Effectiveness of two coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines (viral vector and inactivated viral vaccine) against severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in a cohort of healthcare workers

Longer-term effectiveness of a heterologous coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine booster in healthcare workers in Brazil

Objective

To compare the long-term vaccine effectiveness between those receiving viral vector [Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1)] or inactivated viral (CoronaVac) primary series (2 doses) and those who received an mRNA booster (Pfizer/BioNTech) (the third dose) among healthcare workers (HCWs).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among HCWs (aged ≥18 years) in Brazil from January 2021 to July 2022. To assess the variation in the effectiveness of booster dose over time, we estimated the effectiveness rate by taking the log risk ratio as a function of time.

Results

Of 14,532 HCWs, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was confirmed in 56.3% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine versus 23.2% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001), and 37.1% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine versus 22.7% among HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001). The highest vaccine effectiveness with mRNA booster was observed 30 days after vaccination: 91% for the CoronaVac vaccine group and 97% for the ChAdOx1 vaccine group. Vacine effectiveness declined to 55% and 67%, respectively, at 180 days. Of 430 samples screened for mutations, 49.5% were SARS-CoV-2 delta variants and 34.2% were SARS-CoV-2 omicron variants.

Conclusions

Heterologous COVID-19 vaccines were effective for up to 180 days in preventing COVID-19 in the SARS-CoV-2 delta and omicron variant eras, which suggests the need for a second booster.

Efficacy and effectiveness of inactivated vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19, severe COVID-19, and COVID-19 clinical outcomes in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Inactivated, whole-virion vaccines have been used extensively in the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Its efficacy and effectiveness across regions have not been systematically evaluated. Efficacy refers to how well a vaccine performs in a controlled environment. Effectiveness refers to how well it performs in real world settings.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed published, peer-reviewed evidence on all WHO-approved inactivated vaccines and evaluated their efficacy and effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection, symptomatic infection, severe clinical outcomes, and severe COVID-19. We searched Pubmed (including MEDLINE), EMBASE (via OVID), Web of Science Core Collection, Web of Science Chinese Science Citation Database, and Clinicaltrials.gov.

Findings

The final pool included 28 studies representing over 32 million individuals reporting efficacy or effectiveness estimates of complete vaccination using any approved inactivated vaccine between January 1, 2019 and June 27, 2022. Evidence was found for efficacy and effectiveness against symptomatic infection (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.27, I2 = 28% and OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.16-0.64, I2 = 98%, respectively) and infection (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.49-0.57, I2 = 90% and OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-0.41, I2 = 0%, respectively) for early SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VoCs) (Alpha, Delta), and for waning of vaccine effectiveness with more recent VoCs (Gamma, Omicron). Effectiveness remained robust against COVID-related ICU admission (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04-1.08, I2 = 99%) and death (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.00-2.02, I2 = 96%), although effectiveness estimates against hospitalization (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.37-0.53, I2 = 0%) were inconsistent.

Interpretation

This study showed evidence of efficacy and effectiveness of inactivated vaccines for all outcomes, although inconsistent reporting of key study parameters, high heterogeneity of observational studies, and the small number of studies of particular designs for most outcomes undermined the reliability of the findings. Findings highlight the need for additional research to address these limitations so that more definitive conclusions can be drawn to inform SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development and vaccination policies.

Funding

Health and Medical Research Fund on COVID-19, Health Bureau of the Government of the Hong Kong SAR.

Real-world effectiveness and factors associated with effectiveness of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

The two inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV, have been widely used to control the COVID-19 pandemic. The influence of multiple factors on inactivated vaccine effectiveness (VE) during long-term use and against variants is not well understood.

METHODS

We selected published or preprinted articles from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, medRxiv, BioRxiv, and the WHO COVID-19 database by 31 August 2022. We included observational studies that assessed the VE of completed primary series or homologous booster against SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe COVID-19. We used DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models to calculate pooled estimates and conducted multiple meta-regression with an information theoretic approach based on Akaike's Information Criterion to select the model and identify the factors associated with VE.

