Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 covid-19 vaccines against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe covid-19 outcomes in Ontario, Canada: test negative design study

Viral Dynamics of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant in Pediatric Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the viral dynamics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in children. Understanding viral load changes over the course of illness and duration of viral shedding may provide insight into transmission dynamics to inform public health and infection-control decisions.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of children aged 18 years and younger with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 between 1 February 2022 and 14 March 2022. SARS-CoV-2 testing occurred on daily samples for 10 days; a subset of participants completed daily rapid antigen tests (RATs). Viral RNA trajectories were described in relation to symptom onset and resolution. The associations between both time since symptom onset/resolution and non-infectious viral load were evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Among 101 children aged 2 to 17 years, the median time to study-defined non-infectious viral load was 5 days post-symptom onset, with 75% meeting this threshold by 7 days and 90% by 10 days. On the day of and day after symptom resolution, 43 (49%) and 52 (60%) of 87 had met the non-infectious thresholds, respectively. Of the 50 participants completing a RAT, positivity at symptom onset and on the day after symptom onset was 67% (16/24) and 75% (14/20). On the first day where the non-infectious threshold was met, 61% (n = 27/44) of participant RAT results were positive.

CONCLUSIONS

Children often met the study-defined non-infectiousness threshold on the day after symptom resolution. The RATs were often negative early in the course of illness and should not be relied on to exclude infection. Clinical Trials Registration. clinicaltrials.org; NCT05240183.

mRNA vaccines protect from the lung microvasculature injury and the capillary blood volume loss occurring in SARS-CoV-2 paucisymptomatic infections

INTRODUCTION

The reduction of lung capillary blood volume (Vc) had been identified as the microvascular injury mostly underlying the respiratory Long-COVID syndrome following post-COVID-19 pneumonia. The same kind of injury have been recently also found in several individuals after milder paucisymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections. Though current guidelines strongly recommend vac-cination, studies aimed to investigate the in vivo protection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on lung microvascular targets still are missing to our best knowledge.

AIM

to assess the protection of mRNA vaccines from the reduction of lung capillary blood volume (Vc) caused by pauci-symptomatic SARS.CoV-2 infections in vaccinated compared to unvaccinated individuals.

METHODS

Non-smoking individuals with recent paucisymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection were divided into vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Lung function parameters, including single-breath diffusing capacity and microvascular blood volume, were compared between groups.

RESULTS

fifty vaccinated and twenty-five unvaccinated well-matched individuals were studied. Differently than usual lung function parameters, only the single-breath simultaneous assessment of sDLCO, sDLNO/sDLCO ratio and Vc allowed to identify the occurrence of the lung microvascular injury with high sensitivity and specificity (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

mRNA vaccines proved to exert a high protection from the loss of lung capillary blood volume (Vc) induced by SARS.CoV-2 paucisymptomatic infections (p<0.001). The availability of this non-invasive investigational model should be regarded as a very helpful tool for assessing and comparing in vivo the protective effect of mRNA vaccines on the human microvascular structures of the deep lung.

The Effect of COVID-19 Vaccination on Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing in Older Adults: A Self-Controlled Risk-Interval Study

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination has been associated with reduced outpatient antibiotic prescribing among older adults with laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We assessed the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on outpatient antibiotic prescribing in the broader population of older adults, regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection status.

METHODS

We included adults aged ≥65 years who received their first, second, and/or third COVID-19 vaccine dose from December 2020 to December 2022. We used a self-controlled risk-interval design and included cases who received an antibiotic prescription 2-6 weeks before vaccination (pre-vaccination or control interval) or after vaccination (post-vaccination or risk interval). We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the odds of being prescribed (1) any antibiotic, (2) a typical "respiratory" infection antibiotic, or (3) a typical "urinary tract" infection antibiotic (negative control) in the post-vaccination interval versus the pre-vaccination interval. We accounted for temporal changes in antibiotic prescribing using background monthly antibiotic prescribing counts.

