Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Relative Effectiveness of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S Vaccines and Homologous Boosting in Preventing COVID-19 in Adults in the US.
Hung Nguyen, Van; Boileau, Catherine; Bogdanov, Alina; Sredl, Meg; Bonafede, Mac; Ducruet, Thierry; Chavers, Scott; Rosen, Andrew; Martin, David; Buck, Philip; Esposito, Daina; Van de Velde, Nicolas; Mansi, James A.
Afiliação
  • Hung Nguyen V; VHN Consulting Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  • Boileau C; VHN Consulting Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  • Bogdanov A; Veradigm, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  • Sredl M; Veradigm, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  • Bonafede M; Veradigm, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
  • Ducruet T; VHN Consulting Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
  • Chavers S; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Rosen A; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Martin D; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Buck P; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Esposito D; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Van de Velde N; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Mansi JA; Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(7): ofad288, 2023 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37496607
ABSTRACT

Background:

Few head-to-head comparisons have been performed on the real-world effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster vaccines. We evaluated the relative effectiveness (rVE) of a primary series of mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S and a homologous mRNA booster against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19.

Methods:

A data set linking primary care electronic medical records with medical claims data was used for this retrospective cohort study of US patients age ≥18 years vaccinated with a primary series between February and October 2021 (Part 1) and a homologous mRNA booster between October 2021 and January 2022 (Part 2). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were derived from 11 matching adjusted across potential covariates. rVE was (1 - HRadjusted) × 100. Additional analysis was performed across regions and age groups.

Results:

Following adjustment, Part 1 rVE for mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 was 23% (95% CI, 22%-25%), 23% (95% CI, 22%-25%), and 19% (95% CI, 14%-24%), while the rVE for mRNA-1273 vs Ad26.COV2.S was 50% (95% CI, 48%-51%), 50% (95% CI, 48%-52%), and 57% (95% CI, 53%-61%) against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19, respectively. The adjusted rVE in Part 2 for mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 was 14% (95% CI, 10%-18%), 13% (95% CI, 8%-17%), and 19% (95% CI, 1%-34%) against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19, respectively. rVE against medically attended COVID-19 was higher in adults age ≥65 years (35%; 95% CI, 24%-47%) than in those age 18-64 years (13%; 95% CI, 9%-17%) after the booster.

Conclusions:

In this study, mRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 or Ad26.COV2.S following a primary series during the Delta-dominant period and more effective than BNT162b2 as a booster during the Omicron-dominant period.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Observational_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article