RESULTS

Fifty-one eligible studies with 151 estimates were included. For prevention of infection, VE associated with study region, variants, and time since vaccination; VE was significantly decreased against Omicron compared to Alpha (P = 0.021), primary series VE was 52.8% (95% CI, 43.3 to 60.7%) against Delta and 16.4% (95% CI, 9.5 to 22.8%) against Omicron, and booster dose VE was 65.2% (95% CI, 48.3 to 76.6%) against Delta and 20.3% (95% CI, 10.5 to 28.0%) against Omicron; primary VE decreased significantly after 180 days (P = 0.022). For the prevention of severe COVID-19, VE associated with vaccine doses, age, study region, variants, study design, and study population type; booster VE increased significantly (P = 0.001) compared to primary; though VE decreased significantly against Gamma (P = 0.034), Delta (P = 0.001), and Omicron (P = 0.001) compared to Alpha, primary and booster VEs were all above 60% against each variant.

CONCLUSIONS

Inactivated vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection was moderate, decreased significantly after 6 months following primary vaccination, and was restored by booster vaccination. VE against severe COVID-19 was greatest after boosting and did not decrease over time, sustained for over 6 months after the primary series, and more evidence is needed to assess the duration of booster VE. VE varied by variants, most notably against Omicron. It is necessary to ensure booster vaccination of everyone eligible for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and continue monitoring virus evolution and VE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42022353272.

Fast-track development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2: The shots that saved the world

In December 2019, an outbreak emerged of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which leads to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The World Health Organisation announced the outbreak a global health emergency on 30 January 2020 and by 11 March 2020 it was declared a pandemic. The spread and severity of the outbreak took a heavy toll and overburdening of the global health system, particularly since there were no available drugs against SARS-CoV-2. With an immediate worldwide effort, communication, and sharing of data, large amounts of funding, researchers and pharmaceutical companies immediately fast-tracked vaccine development in order to prevent severe disease, hospitalizations and death. A number of vaccines were quickly approved for emergency use, and worldwide vaccination rollouts were immediately put in place. However, due to several individuals being hesitant to vaccinations and many poorer countries not having access to vaccines, multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants quickly emerged that were distinct from the original variant. Uncertainties related to the effectiveness of the various vaccines against the new variants as well as vaccine specific-side effects have remained a concern. Despite these uncertainties, fast-track vaccine approval, manufacturing at large scale, and the effective distribution of COVID-19 vaccines remain the topmost priorities around the world. Unprecedented efforts made by vaccine developers/researchers as well as healthcare staff, played a major role in distributing vaccine shots that provided protection and/or reduced disease severity, and deaths, even with the delta and omicron variants. Fortunately, even for those who become infected, vaccination appears to protect against major disease, hospitalisation, and fatality from COVID-19. Herein, we analyse ongoing vaccination studies and vaccine platforms that have saved many deaths from the pandemic.

Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Inactivated Vaccine to Address COVID-19 Pandemic in China: Evidence From Randomized Control Trials and Real-World Studies

Objective

This study aimed to determine the efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines (CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV) in China using existing international clinical trials and real-world evidence.

Methods

Through a search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI, studies investigating the effectiveness of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines were identified, and a meta-analysis was undertaken to synthesize the vaccine efficacy and effectiveness data. Moreover, a decision-analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of inactivated vaccines for combating the COVID-19 pandemic in the Chinese context from a societal perspective. Results of the meta-analysis, along with cost data from official websites and works of literature were used to populate the model. Sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the model results.

Results

A total of 24 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In comparison to no immunization, the effectiveness of inactivated vaccine against COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, ICU admission and death were 65.18% (95% CI 62.62, 67.75), 79.10% (95% CI 71.69, 86.51), 90.46% (95% CI 89.42, 91.50), and 86.69% (95% CI 85.68, 87.70); and the efficacy against COVID-19 infection and hospitalization were 70.56% (95% CI 57.87, 83.24) and 100% (95% CI 61.72, 100). Inactivated vaccine vaccination prevented more infections, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths with lower total costs, thus was cost-saving from a societal perspective in China. Base-case analysis results were robust in the one-way sensitivity analysis, and the percentage of ICU admission or death and direct medical cost ranked the top influential factors in our models. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, vaccination had a 100% probability of being cost-effective.