RESULTS

469 923 vaccine doses met inclusion criteria. The odds of receiving any antibiotic or a respiratory antibiotic prescription were lower in the post-vaccination versus pre-vaccination interval (aOR, .973; 95% CI, .968-.978; aOR, .961; 95% CI, .953-.968, respectively). There was no association between vaccination and urinary antibiotic prescriptions (aOR, .996; 95% CI, .987-1.006). Periods with high (>10%) versus low (<5%) SARS-CoV-2 test positivity demonstrated greater reductions in antibiotic prescribing (aOR, .875; 95% CI, .845-.905; aOR, .996; 95% CI, .989-1.003, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination was associated with reduced outpatient antibiotic prescribing in older adults, especially during periods of high SARS-CoV-2 circulation.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in cancer patients: Real-world evidence from self-controlled risk interval and retrospective cohort studies

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines is generally reduced in cancer patients compared to the general population. However, there are only a few studies that compare the relative risk of breakthrough infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes in fully vaccinated cancer patients versus their unvaccinated counterparts.

METHODS

To assess the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in cancer patients, we employed (1) a self-controlled risk interval (SCRI) design, and (2) a retrospective matched cohort design. A SCRI design was used to compare the risk of breakthrough infection in vaccinated cancer patients during the period immediately following vaccination ("control window") and the period in which immunity is achieved ("exposure windows"). The retrospective matched cohort design was used to compare the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated cancer patients. For both studies, data were extracted from the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency-COVID-19-National Health Insurance Service cohort, including demographics, medical history, and vaccination records of all individuals confirmed with COVID-19. We used conditional Poisson regression to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) for breakthrough infection and Cox regression to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for severe outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 14,448 cancer patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between October 2020 and December 2021, a total of 217 and 3996 cancer patients were included in the SCRI and cohort study respectively. While the risk of breakthrough infections, measured by the incidence rate in the control and exposure windows, did not show statistically significant difference in vaccinated cancer patients (IRR=0.88, 95% CI: 0.64-1.22), the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes was significantly lower in vaccinated cancer patients compared to those unvaccinated (HR=0.27, 95% CI: 0.22-0.34).

CONCLUSION

COVID-19 vaccines significantly reduce the risk of severe outcomes in cancer patients, though their efficacy against breakthrough infections is less evident.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines Induce Greater Complement Activation and Decreased Viremia and Nef Antibodies in Men With HIV-1

BACKGROUND

Immune dysregulation in people with human immunodeficiency virus-1 (PWH) persists despite potent antiretroviral therapy and, consequently, PWH tend to have lower immune responses to licensed vaccines. However, limited information is available about the impact of mRNA vaccines in PWH. This study details the immunologic responses to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccines in PWH and their impact on HIV-1.

METHODS

We quantified anti-S immunoglobulin G (IgG) binding and neutralization of 3 SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and complement activation in blood from virally suppressed men with HIV-1 (MWH) and men without HIV-1 (MWOH), and the characteristics that may impact the vaccine immune responses. We also studied antibody levels against HIV-1 proteins and HIV-1 plasma RNA.

RESULTS

MWH had lower anti-S IgG binding and neutralizing antibodies against the 3 variants compared to MWOH. MWH also produced anti-S1 antibodies with a 10-fold greater ability to activate complement and exhibited higher C3a blood levels than MWOH. MWH had decreased residual HIV-1 plasma viremia and anti-Nef IgG approximately 100 days after immunization.

CONCLUSIONS

MWH respond to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines with lower antibody titers and with greater activation of complement, while exhibiting a decrease in HIV-1 viremia and anti-Nef antibodies. These results suggest an important role of complement activation mediating protection in MWH.

AZD1222 effectiveness against severe COVID-19 in individuals with comorbidity or frailty: The RAVEN cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Despite being prioritized during initial COVID-19 vaccine rollout, vulnerable individuals at high risk of severe COVID-19 (hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or death) remain underrepresented in vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies. The RAVEN cohort study (NCT05047822) assessed AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCov-19) two-dose primary series VE in vulnerable populations.

