The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in reducing the incidence, hospitalization, and mortality from COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Barriers and shortcomings in access to cardiovascular management and prevention for familial hypercholesterolemia during the COVID-19 pandemic

Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a hereditary condition caused by mutations in the lipid pathway. The goal in managing FH is to reduce circulating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and, therefore, reduce the risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Because FH patients were considered high risk groups due to an increased susceptible for contracting COVID-19 infection, we hypothesized whether the effects of the pandemic hindered access to cardiovascular care. In this review, we conducted a literature search in databases Pubmed/Medline and ScienceDirect. We included a comprehensive analysis of findings from articles in English related and summarized the effects of the pandemic on cardiovascular care through direct and indirect effects. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FH patients presented with worse outcomes and prognosis, especially those that have suffered from early ASCVD. This caused avoidance in seeking care due to fear of transmission. The pandemic severely impacted consultations with lipidologists and cardiologists, causing a decline in lipid profile evaluations. Low socioeconomic communities and ethnic minorities were hit the hardest with job displacements and lacked healthcare coverage respectively, leading to treatment nonadherence. Lock-down restrictions promoted sedentary lifestyles and intake of fatty meals, but it is unclear whether these factors attenuated cardiovascular risk in FH. To prevent early atherogenesis in FH patients, universal screening programs, telemedicine, and lifestyle interventions are important recommendations that could improve outcomes in FH patients. However, the need to research in depth on the disproportionate impact within different subgroups should be the forefront of FH research.

Drug delivery breakthrough technologies - A perspective on clinical and societal impact

The way a drug molecule is administered has always had a profound impact on people requiring medical interventions - from vaccine development to cancer therapeutics. In the Controlled Release Society Fall Symposium 2022, a trans-institutional group of scientists from industry, academia, and non-governmental organizations discussed what a breakthrough in the field of drug delivery constitutes. On the basis of these discussions, we classified drug delivery breakthrough technologies into three categories. In category 1, drug delivery systems enable treatment for new molecular entities per se, for instance by overcoming biological barriers. In category 2, drug delivery systems optimize efficacy and/or safety of an existing drug, for instance by directing distribution to their target tissue, by replacing toxic excipients, or by changing the dosing reqimen. In category 3, drug delivery systems improve global access by fostering use in low-resource settings, for instance by facilitating drug administration outside of a controlled health care institutional setting. We recognize that certain breakthroughs can be classified in more than one category. It was concluded that in order to create a true breakthrough technology, multidisciplinary collaboration is mandated to move from pure technical inventions to true innovations addressing key current and emerging unmet health care needs.

Incarcerated in a Pandemic: How COVID-19 Exacerbated the “Pains of Imprisonment”

Although the exact toll of COVID-19 in U.S. prisons and jails is relatively undetermined, estimates show that deaths due to the virus in the nation's correctional facilities are approximately six times higher than deaths in the general population. During the pandemic, jail and prison structures as well as significant overcrowding made it virtually impossible to institute protective measures against infection in correctional settings. Jail and prison administrators suspended in-person visitation, leaving those incarcerated even further isolated, and their friends and family in fear for the health and safety of their loved ones. The present study examines narratives of individuals who spoke about their experiences while incarcerated during the pandemic. The data for the study were gathered from prison reform advocacy organizations that featured individuals’ stories. The narrative findings provide insight into the traumatic experiences that incarcerated people endured, how institutional failures exacerbated their mistrust of the criminal legal system, and their efforts to cope.

Dissecting the Protective Effect of CD8+ T Cells in Response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccination and the Potential Link with Lymph Node CD8+ T Cells

SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have played a crucial role in effectively reducing COVID-19 disease severity, with a new generation of vaccines that use messenger RNA (mRNA) technology being administered globally. Neutralizing antibodies have featured as the heroes of vaccine-induced immunity. However, vaccine-elicited CD8⁺ T cells may have a significant impact on the early protective effects of the mRNA vaccine, which are evident 12 days after initial vaccination. Vaccine-induced CD8⁺ T cells have been shown to respond to multiple epitopes of SARS-CoV-2 and exhibit polyfunctionality in the periphery at the early stage, even when neutralizing antibodies are scarce. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce diverse subsets of memory CD8⁺ T cells that persist for more than six months following vaccination. However, the protective role of CD8⁺ T cells in response to the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines remains a topic of debate. In addition, our understanding of CD8⁺ T cells in response to vaccination in the lymph nodes, where they first encounter antigen, is still limited. This review delves into the current knowledge regarding the protective role of polyfunctional CD8⁺ T cells in controlling the virus, the response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, and the contribution to supporting B cell activity and promoting immune protection in the lymph nodes.