Conclusion

Inactivated vaccine is effective in preventing COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, ICU admission and avoiding COVID-19 related death, and COVID-19 vaccination program is cost-saving from societal perspective in China.

Assessment of Clinical Profile and Treatment Outcome in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 Infected Patients

Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, which causes coronavirus disease–19 (COVID-19) in humans, have been developed and are being tested for safety and efficacy. We conducted the cross-sectional prospective cohort study on 820 patients who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 and were admitted to Princess Krishnajammanni trauma care centre (PKTCC), Mysore, which was converted to a designated COVID hospital between April 2021 to July 2021. After obtaining the informed consent, RT-PCR report, vaccination certificate and patient history, patients were classified according to their vaccination status. Results from the study showed decreases in serum ferritin levels, clinical symptoms, improvement in oxygen saturation, early recovery in patients having diabetes and hypertension, and a substantial reduction in the overall duration of hospital stay in vaccinated patients compared to unvaccinated patients. Further, fully vaccinated patients showed better outcomes compared to single dose vaccinated and nonvaccinated patients. Taken together, our findings reaffirm the vaccine’s effectiveness in reducing case fatality and promoting faster recovery compared to nonvaccinated patients. Efforts to increase the number of immunized subjects in the community help to achieve herd immunity and offer protection against the severity of COVID-19 and associated complications while minimizing the public health and economic burden.

Effectiveness of Heterologous Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccine Booster Dosing in Brazilian Healthcare Workers, 2021

BACKGROUND

Little is currently known about vaccine effectiveness (VE) for either 2 doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1) viral vector vaccine or CoronaVac (Instituto Butantan) inactivated viral vaccine followed by a third dose of mRNA vaccine (Pfizer/BioNTech) among healthcare workers (HCWs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among HCWs (aged ≥18 years) working in a private healthcare system in Brazil from January to December 2021. VE was defined as 1 - incidence rate ratio (IRR), with IRR determined using Poisson models with the occurrence of laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection as the outcome, adjusting for age, sex, and job type. We compared those receiving viral vector or inactivated viral primary series (2 doses) with those who received an mRNA booster.

RESULTS

A total of 11 427 HCWs met the inclusion criteria. COVID-19 was confirmed in 31.5% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine versus 0.9% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001) and 9.8% of HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine versus 1% among HCWs receiving 2 doses of ChAdOx1 vaccine with mRNA booster (P < .001). In the adjusted analyses, the estimated VE was 92.0% for 2 CoronaVac vaccines plus mRNA booster and 60.2% for 2 ChAdOx1 vaccines plus mRNA booster, when compared with those with no mRNA booster. Of 246 samples screened for mutations, 191 (77.6%) were Delta variants.

CONCLUSIONS

While 2 doses of ChAdOx1 or CoronaVac vaccines prevent COVID-19, the addition of a Pfizer/BioNTech booster provided significantly more protection.

Role of COVID-19 Vaccines in SARS-CoV-2 Variants

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a threat to the health of the global population. As the result of a global effort in the determination of origin, structure, and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, particularly such the variant of concern as Delta Variant and Omicron Variant, the understanding of SARS-CoV-2 are deepening and the development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 are ongoing. Currently, AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria/SII-Covishield vaccine, Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S vaccine, Moderna-mRNA-1273 vaccine, Pfizer BioNTech-Comirnaty vaccine and Sinovac-CoronaVac vaccine have been listed as WHO Emergency Use Listing (EUL) Qualified Vaccines by WHO. Because of the antigen escape caused by the mutation in variants, the effectiveness of vaccines, which are currently the main means of prevention and treatment, has been affected by varying degrees. Herein, we review the current status of mutations of SARS-CoV-2 variants, the different approaches used in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 variants.