METHODS

Using the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Clinical Informatics Digital Hub, linked to secondary care, death registration, and COVID-19 datasets in England, COVID-19 outcomes in 2021 were compared in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals matched on age, sex, region, and multimorbidity.

RESULTS

Over 4.5 million AZD1222 recipients were matched (mean follow-up ∼5 months); 68% were ≥50 years, 57% had high multimorbidity. Overall, high VE against severe COVID-19 was demonstrated, with lower VE observed in vulnerable populations. VE against hospitalization was higher in the lowest multimorbidity quartile (91.1%; 95% CI: 90.1, 92.0) than the highest quartile (80.4%; 79.7, 81.1), and among individuals ≥65 years, higher in the 'fit' (86.2%; 84.5, 87.6) than the frailest (71.8%; 69.3, 74.2). VE against hospitalization was lowest in immunosuppressed individuals (64.6%; 60.7, 68.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on integrated and comprehensive UK health data, overall population-level VE with AZD1222 was high. VEs were notably lower in vulnerable groups, particularly the immunosuppressed.

Current Progress, Challenges and Prospects in the Development of COVID-19 Vaccines

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in over 772 million confirmed cases, including nearly 7 million deaths, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Leveraging rapid development, accelerated vaccine approval processes, and large-scale production of various COVID-19 vaccines using different technical platforms, the WHO declared an end to the global health emergency of COVID-19 on May 5, 2023. Current COVID-19 vaccines encompass inactivated, live attenuated, viral vector, protein subunit, nucleic acid (DNA and RNA), and virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines. However, the efficacy of these vaccines is diminishing due to the constant mutation of SARS-CoV-2 and the heightened immune evasion abilities of emerging variants. This review examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the biological characteristics of the virus, and its diverse variants. Moreover, the review underscores the effectiveness, advantages, and disadvantages of authorized COVID-19 vaccines. Additionally, it analyzes the challenges, strategies, and future prospects of developing a safe, broad-spectrum vaccine that confers sufficient and sustainable immune protection against new variants of SARS-CoV-2. These discussions not only offer insight for the development of next-generation COVID-19 vaccines but also summarize experiences for combating future emerging viruses.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1/BA.2 lineages among adults and adolescents in a multicentre primary care study, Europe, December 2021 to June 2022

BackgroundScarce European data in early 2021 suggested lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineages than previous variants.AimWe aimed to estimate primary series (PS) and first booster VE against symptomatic BA.1/BA.2 infection and investigate potential biases.MethodsThis European test-negative multicentre study tested primary care patients with acute respiratory symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 in the BA.1/BA.2-dominant period. We estimated PS and booster VE among adults and adolescents (PS only) for all products combined and for Comirnaty alone, by time since vaccination, age and chronic condition. We investigated potential bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination and explored effect modification and confounding by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong adults, PS VE was 37% (95% CI: 24-47%) overall and 60% (95% CI: 44-72%), 43% (95% CI: 26-55%) and 29% (95% CI: 13-43%) < 90, 90-179 and ≥ 180 days post vaccination, respectively. Booster VE was 42% (95% CI: 32-51%) overall and 56% (95% CI: 47-64%), 22% (95% CI: 2-38%) and 3% (95% CI: -78% to 48%), respectively. Primary series VE was similar among adolescents. Restricting analyses to Comirnaty had little impact. Vaccine effectiveness was higher among older adults. There was no signal of bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. Confounding by previous infection was low, but sample size precluded definite assessment of effect modification.ConclusionPrimary series and booster VE against symptomatic infection with BA.1/BA.2 ranged from 37% to 42%, with similar waning post vaccination. Comprehensive data on previous SARS-CoV-2 infection would help disentangle vaccine- and infection-induced immunity.

