10% of all deaths after 4 weeks in the hospital, respectively. CONCLUSION: Nearly one-third of patients with COVID-19 infection die of non-COVID-19 causes, some of which are preventable. Mitigation strategies should be instituted to reduce the risk of such deaths.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Causas de Muerte , SARS-CoV-2 , Hospitalización , HospitalesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Long-term effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters in populations with different previous infection histories and clinical vulnerability profiles is inadequately understood. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of a booster (third dose) vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, relative to that of primary-series (two-dose) vaccination over a follow-up duration of 1 year. METHODS: This observational, matched, retrospective, cohort study was done on the population of Qatar in people with different immune histories and different clinical vulnerability to infection. The source of data are Qatar's national databases for COVID-19 laboratory testing, vaccination, hospitalisation, and death. Associations were estimated using inverse-probability-weighted Cox proportional-hazards regression models. The primary outcome of the study is the effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA boosters against infection and against severe COVID-19. FINDINGS: Data were obtained for 2 228 686 people who had received at least two vaccine doses starting from Jan 5, 2021, of whom 658 947 (29·6%) went on to receive a third dose before data cutoff on Oct 12, 2022. There were 20 528 incident infections in the three-dose cohort and 30 771 infections in the two-dose cohort. Booster effectiveness relative to primary series was 26·2% (95% CI 23·6-28·6) against infection and 75·1% (40·2-89·6) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19, during 1-year follow-up after the booster. Among people clinically vulnerable to severe COVID-19, effectiveness was 34·2% (27·0-40·6) against infection and 76·6% (34·5-91·7) against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19. Effectiveness against infection was highest at 61·4% (60·2-62·6) in the first month after the booster but waned thereafter and was modest at only 15·5% (8·3-22·2) by the sixth month. In the seventh month and thereafter, coincident with BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2·75* subvariant incidence, effectiveness was progressively negative albeit with wide CIs. Similar patterns of protection were observed irrespective of previous infection status, clinical vulnerability, or type of vaccine (BNT162b2 vs mRNA-1273). INTERPRETATION: Protection against omicron infection waned after the booster, and eventually suggested a possibility for negative immune imprinting. However, boosters substantially reduced infection and severe COVID-19, particularly among individuals who were clinically vulnerable, affirming the public health value of booster vaccination. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core (both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar), Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica , COVID-19 , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios de Cohortes , Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Some studies have reported that influenza vaccination is associated with lower risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and/or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) morbidity and mortality. This study aims to estimate effectiveness of influenza vaccination, using Abbott's quadrivalent Influvac Tetra vaccine, against SARS-CoV-2 infection and against severe COVID-19. METHODS: This matched, test-negative, case-control study was implemented on a population of 30,774 healthcare workers (HCWs) in Qatar during the 2020 annual influenza vaccination campaign, September 17, 2020-December 31, 2020, before introduction of COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Of 30,774 HCWs, 576 with PCR-positive tests and 10,033 with exclusively PCR-negative tests were eligible for inclusion in the study. Matching by sex, age, nationality, reason for PCR testing, and PCR test date yielded 518 cases matched to 2058 controls. Median duration between influenza vaccination and the PCR test was 43 days (IQR, 29-62). Estimated effectiveness of influenza vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection> 14 days after receiving the vaccine was 29.7% (95% CI: 5.5-47.7%). Estimated effectiveness of influenza vaccination against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 was 88.9% (95% CI: 4.1-98.7%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main analysis results. CONCLUSIONS: Recent influenza vaccination is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Gripe Humana , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Qatar/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Vacunación , Personal de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Understanding protection conferred by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination is important for informing vaccine mandate decisions. We compared protection conferred by natural infection versus that from the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar. METHODS: We conducted two matched retrospective cohort studies that emulated target trials. Data were obtained from the national federated databases for COVID-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 testing, and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death between Feb 28, 2020 (pandemic onset in Qatar) and May 12, 2022. We matched individuals with a documented primary infection and no vaccination record (natural infection cohort) with individuals who had received two doses (primary series) of the same vaccine (BNT162b2-vaccinated or mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohorts) at the start of follow-up (90 days after the primary infection). Individuals were exact matched (1:1) by sex, 10-year age group, nationality, comorbidity count, and timing of primary infection or first-dose vaccination. Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death in the natural infection cohorts was compared with incidence in the vaccinated cohorts, using Cox proportional hazards regression models with adjustment for matching factors. FINDINGS: Between Jan 5, 2021 (date of second-dose vaccine roll-out) and May 12, 2022, 104â500 individuals vaccinated with BNT162b2 and 61â955 individuals vaccinated with mRNA-1273 were matched to unvaccinated individuals with a documented primary infection. During follow-up, 7123 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the BNT162b2-vaccinated cohort and 3583 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. 4282 SARS-CoV-2 infections were recorded in the mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohort and 2301 reinfections were recorded in the matched natural infection cohort. The overall adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection was 0·47 (95% CI 0·45-0·48) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·51 (0·49-0·54) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. The overall adjusted HR for severe (acute care hospitalisations), critical (intensive care unit hospitalisations), or fatal COVID-19 cases was 0·24 (0·08-0·72) after previous natural infection versus BNT162b2 vaccination, and 0·24 (0·05-1·19) after previous natural infection versus mRNA-1273 vaccination. Severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 was rare in both the natural infection and vaccinated cohorts. INTERPRETATION: Previous natural infection was associated with lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of the variant, than mRNA primary-series vaccination. Vaccination remains the safest and most optimal tool for protecting against infection and COVID-19-related hospitalisation and death, irrespective of previous infection status. FUNDING: The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Biomathematics Research Core, Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar; Qatar Ministry of Public Health; Hamad Medical Corporation; Sidra Medicine; Qatar Genome Programme; and Qatar University Biomedical Research Center.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , Reinfección , Estudios Retrospectivos , ARN Mensajero , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacuna BNT162 , Prueba de COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Qatar/epidemiología , Salud PúblicaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the real-world effectiveness of sotrovimab against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 in Qatar at a time in which most SARS-CoV-2 incidences occurred due to the BA.2 Omicron subvariant. METHODS: We conducted a matched case-control study among all individuals eligible for sotrovimab treatment per United States Food and Drug Administration guidelines in the resident population of Qatar. The odds of progression to severe forms of COVID-19 were compared in cases (treatment group) versus controls (eligible patients who opted not to receive the treatment). Subgroup analyses were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 3364 individuals were eligible for sotrovimab treatment during the study period, of whom 519 individuals received the treatment, whereas the remaining 2845 constituted the controls. The adjusted odds ratio of disease progression to severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 comparing the treatment group to the control group was 2.67 (95% confidence interval 0.60-11.91). In the analysis including only the subgroup of patients at higher risk of severe forms of COVID-19, the adjusted odds ratio was 0.65 (95% confidence interval 0.17-2.48). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence for a protective effect of sotrovimab in reducing COVID-19 severity in a setting dominated by the BA.2 subvariant.
Asunto(s)
Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Qatar/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
In 2021, Qatar experienced considerable incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection that was dominated sequentially by the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. Using the cycle threshold (Ct) value of an RT-qPCR-positive test to proxy the inverse of infectiousness, we investigated infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 infections by variant, age, sex, vaccination status, prior infection status, and reason for testing in a random sample of 18,355 RT-qPCR-genotyped infections. Regression analyses were conducted to estimate associations with the Ct value of RT-qPCR-positive tests. Compared to Beta infections, Alpha and Delta infections demonstrated 2.56 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 2.35-2.78), and 4.92 fewer cycles (95% CI: 4.67- 5.16), respectively. The Ct value declined gradually with age and was especially high for children <10 years of age, signifying lower infectiousness in small children. Children <10 years of age had 2.18 higher Ct cycles (95% CI: 1.88-2.48) than those 10-19 years of age. Compared to unvaccinated individuals, the Ct value was higher among individuals who had received one or two vaccine doses, but the Ct value decreased gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination. Ct value was 2.07 cycles higher (95% CI: 1.42-2.72) for those with a prior infection than those without prior infection. The Ct value was lowest among individuals tested because of symptoms and was highest among individuals tested as a travel requirement. Delta was substantially more infectious than Beta. Prior immunity, whether due to vaccination or prior infection, is associated with lower infectiousness of breakthrough infections, but infectiousness increases gradually with time since the second-dose vaccination.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescente , COVID-19/prevención & control , Niño , Humanos , Qatar , Vacunación , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The future of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic hinges on virus evolution and duration of immune protection of natural infection against reinfection. We investigated the duration of protection afforded by natural infection, the effect of viral immune evasion on duration of protection and protection against severe reinfection, in Qatar, between 28 February 2020 and 5 June 2022. METHODS: Three national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted to compare the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) severity among unvaccinated persons with a documented SARS-CoV-2 primary infection, to incidence among those infection-naïve and unvaccinated. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional hazard regression models. RESULTS: Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against pre-Omicron reinfection was 85.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 84.8-86.2%]. Effectiveness peaked at 90.5% (95% CI: 88.4-92.3%) in the 7th month after the primary infection, but waned to ~ 70% by the 16th month. Extrapolating this waning trend using a Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of 50% in the 22nd month and < 10% by the 32nd month. Effectiveness of pre-Omicron primary infection against Omicron reinfection was 38.1% (95% CI: 36.3-39.8%) and declined with time since primary infection. A Gompertz curve suggested an effectiveness of < 10% by the 15th month. Effectiveness of primary infection against severe, critical or fatal COVID-19 reinfection was 97.3% (95% CI: 94.9-98.6%), irrespective of the variant of primary infection or reinfection, and with no evidence for waning. Similar results were found in sub-group analyses for those ≥50 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Protection of natural infection against reinfection wanes and may diminish within a few years. Viral immune evasion accelerates this waning. Protection against severe reinfection remains very strong, with no evidence for waning, irrespective of variant, for over 14 months after primary infection.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Reinfección/prevención & control , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
There is significant genetic distance between SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant BA.1 and BA.2 sub-lineages. This study investigates immune protection of infection with one sub-lineage against reinfection with the other sub-lineage in Qatar during a large BA.1 and BA.2 Omicron wave, from December 19, 2021 to March 21, 2022. Two national matched, retrospective cohort studies are conducted to estimate effectiveness of BA.1 infection against reinfection with BA.2 (N = 20,994; BA.1-against-BA.2 study), and effectiveness of BA.2 infection against reinfection with BA.1 (N = 110,315; BA.2-against-BA.1 study). Associations are estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression models after multiple imputation to assign a sub-lineage status for cases with no sub-lineage status (using probabilities based on the test date). Effectiveness of BA.1 infection against reinfection with BA.2 is estimated at 94.2% (95% CI: 89.2-96.9%). Effectiveness of BA.2 infection against reinfection with BA.1 is estimated at 80.9% (95% CI: 73.1-86.4%). Infection with the BA.1 sub-lineage appears to induce strong, but not full immune protection against reinfection with the BA.2 sub-lineage, and vice versa, for at least several weeks after the initial infection.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Reinfección , Humanos , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
We developed a Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) risk score to guide targeted RT-PCR testing in Qatar. The Qatar national COVID-19 testing database, encompassing a total of 2,688,232 RT-PCR tests conducted between February 5, 2020-January 27, 2021, was analyzed. Logistic regression analyses were implemented to derive the COVID-19 risk score, as a tool to identify those at highest risk of having the infection. Score cut-off was determined using the ROC curve based on maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity. The score's performance diagnostics were assessed. Logistic regression analysis identified age, sex, and nationality as significant predictors of infection and were included in the risk score. The ROC curve was generated and the area under the curve was estimated at 0.63 (95% CI: 0.63-0.63). The score had a sensitivity of 59.4% (95% CI: 59.1%-59.7%), specificity of 61.1% (95% CI: 61.1%-61.2%), a positive predictive value of 10.9% (95% CI: 10.8%-10.9%), and a negative predictive value of 94.9% (94.9%-95.0%). The concept and utility of a COVID-19 risk score were demonstrated in Qatar. Such a public health tool can have considerable utility in optimizing testing and suppressing infection transmission, while maximizing efficiency and use of available resources.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiología , Prueba de COVID-19 , Humanos , Salud Pública , Qatar/epidemiología , Curva ROC , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
Waning immunity following administration of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines remains a concern for many health systems. We undertook a study to determine if recent reports of waning for severe disease could have been attributed to design-related bias by conducting a study only among those detected with a first SARS-CoV-2 infection. We used a matched case-control study design with the study base being all individuals with first infection with SARS-CoV-2 reported in the State of Qatar between 1 January 2021 and 20 February 2022. Cases were those detected with first SARS-CoV-2 infection requiring intensive care (hard outcome), while controls were those detected with first SARS-CoV-2 infection who recovered without the need for intensive care. Cases and controls were matched in a 1:30 ratio for the calendar month of infection and the comorbidity category. Duration and magnitude of conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care and the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one more case of COVID-19 requiring intensive care was estimated for the mRNA (BNT162b2/mRNA-1273) vaccines. Conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care was 59% (95% confidence interval (CI), 50 to 76) between the first and second dose, and strengthened to 89% (95% CI, 85 to 92) between the second dose and 4 months post the second dose in persons who received a primary course of the vaccine. There was no waning of vaccine effectiveness in the period from 4 to 6, 6 to 9, and 9 to 12 months after the second dose. This study demonstrates that, contrary to mainstream reports using hierarchical measures of effectiveness, conditional vaccine effectiveness against requiring intensive care remains robust till at least 12 months after the second dose of mRNA-based vaccines.