COVID-19 and HIV: Clinical Outcomes among Hospitalized Patients in the United States

The concurrence of HIV and COVID-19 yields unique challenges and considerations for healthcare providers, patients living with HIV, and healthcare systems at-large. Persons living with HIV may face a higher risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection and experiencing worse clinical outcomes compared to those without. Notably, COVID-19 may have a disproportionate impact on historically disadvantaged populations, including African Americans and those stratified in a lower socio-economic status. Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, we compared patients with a diagnosis of both HIV and COVID-19 and those who exclusively had a diagnosis of COVID-19. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were intubation rate and vasopressor use; acute MI, acute kidney injury (AKI); AKI requiring hemodialysis (HD); venous thromboembolism (VTE); septic shock and cardiac arrest; length of stay; financial burden on healthcare; and resource utilization. A total of 1,572,815 patients were included in this study; a COVID-19-positive sample that did not have HIV (n = 1,564,875, 99.4%) and another sample with HIV and COVID-19 (n = 7940, 0.56%). Patients with COVID-19 and HIV did not have a significant difference in mortality compared to COVID-19 alone (10.2% vs. 11.3%, respectively, p = 0.35); however, that patient cohort did have a significantly higher rate of AKI (33.6% vs. 28.6%, aOR: 1.26 [95% CI 1.13-1.41], p < 0.001). Given the complex interplay between HIV and COVID-19, more prospective studies investigating the factors such as the contribution of viral burden, CD4 cell count, and the details of patients' anti-retroviral therapeutic regimens should be pursued.

Addressing sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake among youth in Zimbabwe

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance research has mostly originated from high-income countries and reasons why youth may not get vaccinated may differ in low-income settings. Understanding vaccination coverage across different population groups and the sociocultural influences in healthcare delivery is important to inform targeted vaccination campaigns.

METHODS

A population-based survey was conducted in 24 communities across three provinces (Harare, Bulawayo and Mashonaland East) in Zimbabwe between October 2021 and June 2022. Youth aged 18-24 years were randomly selected using multistage sampling. Sociodemographic characteristics, COVID-19 vaccination uptake and reasons for non-uptake were collected, and odds of vaccination was investigated using logistic regression.

RESULTS

17 682 youth were recruited in the survey (n=10 742, 60.8% female). The median age of participants was 20 (IQR: 19-22) years. Almost two thirds (n=10 652, 60.2%) reported receiving at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. A higher proportion of men than women had been vaccinated (68.9% vs 54.7%), and vaccination prevalence increased with age (<19 years: 57.5%, 20-22: 61.5%, >23: 62.2%). Lack of time to get vaccinated, belief that the vaccine was unsafe and anxiety about side effects (particularly infertility) were the main reasons for not getting vaccinated. Factors associated with vaccination were male sex (OR=1.69, 95% CI 1.58 to 1.80), increasing age (>22 years: OR=1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.21), education level (postsecondary: OR=4.34, 95% CI 3.27 to 5.76) and socioeconomic status (least poor: OR=1.32, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.47).

CONCLUSION

This study found vaccine inequity across age, sex, educational attainment and socioeconomic status among youth. Strategies should address these inequities by understanding concerns and tailoring vaccine campaigns to specific groups.

The Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in the Elderly: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the reduced immune response to vaccines in older populations, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccinations and its impact on breakthrough infection, hospital admission, and mortality in the elderly.

METHODS

We carried out a systemic review and meta-analysis where MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials were queried to identify relevant literature. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized trials, prospective, observational cohort, and case-control studies assessing breakthrough infection, hospital admission, and mortality after coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in the elderly (≥ 60 years old).