Syringa reticulata potently inhibits the activity of SARS-CoV-2 3CL protease

The ongoing coronavirus infectious disease (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) still urgently requires effective treatments. The 3C-like (3CL) protease of SARS-CoV-2 is a highly conserved cysteine protease that plays an important role in the viral life cycle and host inflammation, providing an ideal target for developing broad-spectrum antiviral drugs. Herein, we describe the discovery of a large number of herbs mainly produced in Heilongjiang Province, China, that exhibited different inhibitory activities against SARS-CoV-2 3CL protease. We confirmed that Syringa reticulata, which is used for clinical treatment of chronic bronchitis and asthma, is a specific and potent inhibitor of 3CL protease. A 70 % ethanol extract of S. reticulata dose-dependently inhibited the cleavage activity of 3CL protease in a fluorescence resonance energy transfer assay with an IC50 value of 0.0018 mg/mL, but had minimal effect in pseudovirus-based cell entry and luciferase-based RNA-dependent RNA polymerase assays. These results suggest that S. reticulata will be a potential leading candidate for COVID-19 treatment.

COVID Vaccine Hesitancy and Long-Term Traffic Risks

BACKGROUND

COVID vaccine hesitancy identifies a discrepancy between personal decisions and public guidelines. We tested whether COVID vaccine hesitancy was associated with the long-term risks of a traffic crash.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based longitudinal cohort analysis of adults by determining COVID vaccination status through linkages to electronic medical records. Traffic crashes requiring emergency medical care were defined by multicenter outcome ascertainment of all hospitals throughout the region over the subsequent year.

RESULTS

We identified 11,598,549 total individuals, of whom 1,210,754 had not received a COVID vaccine. A total of 54,558 were subsequently injured in traffic crashes during the 1-year follow-up interval, equal to a risk of 4704 per million. Those who had not received a COVID vaccine had a 58% higher risk than those who had received a COVID vaccine (6983 vs 4438 per million, P < .001). The increased traffic risks among unvaccinated individuals included diverse subgroups, were accentuated for single-vehicle crashes, extended to fatal outcomes, exceeded the risks associated with sleep apnea, and persisted after adjustment for baseline characteristics. The increased risks were validated in analyses using Artificial Intelligence techniques and generally larger than the risks of other adverse events frequently ascribed to COVID vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID vaccine hesitancy is associated with significant increased long-term risks of a traffic crash. A greater awareness of traffic risks might encourage patients to take protective actions for personal safety.

The effect of dose-interval on antibody response to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines: a prospective cohort study

Background

Vaccination against COVID-19 is highly effective in preventing severe disease and hospitalization, but primary COVID mRNA vaccination schedules often differed from those recommended by the manufacturers due to supply chain issues. We investigated the impact of delaying the second dose on antibody responses to COVID mRNA-vaccines in a prospective cohort of health-care workers in Quebec.

Methods

We recruited participants from the McGill University Health Centre who provided serum or participant-collected dried blood samples (DBS) at 28-days, 3 months, and 6 months post-second dose and at 28-days after a third dose. IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV2 spike (S), the receptor-binding domain (RBD), nucleocapsid (N) and neutralizing antibodies to the ancestral strain were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We examined associations between long (≤89 days) versus short (<89 days) between-dose intervals and antibody response through multivariable mixed-effects models adjusted for age, sex, prior covid infection status, time since vaccine dose, and assay batch.

Findings

The cohort included 328 participants who received up to three vaccine doses (>80% Pfizer-BioNTech). Weighted averages of the serum (n=744) and DBS (n=216) cohort results from the multivariable models showed that IgG anti-S was 31% higher (95% CI: 12% to 53%) and IgG anti-RBD was 37% higher (95% CI: 14% to 65%) in the long vs. short interval participants, across all time points.

Interpretation

Our study indicates that extending the covid primary series between-dose interval beyond 89 days (approximately 3 months) provides stronger antibody responses than intervals less than 89 days. Our demonstration of a more robust antibody response with a longer between dose interval is reassuring as logistical and supply challenges are navigated in low-resource settings.

Test negative design for vaccine effectiveness estimation in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic methodology review

BACKGROUND

During the height of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the test-negative design (TND) was extensively used in many countries to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). Typically, the TND involves the recruitment of care-seeking individuals who meet a common clinical case definition. All participants are then tested for an infection of interest.

