Effectiveness of Primary and Booster COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination against Infection Caused by the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in People with a Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection

BackgroundThe benefit of vaccination in people who experienced a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear. ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among people with a prior documented infection. DesignTest-negative case-control study. SettingYale New Haven Health System facilities. ParticipantsVaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022. MeasurementsWe conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people. ResultsOverall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (6.1% and 7.8% occurred following a prior infection, respectively). The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (CI, 7.1% to 56.1%) for people with and 28.5% (CI, 20.0% to 36.2%) without prior infection. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (CI, 0.56 to 1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (CI, 0.46 to 0.56). LimitationsMisclassification, residual confounding, reliance on TaqPath assay analyzed samples. ConclusionWhile primary vaccination provided protection against BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection, booster vaccination was only associated with additional protection in people without prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination. Primary Funding SourceBeatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth and Sendas Family Funds, Merck and Co through their Merck Investigator Studies Program, and the Yale Schools of Public Health and Medicine.

Effectiveness of an Inactivated Covid-19 Vaccine with Homologous and Heterologous Boosters against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant

The effectiveness of inactivated vaccines (VE) against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 caused by omicron is unknown. We conducted a nationwide, test-negative, case-control study to estimate VE for homologous and heterologous (BNT162b2) booster doses in adults who received two doses of CoronaVac in Brazil in the Omicron context. Analyzing 1,386,544 matched-pairs, VE against symptomatic disease was 8.6% (95% CI, 5.6-11.5) and 56.8% (95% CI, 56.3-57.3) in the period 8-59 days after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. During the same interval, VE against severe Covid-19 was 73.6% (95% CI, 63.9-80.7) and 86.0% (95% CI, 84.5-87.4) after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. Waning against severe Covid-19 after 120 days was only observed after a homologous booster. Heterologous booster might be preferable to individuals with completed primary series inactivated vaccine.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S among individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in Brazil

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with prior infection is less clear. MethodsUtilizing national COVID-19 notification, hospitalization, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we performed a case-control study using a test-negative design to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S and BNT162b2) among individuals with laboratory-confirmed prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 cases with RT-PCR-negative controls presenting with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests performed at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity, and the odds of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. FindingsAmong individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection [≥] 14 days from vaccine series completion was 39.4% (95% CI 36.1-42.6) for CoronaVac, 56.0% (95% CI 51.4-60.2) for ChAdOx1, 44.0% (95% CI 31.5-54.2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64.8% (95% CI 54.9-72.4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose compared with the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalization or death [≥] 14 days from vaccine series completion was 81.3% (95% CI 75.3-85.8) for CoronaVac, 89.9% (95% CI 83.5-93.8) for ChAdOx1, 57.7% (95% CI -2.6-82.5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89.7% (95% CI 54.3-97.7) for BNT162b2. InterpretationAll four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Provision of a full vaccine series to individuals following recovery from COVID-19 may reduce morbidity and mortality. FundingBrazilian National Research Council, Fundacao Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS S.A., Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Generalitat de Catalunya. RESEARCH IN CONTEXTO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed, medRxiv, and SSRN for articles published from January 1, 2020 until December 15, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms "vaccine effectiveness" AND "previous*" AND ("SARS-CoV-2" OR "COVID-19"). We found several studies evaluating ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2, and one additionally reporting on mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S, which found that previously infected individuals who were vaccinated had lower risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. One study found that risk of hospitalization was lower for previously infected individuals after a full series of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Limited evidence is available comparing effectiveness of one versus two doses among individuals with prior infection. No studies reported effectiveness of inactivated vaccines among previously infected individuals. Added value of this studyWe used national databases of COVID-19 case surveillance, laboratory testing, and vaccination from Brazil to investigate effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S and BNT162b2 among individuals with a prior, laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched >22,000 RT-PCR-confirmed re-infections with >145,000 RT-PCR-negative controls using a test-negative design. All four vaccines were effective against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, with effectiveness from 14 days after series completion ranging from 39-65%. For vaccines with two-dose regimens, the second dose provided significantly increased effectiveness compared with one dose. Effectiveness against COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death from 14 days after series completion was >80% for CoronaVac, ChAdOx1and BNT162b2. Implications of all the available evidenceWe find evidence that four vaccines, using three different platforms, all provide protection to previously infected individuals against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, with a second dose conferring significant additional benefits. These results support the provision of a full vaccine series among individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Factors driving extensive spatial and temporal fluctuations in COVID-19 fatality rates in Brazilian hospitals

The SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant spread rapidly across Brazil, causing substantial infection and death waves. We use individual-level patient records following hospitalisation with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 to document the extensive shocks in hospital fatality rates that followed Gammas spread across 14 state capitals, and in which more than half of hospitalised patients died over sustained time periods. We show that extensive fluctuations in COVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates also existed prior to Gammas detection, and were largely transient after Gammas detection, subsiding with hospital demand. Using a Bayesian fatality rate model, we find that the geographic and temporal fluctuations in Brazils COVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates are primarily associated with geographic inequities and shortages in healthcare capacity. We project that approximately half of Brazils COVID-19 deaths in hospitals could have been avoided without pre-pandemic geographic inequities and without pandemic healthcare pressure. Our results suggest that investments in healthcare resources, healthcare optimization, and pandemic preparedness are critical to minimize population wide mortality and morbidity caused by highly transmissible and deadly pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, especially in low- and middle-income countries. NoteThe following manuscript has appeared as Report 46 - Factors driving extensive spatial and temporal fluctuations in COVID-19 fatality rates in Brazilian hospitals at https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk:8443/handle/10044/1/91875. One sentence summaryCOVID-19 in-hospital fatality rates fluctuate dramatically in Brazil, and these fluctuations are primarily associated with geographic inequities and shortages in healthcare capacity.

One-dose ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Symptomatic COVID-19 in a vulnerable community in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: test-negative design study

We conducted a test-negative study design at the community "Complexo da Mare", the largest group of favelas in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, when Gamma and Delta were the predominant variants circulating. We estimated 42.4% (95% CI, 24.6, 56.0) protection against symptomatic COVID-19 after 21 days of one dose of ChAdOx1.

Vaccine effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S against symptomatic COVID-19 and clinical outcomes in Brazil: a test-negative study design

We used a test-negative design to estimate the vaccine effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen) against symptomatic COVID-19 and clinical outcomes in Mato-Grosso do Sul, Brazil. We analyzed 11,817 RT-PCR tests. The mean age was 37 (SD=17) years, 2,308 (20%) of individuals more or equal than 50 years and almost two-thirds of the population was Brown/Pardo. Adjusted effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 after 28 days of the single dose was 50.9% (95% CI, 35.5-63.0). Adjusted effectiveness against clinical outcomes was 72.9% (95% CI, 35.1-91.1) for hospitalization, 92.5% (95% CI, 54.9-99.6) for ICU admission, 88.7% (95% CI, 17.9-99.5) for mechanical ventilation and 90.5% (95% CI, 31.5-99.6) for death. Despite lacking precision on some estimates, a single dose of Ad26.COV2.S vaccine continues to protect specially for severe forms of COVID-19 in the context of new variants.

Effectiveness of the ChAdOx1 vaccine in the elderly during SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Brazil