RESULTS

Overall, 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the unvaccinated group, the vaccinated group showed a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection after 28-34 (relative risk [RR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.49) and 35-60 days (RR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.62). There was a step-wise increase in efficacy with additional doses with the two-dose group experiencing decreased risk of breakthrough infection (RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.32-0.42), hospital admissions (RR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.14-0.45), disease severity (RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.20-0.70), and mortality (RR = 0.21, 95% CI 0.14-0.32) compared with those receiving one or no doses. Similarly three-dose and four-dose vaccine groups also showed a decreased risk of breakthrough infection (3-dose: RR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.10-0.20; 4-dose RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.4-0.53), hospital admissions (3-dose: RR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.07-0.17; 4-dose: RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.32-0.55), and all-cause mortality (3-dose: RR = 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.48; 4-dose: RR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.84) Subgroup analysis found that protection against mortality for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated groups was similar by age (60-79 years: RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.74; ≥ 80 years: RR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98) and gender (female: RR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.87, male: (RR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76), and comorbid cardiovascular disease (CVD) (RR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.92) or diabetes (DM) (RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.89.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pooled results showed that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines administered to the elderly is effective in preventing prevent breakthrough infection, hospitalization, severity, and death. What's more, increasing number of vaccine doses is becoming increasingly effective.

COVID-19 Vaccine Impacts in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background and purpose Vaccinations provide disease protection through a variety of mechanisms; however, vaccines can occasionally cause adverse effects. Therefore, the objective of this investigation was to assess the short- and long-term adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccinations in Saudi Arabia. Methods In Saudi Arabia, between October 2021 and October 2022, a cross-sectional study was conducted. A validated Arabic and English dual-language online questionnaire were utilized to collect data. Results This investigation included 492 participants who were all immunized against the COVID-19 virus. There were 152 (30.9%) male participants and 340 (69.1%) female participants, with a mean age of 35±10.7 years. About 72.2% of study participants received three doses of vaccine, with 75.6% receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, 22.2% receiving the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, and 2.2% receiving the Moderna vaccine. Fever was observed in 66.3% (326/492) of the participants following vaccination, headache in 57.3% (282/492) of the participants, fatigue in 54.7% (269/492) of the participants, and influenza-like symptoms in 51% (251/492) of the participants. Younger participants (18-29 years old) exhibited influenza-like symptoms and fever after vaccination in comparison to older participants (P=0.03, P=0.02, respectively). In contrast, older participants reported more immobilization of the hands or legs, difficulty breathing, and chest pain than younger participants (P=0.04, P=0.02, and P=0.03, respectively). There was a significant correlation between gender and injection-site pain, headache, lethargy or convulsions, and flu-like symptoms. In addition, the participants' clinical history of chronic diseases was significantly associated with the occurrence of post-vaccination adverse effects. Conclusion The majority of the documented adverse reactions are of a temporary and minimal nature. Additional research is required to assess the enduring adverse reactions and efficacy of the vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 reoccurrence.

A comprehensive insight on the challenges for COVID-19 vaccine: A lesson learnt from other viral vaccines

The aim of this study is to comprehensively analyze previous viral vaccine programs and identify potential challenges and effective measures for the COVID-19 vaccine program. Previous viral vaccine programs, such as those for HIV, Zika, Influenza, Ebola, Dengue, SARS, and MERS, were evaluated. Paramount challenges were identified, including quasi-species, cross-reactivity, duration of immunity, revaccination, mutation, immunosenescence, and adverse events related to viral vaccines. Although a large population has been vaccinated, mutations in SARS-CoV-2 and adverse events related to vaccines pose significant challenges. Previous vaccine programs have taught us that predicting the final outcome of the current vaccine program for COVID-19 cannot be determined at a given state. Long-term follow-up studies are essential. Validated preclinical studies, long-term follow-up studies, alternative therapeutic approaches, and alternative vaccines are necessary.