OBJECTIVES

To review and describe the variation in TND methodology, and disclosure of potential biases, as applied to the evaluation of COVID-19 VE during the early vaccination phase of the pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review by searching four biomedical databases using defined keywords to identify peer-reviewed articles published between January 1, 2020, and January 25, 2022. We included only original articles that employed a TND to estimate VE of COVID-19 vaccines in which cases and controls were evaluated based on SARS-CoV-2 laboratory test results.

RESULTS

We identified 96 studies, 35 of which met the defined criteria. Most studies were from North America (16 studies) and targeted the general population (28 studies). Outcome case definitions were based primarily on COVID-19-like symptoms; however, several papers did not consider or specify symptoms. Cases and controls had the same inclusion criteria in only half of the studies. Most studies relied upon administrative or hospital databases assembled for a different (non-evaluation) clinical purpose. Potential unmeasured confounding (20 studies), misclassification of current SARS-CoV-2 infection (16 studies) and selection bias (10 studies) were disclosed as limitations by some studies.

CONCLUSION

We observed potentially meaningful deviations from the validated design in the application of the TND during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Population-Based Test-Negative Matched Case-Control Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Effectiveness Among Pregnant People in Ontario, Canada

OBJECTIVE

Pregnancy is a risk factor for severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, which can result in adverse pregnancy outcomes, thus making understanding vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population important. This study aimed to assess the VE of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related hospitalization in pregnant people.

METHODS

Population-based matched test-negative case-control study of pregnant people aged 18-49 years, of 12 or more weeks gestation in Ontario, Canada, symptomatic with possible SARS-CoV-2 infection, and having at least 1 positive (n = 1842) or negative (n = 8524) real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) SARS-CoV-2 test between December 14, 2020, and December 31, 2021. The exposure was receipt of ≥1 dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine versus no vaccination. Exposure was further stratified by number and recency of doses. The primary outcome was a positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. As a secondary outcome, VE for COVID-19-related hospitalization was assessed.

RESULTS

In the primary outcome analysis, there were 1821 positive cases, matched to 1821 negative controls. The mean (SD) maternal age was 31 (5) years. When compared to those unvaccinated, receipt of ≥1 dose was associated with an estimated VE of 39% (95% CI 29%-48%) for symptomatic infection, and 85% (95% CI 72%-92%) for COVID-19 hospitalization. VE estimates demonstrated waning with increased time since last vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provide protection against symptomatic COVID-19 illness and are highly effective at preventing severe illness in pregnant people. The observed effect of vaccine waning highlights the importance of booster doses to provide optimal protection for pregnant people.

Vaccinating against a Novel Pathogen: A Critical Review of COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Evidence

We study the experience with COVID-19 vaccination of an initially naïve population, which can inform planning for vaccination against the next novel, highly transmissible pathogen. We focus on the first two pandemic years (wild strain through Delta), because after the Omicron wave in early 2022, very few people were still SARS-CoV-2-naïve. Almost all were vaccinated, infected, or often both. We review the evidence on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and waning effectiveness over time and the relative effectiveness of the four principal vaccines used in developed Western countries: BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA1273 (Moderna), Ad26.CoV2.S (Johnson&Johnson), and ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca). As a basis for our analysis, we conducted a PRISMA-compliant review of all studies on PubMed through 15 August 2022, reporting VE against four endpoints for these four vaccines: any infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death. The mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2, mRNA1273) had high initial VE against all endpoints but protection waned after approximately six months, with BNT162b2 declining faster than mRNA1273. Both mRNA vaccines outperformed the viral vector vaccines (Ad26.CoV2.S and ChAdOx1-S). A third "booster" dose, roughly six months after the initial doses, substantially reduced symptomatic infection, hospitalization, and death. In hindsight, a third dose should be seen as part of the normal vaccination schedule. Our analysis highlights the importance of the real-time population-level surveillance needed to assess evidence for waning, and the need for rapid regulatory response to this evidence.