BackgroundA two-dose regimen of ChAdOx1 coronavirus disease 19 (Covid-19) vaccine with an inter-dose interval of three months has been implemented in many countries with restricted vaccine supply. However, there is limited evidence for the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 by dose in elderly populations in countries with high prevalence of the Gamma variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome 2 (SARS-CoV-2). MethodsWe conducted a test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of ChAdOx1 vaccine in adults aged 60 years or older during a Gamma-variant-associated epidemic in Sao Paulo state, Brazil, between 17 January and 2 July 2021. Cases and matched test-negative controls were individuals, identified from surveillance databases, who experienced an acute respiratory illness and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the effectiveness by dose against RT-PCR-confirmed Covid-19, Covid-19 hospitalization, and Covid-19-related death. Results61,164 individuals were selected into matched case-control pairs. Starting [≥]28 days after the first dose, adjusted effectiveness of a single dose of ChAdOx1 was 33.4% (95% CI, 26.4 to 39.7) against Covid-19, 55.1% (95% CI, 46.6 to 62.2) against hospitalization, and 61.8% (95% CI, 48.9 to 71.4) against death. Starting [≥]14 days after the second dose, the adjusted effectiveness of the two-dose schedule was 77.9% (95% CI, 69.2 to 84.2) against Covid-19, 87.6% (95% CI, 78.2 to 92.9) against hospitalization, and 93.6% (95% CI, 81.9 to 97.7) against death. ConclusionsCompletion of the ChAdOx1 vaccine schedule afforded significantly increased protection over a single dose against mild and severe Covid-19 outcomes in elderly individuals during widespread Gamma variant transmission.

Use of recently vaccinated individuals to detect bias in test-negative case-control studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness

Post-authorization observational studies play a key role in understanding COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness following the demonstration of efficacy in clinical trials. While bias due to confounding, selection bias, and misclassification can be mitigated through careful study design, unmeasured confounding is likely to remain in these observational studies. Phase III trials of COVID-19 vaccines have shown that protection from vaccination does not occur immediately, meaning that COVID-19 risk should be similar in recently vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, in the absence of confounding or other bias. Several studies have used the estimated effectiveness among recently vaccinated individuals as a negative control exposure to detect bias in vaccine effectiveness estimates. In this paper we introduce a theoretical framework to describe the interpretation of such a bias-indicator in test-negative studies, and outline assumptions that would allow the use of recently vaccinated individuals to correct bias due to unmeasured confounding.

Effectiveness of the CoronaVac vaccine in the elderly population during a P.1 variant-associated epidemic of COVID-19 in Brazil: A test-negative case-control study

ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of the inactivated whole-virus vaccine, CoronaVac, against symptomatic COVID-19 in the elderly population of Sao Paulo State, Brazil during widespread circulation of the Gamma variant. DesignTest negative case-control study. SettingHealth-care facilities in Sao Paulo State, Brazil. Participants43,774 adults aged 70 years or older who were residents of Sao Paulo State and underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing from January 17 to April 29, 2021. 26,433 cases with symptomatic COVID-19 and 17,622 symptomatic, test negative controls were selected into 7,950 matched pairs, according to age, sex, self-reported race, municipality of residence, prior COVID-19 status and date of RT-PCR testing. InterventionVaccination with a two-dose regimen of CoronaVac. Main outcome measuresRT-PCR confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 and COVID-19 associated hospitalizations and deaths. ResultsAdjusted vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 18.2% (95% CI, 0.0 to 33.2) in the period 0-13 days after the second dose and 41.6% (95% CI, 26.9 to 53.3) in the period [≥]14 days after the second dose. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisations was 59.0% (95% CI, 44.2 to 69.8) and against deaths was 71.4% (95% CI, 53.7 to 82.3) in the period [≥]14 days after the second dose. Vaccine effectiveness [≥]14 days after the second dose declined with increasing age for the three outcomes, and among individuals aged 70-74 years it was 61.8% (95% CI, 34.8 to 77.7) against symptomatic disease, 80.1% (95% CI, 55.7 to 91.0) against hospitalisations and 86.0% (95% CI, 50.4 to 96.1) against deaths. ConclusionsVaccination with CoronaVac was associated with a reduction in symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalisations and deaths in adults aged 70 years or older in a setting with extensive Gamma variant transmission. However, significant protection was not observed until completion of the two-dose regimen, and vaccine effectiveness declined with increasing age amongst this elderly population. Summary boxesO_ST_ABSWhat is already known on this topicC_ST_ABSRandomised controlled trials (RCT) have yielded varying estimates (51 to 84%) for the effectiveness of the inactivated whole-virus vaccine, CoronaVac, against symptomatic COVID-19. Current evidence is limited on whether CoronaVac is effective against severe disease or death caused by the SARS-CoV-2 variant of concern, Gamma, or in the setting of extensive Gamma variant circulation. More evidence is needed for the real-world effectiveness of CoronaVac and other inactivated vaccines among elderly individuals, a population that was underrepresented in RCTs of these vaccines. What this study addsA two-dose regimen of CoronaVac provides significant protection against symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalisations and deaths among adults [≥]70 years of age in the setting of widespread Gamma variant transmission. Significant protection did not occur until [≥]14 days after administration of the second dose of CoronaVac. The effectiveness of CoronaVac declines with increasing age in the elderly population.