The Impact of Vaccination on COVID-19 Burden of Disease in the Adult and Elderly Population: A Systematic Review of Italian Evidence

COVID-19 is a major global health threat, with millions of confirmed cases and deaths worldwide. Containment and mitigation strategies, including vaccination, have been implemented to reduce transmission and protect the population. We conducted two systematic reviews to collect nonrandomized studies investigating the effects of vaccination on COVID-19-related complications and deaths in the Italian population. We considered studies conducted in Italian settings and written in English that contained data on the effects of vaccination on COVID-19-related mortality and complications. We excluded studies that pertained to the pediatric population. In total, we included 10 unique studies in our two systematic reviews. The results showed that fully vaccinated individuals had a lower risk of death, severe symptoms, and hospitalization compared to unvaccinated individuals. The review also looked at the impact of vaccination on post-COVID-19 syndrome, the effectiveness of booster doses in older individuals, and nationwide adverse events. Our work highlights the crucial role that vaccination campaigns have played in reducing the burden of COVID-19 disease in the Italian adult population, positively impacting the pandemic trajectory in Italy.

IgG4 Antibodies Induced by Repeated Vaccination May Generate Immune Tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein

Less than a year after the global emergence of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, a novel vaccine platform based on mRNA technology was introduced to the market. Globally, around 13.38 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses of diverse platforms have been administered. To date, 72.3% of the total population has been injected at least once with a COVID-19 vaccine. As the immunity provided by these vaccines rapidly wanes, their ability to prevent hospitalization and severe disease in individuals with comorbidities has recently been questioned, and increasing evidence has shown that, as with many other vaccines, they do not produce sterilizing immunity, allowing people to suffer frequent re-infections. Additionally, recent investigations have found abnormally high levels of IgG4 in people who were administered two or more injections of the mRNA vaccines. HIV, Malaria, and Pertussis vaccines have also been reported to induce higher-than-normal IgG4 synthesis. Overall, there are three critical factors determining the class switch to IgG4 antibodies: excessive antigen concentration, repeated vaccination, and the type of vaccine used. It has been suggested that an increase in IgG4 levels could have a protecting role by preventing immune over-activation, similar to that occurring during successful allergen-specific immunotherapy by inhibiting IgE-induced effects. However, emerging evidence suggests that the reported increase in IgG4 levels detected after repeated vaccination with the mRNA vaccines may not be a protective mechanism; rather, it constitutes an immune tolerance mechanism to the spike protein that could promote unopposed SARS-CoV2 infection and replication by suppressing natural antiviral responses. Increased IgG4 synthesis due to repeated mRNA vaccination with high antigen concentrations may also cause autoimmune diseases, and promote cancer growth and autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible individuals.

Expectations and Prior Experiences Associated With Adverse Effects of COVID-19 Vaccination

Importance

Uptake of vaccination against COVID-19 is strongly affected by concerns about adverse effects. Research on nocebo effects suggests that these concerns can amplify symptom burden.

Objective

To investigate whether positive and negative expectations prior to COVID-19 vaccination are associated with systemic adverse effects.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective cohort study analyzed the association of expected benefits and risks of vaccination, adverse effects at first vaccination, and observed adverse effects in close contacts with severity of systemic adverse effects among adults receiving a second dose of messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines between August 16 and 28, 2021. A total of 7771 individuals receiving the second dose at a state vaccination center in Hamburg, Germany, were invited to participate; of these, 5370 did not respond, 535 provided incomplete information, and 188 were excluded retrospectively. The mobile application m-Path was used for data collection.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome was a composite severity index of systemic adverse effects in 12 symptom areas measured once daily with an electronic symptom diary over 7 consecutive days. Data were analyzed by mixed-effects multivariable ordered logistic regression adjusted for prevaccine symptom levels and observation times.