Emerging heterologous mRNA-based booster strategies within the COVID-19 vaccine landscape

Messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccine platforms used for the development of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 have provided a robust adaptable approach to offer protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, as variants of concern (VoCs), such as omicron and associated sub-variants, emerge, boosting strategies must also adapt to keep pace with the changing landscape. Heterologous vaccination regimens involving the administration of booster vaccines different than the primary vaccination series offer a practical, effective, and safe approach to continue to reduce the global burden of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To understand the immunogenicity, effectiveness, and safety of heterologous mRNA-based vaccination strategies, relevant clinical and real-world observational studies were identified and summarized. Overall, heterologous boosting strategies with mRNA-based vaccines that are currently available and those in development will play an important global role in protecting individuals from COVID-19 caused by emerging VoCs.

Protection of the third-dose and fourth-dose mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariant: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The rapid spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant has raised concerns regarding waning vaccine-induced immunity and durability. We evaluated protection of the third-dose and fourth-dose mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariant and its sublineages.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases and other resources (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL PLUS, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, MedRxiv and bioRxiv) were searched until December 2022.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included studies that assessed the effectiveness of mRNA vaccine booster doses against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes caused by the subvariant.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) at different time points after the third-dose and fourth-dose vaccination were extracted. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to compare VE of the third dose versus the primary series, no vaccination and the fourth dose at different time points. The certainty of the evidence was assessed by Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

This review included 50 studies. The third-dose VE, compared with the primary series, against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 48.86% (95% CI 44.90% to 52.82%, low certainty) at ≥14 days, and gradually decreased to 38.01% (95% CI 13.90% to 62.13%, very low certainty) at ≥90 days after the third-dose vaccination. The fourth-dose VE peaked at 14-30 days (56.70% (95% CI 50.36% to 63.04%), moderate certainty), then quickly declined at 61-90 days (22% (95% CI 6.40% to 37.60%), low certainty). Compared with no vaccination, the third-dose VE was 75.84% (95% CI 40.56% to 111.12%, low certainty) against BA.1 infection, and 70.41% (95% CI 49.94% to 90.88%, low certainty) against BA.2 infection at ≥7 days after the third-dose vaccination. The third-dose VE against hospitalisation remained stable over time and maintained 79.30% (95% CI 58.65% to 99.94%, moderate certainty) at 91-120 days. The fourth-dose VE up to 60 days was 67.54% (95% CI 59.76% to 75.33%, moderate certainty) for hospitalisation and 77.88% (95% CI 72.55% to 83.21%, moderate certainty) for death.

CONCLUSION

The boosters provided substantial protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 6 months, although the duration of protection remains uncertain, suggesting the need for a booster dose within 6 months of the third-dose or fourth-dose vaccination. However, the certainty of evidence in our VE estimates varied from very low to moderate, indicating significant heterogeneity among studies that should be considered when interpreting the findings for public health policies.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023376698.

Employment of a high throughput functional assay to define the critical factors that influence vaccine induced cross-variant neutralizing antibodies for SARS-CoV-2

The scale and duration of neutralizing antibody responses targeting SARS-CoV-2 viral variants represents a critically important serological parameter that predicts protective immunity for COVID-19. In this study, we describe the development and employment of a new functional assay that measures neutralizing antibodies for SARS-CoV-2 and present longitudinal data illustrating the impact of age, sex and comorbidities on the kinetics and strength of vaccine-induced antibody responses for key variants in an Asian volunteer cohort. We also present an accurate quantitation of serological responses for SARS-CoV-2 that exploits a unique set of in-house, recombinant human monoclonal antibodies targeting the viral Spike and nucleocapsid proteins and demonstrate a reduction in neutralizing antibody titres across all groups 6 months post-vaccination. We also observe a marked reduction in the serological binding activity and neutralizing responses targeting recently newly emerged Omicron variants including XBB 1.5 and highlight a significant increase in cross-protective neutralizing antibody responses following a third dose (boost) of vaccine. These data illustrate how key virological factors such as immune escape mutations combined with host demographic factors such as age and sex of the vaccinated individual influence the strength and duration of cross-protective serological immunity for COVID-19.

