Vaccine Effectiveness of Primary Series and Booster Doses against Omicron Variant COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization in the United States

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of a primary COVID-19 vaccine series plus a booster dose with a primary series alone for the prevention of Omicron variant COVID-19 hospitalization. Design: Multicenter observational case-control study using the test-negative design to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE). Setting: Twenty-one hospitals in the United States (US). Participants: 3,181 adults hospitalized with an acute respiratory illness between December 26, 2021 and April 30, 2022, a period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1, BA.2) predominance. Participants included 1,572 (49%) case-patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 and 1,609 (51%) control patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Median age was 64 years, 48% were female, and 21% were immunocompromised; 798 (25%) were vaccinated with a primary series plus booster, 1,326 (42%) were vaccinated with a primary series alone, and 1,057 (33%) were unvaccinated. Main Outcome Measures: VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated for a primary series plus a booster and a primary series alone by comparing the odds of being vaccinated with each of these regimens versus being unvaccinated among cases versus controls. VE analyses were stratified by immune status (immunocompetent; immunocompromised) because the recommended vaccine schedules are different for these groups. The primary analysis evaluated all COVID-19 vaccine types combined and secondary analyses evaluated specific vaccine products. Results: Among immunocompetent patients, VE against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization for a primary series plus one booster of any vaccine product dose was 77% (95% CI: 71-82%), and for a primary series alone was 44% (95% CI: 31-54%) (p<0.001). VE was higher for a boosted regimen than a primary series alone for both mRNA vaccines used in the US (BNT162b2: primary series plus booster VE 80% (95% CI: 73-85%), primary series alone VE 46% (95% CI: 30-58%) [p<0.001]; mRNA-1273: primary series plus booster VE 77% (95% CI: 67-83%), primary series alone VE 47% (95% CI: 30-60%) [p<0.001]). Among immunocompromised patients, VE for a primary series of any vaccine product against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization was 60% (95% CI: 41-73%). Insufficient sample size has accumulated to calculate effectiveness of boosted regimens for immunocompromised patients. Conclusions: Among immunocompetent people, a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine provided additional benefit beyond a primary vaccine series alone for preventing COVID-19 hospitalization due to the Omicron variant.

Clinical Severity and mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness for Omicron, Delta, and Alpha SARS-CoV-2 Variants in the United States: A Prospective Observational Study

ObjectivesTo characterize the clinical severity of COVID-19 caused by Omicron, Delta, and Alpha SARS-CoV-2 variants among hospitalized adults and to compare the effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to prevent hospitalizations caused by each variant. DesignA case-control study of 11,690 hospitalized adults. SettingTwenty-one hospitals across the United States. ParticipantsThis study included 5728 cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and 5962 controls hospitalized without COVID-19. Cases were classified into SARS-CoV-2 variant groups based on viral whole genome sequencing, and if sequencing did not reveal a lineage, by the predominant circulating variant at the time of hospital admission: Alpha (March 11 to July 3, 2021), Delta (July 4 to December 25, 2021), and Omicron (December 26, 2021 to January 14, 2022). Main Outcome MeasuresVaccine effectiveness was calculated using a test-negative design for COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations by each variant (Alpha, Delta, Omicron). Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, disease severity on the WHO Clinical Progression Ordinal Scale was compared among variants using proportional odds regression. ResultsVaccine effectiveness of the mRNA vaccines to prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalizations included: 85% (95% CI: 82 to 88%) for 2 vaccine doses against Alpha; 85% (95% CI: 83 to 87%) for 2 doses against Delta; 94% (95% CI: 92 to 95%) for 3 doses against Delta; 65% (95% CI: 51 to 75%) for 2 doses against Omicron; and 86% (95% CI: 77 to 91%) for 3 doses against Omicron. Among hospitalized unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, severity on the WHO Clinical Progression Scale was higher for Delta than Alpha (adjusted proportional odds ratio [aPOR] 1.28, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.46), and lower for Omicron than Delta (aPOR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.77). Compared to unvaccinated cases, severity was lower for vaccinated cases for each variant, including Alpha (aPOR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.49), Delta (aPOR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.51), and Omicron (aPOR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.85). ConclusionsmRNA vaccines were highly effective in preventing COVID-19-associated hospitalizations from Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants, but three vaccine doses were required to achieve protection against Omicron similar to the protection that two doses provided against Delta and Alpha. Among adults hospitalized with COVID-19, Omicron caused less severe disease than Delta, but still resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality. Vaccinated patients hospitalized with COVID-19 had significantly lower disease severity than unvaccinated patients for all the variants.

mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness against COVID-19 among Symptomatic Outpatients Aged >=16 Years in the United States, February to May 2021

Evaluations of vaccine effectiveness (VE) are important to monitor as COVID-19 vaccines are introduced in the general population. Research staff enrolled symptomatic participants seeking outpatient medical care for COVID-19-like illness or SARS-CoV-2 testing from a multisite network. VE was evaluated using the test-negative design. Among 236 SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test-positive and 576 test-negative participants aged [≥]16 years, VE of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 was 91% (95% CI: 83-95) for full vaccination and 75% (95% CI: 55-87) for partial vaccination. Vaccination was associated with prevention of most COVID-19 cases among people seeking outpatient medical care.

Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines for Preventing Covid-19 Hospitalizations in the United States

BackgroundAs SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage increases in the United States (US), there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe Covid-19 and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes. MethodsIn a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11 - May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent Covid-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with Covid-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. ResultsAmong 1210 participants, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 20.6% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 was most common variant (59.7% of sequenced viruses). Full vaccination (receipt of two vaccine doses [≥]14 days before illness onset) had been received by 45/590 (7.6%) cases and 215/620 (34.7%) controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 86.9% (95% CI: 80.4 to 91.2%). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.3%; 95% CI: 78.9 to 99.7%). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough Covid hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were [≥]50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (59.2%; 95% CI: 11.9 to 81.1%) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI: 85.5 to 94.7%). ConclusionDuring March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing Covid-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

SARS-CoV-2 Total and Subgenomic RNA Viral Load in Hospitalized Patients

Understanding viral load in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 is critical to epidemiology and infection control. Previous studies have demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be detected for many weeks after symptom onset. The clinical significance of this finding is unclear and, in most patients, likely does not represent active infection. There are, however, patients who shed infectious virus for weeks. Detection of subgenomic RNA transcripts expressed by SARS-CoV-2 has been proposed to represent productive infection and may be a tractable marker for monitoring infectivity. Here, we use RT-PCR to quantify total and subgenomic nucleocapsid (N) and envelope (E) transcripts in 190 SARS-CoV-2 positive samples collected on hospital admission. We relate these findings to duration of symptoms. We find that all transcripts decline at the same rate; however, subgenomic E becomes undetectable before other transcripts. In Kaplan-Meier analysis the median duration of symptoms to a negative test is 14 days for sgE and 25 days for sgN. There is a linear decline in subgenomic RNA compared to total RNA suggesting subgenomic transcript copy number is highly dependent on copy number of total transcripts. The mean difference between total N and subgenomic N is 16-fold (4.0 cycles) and the mean difference between total E and sub-genomic E is 137-fold (7.1 cycles). This relationship is constant over duration of symptoms allowing prediction of subgenomic copy number from total copy number. Although Subgenomic E is undetectable at a time that may more closely reflect the duration of infectivity, its utility in determining active infection may be no more useful than a copy number threshold determined for total transcripts.

Evaluation of individual and ensemble probabilistic forecasts of COVID-19 mortality in the US

Short-term probabilistic forecasts of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States have served as a visible and important communication channel between the scientific modeling community and both the general public and decision-makers. Forecasting models provide specific, quantitative, and evaluable predictions that inform short-term decisions such as healthcare staffing needs, school closures, and allocation of medical supplies. Starting in April 2020, the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub (https://covid19forecasthub.org/) collected, disseminated, and synthesized tens of millions of specific predictions from more than 90 different academic, industry, and independent research groups. A multi-model ensemble forecast that combined predictions from dozens of different research groups every week provided the most consistently accurate probabilistic forecasts of incident deaths due to COVID-19 at the state and national level from April 2020 through October 2021. The performance of 27 individual models that submitted complete forecasts of COVID-19 deaths consistently throughout this year showed high variability in forecast skill across time, geospatial units, and forecast horizons. Two-thirds of the models evaluated showed better accuracy than a naive baseline model. Forecast accuracy degraded as models made predictions further into the future, with probabilistic error at a 20-week horizon 3-5 times larger than when predicting at a 1-week horizon. This project underscores the role that collaboration and active coordination between governmental public health agencies, academic modeling teams, and industry partners can play in developing modern modeling capabilities to support local, state, and federal response to outbreaks. Significance StatementThis paper compares the probabilistic accuracy of short-term forecasts of reported deaths due to COVID-19 during the first year and a half of the pandemic in the US. Results show high variation in accuracy between and within stand-alone models, and more consistent accuracy from an ensemble model that combined forecasts from all eligible models. This demonstrates that an ensemble model provided a reliable and comparatively accurate means of forecasting deaths during the COVID-19 pandemic that exceeded the performance of all of the models that contributed to it. This work strengthens the evidence base for synthesizing multiple models to support public health action.

Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 replication in an immunocompromised patient

We describe a case of chronic COVID-19 in a patient with lymphoma and associated B-cell immunodeficiency. Viral cultures and sequence analysis demonstrate ongoing replication of infectious SARS-CoV-2 virus for at least 119 days. The patient had three admissions related to COVID-19 over a four-month period and was treated twice with remdesivir and convalescent plasma with resolution of symptoms. The lack of seroconversion and prolonged course illustrate the importance of humoral immunity in resolving SARS-CoV-2 infection. This case highlights challenges in managing immunocompromised hosts, who may act as persistent shedders and sources of transmission.

SARS-CoV-2 surveillance in decedents in a large, urban medical examiner's office

BackgroundSARS-CoV-2 has become a global pandemic. Given the challenges in implementing widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing, there is increasing interest in alternative surveillance strategies. MethodsWe tested nasopharyngeal swabs from 821 decedents in the Wayne County Medical Examiners office for SARS-CoV-2. All decedents were assessed by a COVID-19 checklist, and decedents flagged by the checklist (237) were preferentially tested. A random sample of decedents not flagged by the checklist were also tested (584). We statistically analyzed the characteristics of decedents (age, sex, race, and manner of death), differentiating between those flagged by the checklist and not and between those SARS-CoV-2 positive and not. ResultsDecedents were more likely to be male (70% vs 48%) and Black (55% vs 36%) than the catchment population. Seven-day average percent positivity among flagged decedents closely matched the trajectory of percent positivity in the catchment population, particularly during the peak of the outbreak (March and April). After a lull in May to mid-June, new positive tests in late June coincided with increased case detection in the catchment. We found large racial disparities in test results: despite no statistical difference in the racial distribution between those flagged and not, SARS-CoV-2 positive decedents were substantially more likely to be Black (89% vs 51%). SARS-CoV-2 positive decedents were also more likely to be older and to have died of natural causes, including of COVID-19 disease. ConclusionsDisease surveillance through medical examiners and coroners could supplement other forms of surveillance and may serve as a possible early outbreak warning sign.