Results

A total of 10 447 observations from 1678 individuals receiving vaccinations (BNT162b2 [Pfizer BioNTech] in 1297 [77.3%] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna] in 381 [22.7%]) were collected. The participants' median age was 34 (IQR, 27-44) years, and 862 (51.4%) were women. The risk for more severe adverse effects was higher for persons expecting a lower benefit of vaccination (odds ratio [OR] for higher expectations, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.63-0.83]; P < .001), expecting higher adverse effects of vaccination (OR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.23-1.58]; P < .001), having experienced higher symptom burden at the first vaccination (OR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.42-1.82]; P < .001), scoring higher on the Somatosensory Amplification Scale (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.06-1.38]; P = .004), and if the vaccine mRNA-1273 was given rather than BNT162b2 (OR, 2.45 [95% CI, 2.01-2.99]; P < .001). No associations were seen for observed experiences.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, several nocebo effects occurred in the first week after COVID-19 vaccination. The severity of systemic adverse effects was associated not only with vaccine-specific reactogenicity but also more negative prior experiences with adverse effects from the first COVID-19 vaccination, more negative expectations regarding vaccination, and tendency to catastrophize instead of normalize benign bodily sensations. Clinician-patient interactions and public vaccine campaigns may both benefit from these insights by optimizing and contextualizing information provided about COVID-19 vaccines.

Coronavirus disease 2019 rebounds following nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment

Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV-r) is an effective anti-SARS-CoV-2 agent and has been recommended in the treatment of nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19. In rare occasions, some patients experience virologic and symptomatic rebound after initial resolution, which we call COVID-19 rebound after NMV-r. Although COVID rebound can also occur after molnupiravir treatment or even no antiviral treatment, we have more serious concern about the rebound after NMV-r, which remains the most effective antiviral. Due to a lack of information about its frequency, mechanism, outcomes, and management, we conducted this review to provide comprehensive and updated information to address these questions. Based on the limited evidence, the incidence of COVID-19 rebound after NMV-r was less than 2%, and most cases developed 5-15 days after initiating NMV-r treatment. Almost all reported cases had mild symptoms, and the clinical condition gradually subsided without additional treatment. Overall, the clinical outcome was favorable, and only a small number of patients required emergency department visits or hospitalization. Regarding virologic rebound, culturable SARS-CoV-2 with possible transmission was observed, so re-isolation may be needed.

Quantitative Benefit-Risk Assessment of COVID-19 Vaccines Using the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

In the early SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, four major vaccines were approved despite limited efficacy and safety data through short regulatory review periods. Thus, it is necessary to assess the benefit-risk (BR) profiles of the COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted a quantitative BR assessment for four COVID-19 vaccines (mRNA-based: mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2; viral vector-based: Ad26.COV.2 and ChAdOx1-S) using multi-criteria decision analysis. Three benefit criteria and two risk criteria were considered: preventing COVID-19 infection for (1) adults aged ≥18 years; (2) seniors aged 60 years or older; and (3) severe COVID-19, adverse events (AEs), and serious AEs. Data were retrieved from clinical trials, observational studies, and county-specific AE monitoring reports. Based on the collected data, vaccines were scored for each criterion. 22 professionals weighted each criterion. The overall BR score was calculated using scores and weights. mRNA-1273 was the most preferred vaccine in pre-authorization and BNT162b2 in post-authorization. We found that the mRNA vaccine had a good balance between the benefits and risks. Using this BR assessment, the benefit-risk profile of COVID-19 vaccines can be updated with cumulated data. It will contribute to building evidence for decision making by policy makers and health professionals.

Effectiveness of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) Vaccine in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic have expanded to the vaccination of children and adolescents. This systematic review assesses the utility of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine in children and adolescents aged 5-18 years, considering its effectiveness against COVID infection, hospital and intensive care admission and duration of effectiveness after vaccination. Six databases were searched following the PRISMA guidelines. Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using meta-analysis. Fifteen studies were included in the systematic review, while 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Evidence suggests that the two-dose vaccination regime provided high effectiveness of 92% (95% CI, 86-96) against COVID infection. Vaccination also conferred high protection against hospitalisation (91%) and intensive care admission (85%). The vaccine was highly protective against the Delta variant of the virus, but showed a lower protection against the Omicron variant. Most adverse effects were transient and mild, commonly including pain at the injection site, fatigue and headache. Current findings are suggestive of waning immunity over time; however, further research is needed to investigate the relevance of booster doses in this age group. In summary, the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccine demonstrated high levels of protection against COVID-19 infection and its complications while maintaining an adequate safety profile in children and adolescents.