ABSTRACT
Background: Further understanding on the safety profile of vaccines in a real-world still need to be elucidated, such as the comparative tolerability and reactogenicity of mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and MRNA- 1273) beyond the controlled context of clinical trials. An active pharmacovigilance study was designed to capture a complete short-term safety profile of two mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA- 1273, targeting incidence rates of adverse reactions within a pre-defined denominator of vaccinated healthcare professionals. Methods: A prospective active surveillance study was implemented during the vaccination campaign at Hospital Clínic by a multidisciplinary team, involving the Pharmacovigilance Technical Committee, the Department of Preventive Medicine and Epidemiology and the Department of Occupational Health Care of the Hospital. Target population of the program included vaccinated professionals from Hospital Clínic and affiliated institutions, who were vaccinated with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273. The program was based on the delivery of a structured questionnaire by telephonic interview after each vaccine dose. A total of 64% of vaccinated professionals completed the questionnaire (n=5088). Results: A total of 85% subjects suffered at least 1 AR reaction with the vaccine. The proportion of professionals developing any AR was 2878 (81.2%) after vaccination with BNT162b2 and 1463 (92.9%) after vaccination with mRNA-1273. Severe ARs (VAS scoring ≥ 7) were reported in 1184 (33.7%) professionals after vaccination with BNT162b2 and 886 (56.4%) after mRNA-1273. In the multivariate analysis, mRNA-1273 showed a greater reactogenicity than BNT162b2 (OR=3.04 (95% CI 2.48 - 3.73;p-value: <0.0001)). Conclusions: Our study shows that mRNA-1273 has greater reactogenicity than BNT162b2. Overall, both mRNA vaccines had a reasonable tolerability profile, compared in a real-world scenario. This can be understood as a reassuring message for the medical and scientific community.
ABSTRACT
We developed an agent-based stochastic model, based on P Systems methodology, to decipher the effects of vaccination and contact tracing on the control of COVID-19 outbreak at population level under different control measures (social distancing, mask wearing and hand hygiene) and epidemiological scenarios. Our findings suggest that without the application of protection social measures, 56.1% of the Spanish population would contract the disease with a mortality of 0.4%. Assuming that 20% of the population was protected by vaccination by the end of the summer of 2021, it would be expected that 45% of the population would contract the disease and 0.3% of the population would die. However, both of these percentages are significantly lower when social measures were adopted, being the best results when social measures are in place and 40% of contacts traced. Our model shows that if 40% of the population can be vaccinated, even without social control measures, the percentage of people who die or recover from infection would fall from 0.41% and 56.1% to 0.16% and 33.5%, respectively compared with an unvaccinated population. When social control measures were applied in concert with vaccination the percentage of people who die or recover from infection diminishes until 0.10% and 14.5%, after vaccinating 40% of the population. Vaccination alone can be crucial in controlling this disease, but it is necessary to vaccinate a significant part of the population and to back this up with social control measures.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic has greatly impacted the daily clinical practice of cardiologists and cardiovascular surgeons. Preparedness of health workers and health services is crucial to tackle the enormous challenge posed by SARS-CoV-2 in wards, operating theatres, intensive care units, and interventionist laboratories. This Clinical Review provides an overview of COVID-19 and focuses on relevant aspects on prevention and management for specialists within the cardiovascular field.