Effectiveness of CoronaVac in the setting of high SARS-CoV-2 P.1 variant transmission in Brazil: A test-negative case-control study

BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported. MethodsWe performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. FindingsFor the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case- control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate. InterpretationEvidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented. FundingFundacao Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed for articles published from inception of the pandemic until April 3, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms "P.1" AND "vaccine" AND "SARS-CoV-2". Additionally, we searched for "CoronaVac" AND "SARS-CoV-2". Early studies have found plasma from convalescent COVID-19 patients and sera from vaccinated individuals have reduced neutralisation of the SARS-CoV-2 variant, Gamma or P.1, compared with strains isolated earlier in the pandemic. Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA, Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1, and CoronaVac are the only vaccines for which such data has been published to date. No studies reported effectiveness of any vaccine on reducing the risk of infection or disease among individuals exposed to P.1 or in settings of high P.1 transmission. Added value of this studyThis study finds that vaccination with CoronaVac was 49.4% (95% CI 13.2 to 71.9) effective at preventing COVID-19 in a setting with likely high prevalence of the Gamma Variant of Concern. However, an analysis of effectiveness by dose was underpowered and failed to find significant effectiveness of the two-dose schedule of CoronaVac (estimated VE 37.1%, 95% CI -53.3 to 74.2). Implications of all the available evidenceThese findings are suggestive for the effectiveness of CoronaVac in healthcare workers in the setting of widespread P.1 transmission but must be strengthened by observational studies in other settings and populations. Based on this evidence, there is a need to implement sustained non-pharmaceutical interventions even as vaccination campaigns continue.

Use of dialysis, tracheostomy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation among 240,392 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in the United States

ObjectiveTo estimate the proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who undergo dialysis, tracheostomy, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). DesignA network cohort study. SettingSix databases from the United States containing routinely-collected patient data: HealthVerity, Premier, IQVIA Open Claims, Optum EHR, Optum SES, and VA-OMOP. PatientsPatients hospitalized with a clinical diagnosis or a positive test result for COVID-19. InterventionsDialysis, tracheostomy, and ECMO. Measurements and Main Results240,392 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were included (22,887 from HealthVerity, 139,971 from IQVIA Open Claims, 29,061 from Optum EHR, 4,336 from OPTUM SES, 36,019 from Premier, and 8,118 from VA-OMOP). Across the six databases, 9,703 (4.04% [95% CI: 3.96% to 4.11%]) patients received dialysis, 1,681 (0.70% [0.67% to 0.73%]) had a tracheostomy, and 398 (0.17% [95% CI: 0.15% to 0.18%]) patients underwent ECMO over the 30 days following hospitalization. Use of ECMO was generally concentrated among patients who were younger, male, and with fewer comorbidities except for obesity. Tracheostomy was used for a similar proportion of patients regardless of age, sex, or comorbidity. While dialysis was used for a similar proportion among younger and older patients, it was more frequent among male patients and among those with chronic kidney disease. ConclusionUse of dialysis among those hospitalized with COVID-19 is high at around 4%. Although less than one percent of patients undergo tracheostomy and ECMO, the absolute numbers of patients who have undergone these interventions is substantial and can be expected to continue grow given the continuing spread of the COVID-19.