M, Armas R, de Mora D, Pinos J, Olmedo A, Salas R, Jimbo-Sotomayor R, Chiluisa C, Acosta P, Sánchez X, Whittembury A. Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in Ecuador: A test-negative design

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a significant global health threat, characterized by high morbidity, severity, and the emergence of concerning variants. Latin America has been greatly affected, with high infection and mortality rates. Vaccination plays a crucial role in mitigating severe disease and controlling the pandemic. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) in hospitalized vaccination target groups in Ecuador.

Methods

This is a test-negative design study. We used data reported through sentinel surveillance of SARI between May 2021 and March 2022 in Ecuador. Patients with case criteria of SARI and hospitalized for a minimum of 24 hours were included in the study. Cases were defined as patients with SARI with a positive RT-qPCR test for SARS-CoV-2 and controls were those with a negative result. Information on vaccination status was obtained from the national vaccination registry, a valid dose of vaccination was considered when it was administered at least 14 days prior to symptom onset. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) (1-OR/OR) was calculated using a logistic regression.

Results

A total of 1,277 patients were included in the analysis of VE. The adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) in preventing hospitalization, adjusted for sex, age group, presence of one or more comorbidities, and period of the predominance of the omicron variant, was 44.5% for the partial primary schedule, 74.7% for the complete primary schedule, and 79.9% for the complete primary schedule plus booster doses. The aVE in avoiding ICU admissions was close to 80% with both the complete primary schedule and the booster doses, and in avoiding deaths, the aVE was 89% and 98%, respectively.

Conclusions

In Ecuador, COVID-19 vaccination prevents hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths. The effectiveness of the vaccines improves with more doses, offering increased protection across all age groups.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 against SARS-CoV-2 household transmission: a prospective cohort study in England

Background

The ability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to protect against infection and onward transmission determines whether immunisation can control global circulation. We estimated the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) and Oxford AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) vaccines against acquisition and transmission of the Alpha and Delta variants in a prospective household study in England.

Methods

Households were recruited based on adult purported index cases testing positive after reverse transcription-quantitative (RT-q)PCR testing of oral-nasal swabs. Purported index cases and their household contacts took oral-nasal swabs on days 1, 3 and 7 after enrolment and a subset of the PCR-positive swabs underwent genomic sequencing conducted on a subset. We used Bayesian logistic regression to infer vaccine effectiveness against acquisition and transmission, adjusted for age, vaccination history and variant.

Results

Between 2 February 2021 and 10 September 2021, 213 index cases and 312 contacts were followed up. After excluding households lacking genomic proximity (N=2) or with unlikely serial intervals (N=16), 195 households with 278 contacts remained, of whom 113 (41%) became PCR positive. Delta lineages had 1.53 times the risk (95% Credible Interval: 1.04 - 2.20) of transmission than Alpha; contacts older than 18 years old were 1.48 (1.20 - 1.91) and 1.02 (0.93 - 1.16) times more likely to acquire an Alpha or Delta infection than children. Effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against transmission of Delta was 36% (-1%, 66%) and 49% (18%, 73%) for ChAdOx1, similar to their effectiveness for Alpha. Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 69% (9%, 95%) vs. 18% (-11%, 59%), respectively, for BNT162b2 and 24% (-41%, 72%) vs. 9% (-15%, 42%), respectively, for ChAdOx1.

Conclusions

BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 reduce transmission of the Delta variant from breakthrough infections in the household setting, although their protection against infection within this setting is low.

Relative vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 boosters in people aged at least 75 years during the spring-summer (monovalent vaccine) and autumn-winter (bivalent vaccine) booster campaigns: a prospective test negative case-control study, United Kingdom, 2022

BackgroundUnderstanding the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of new COVID-19 vaccine formulations against SARS-CoV-2 infection is a public health priority. A precise analysis of the rVE of monovalent and bivalent boosters given during the 2022 spring-summer and autumn-winter campaigns, respectively, in a defined population remains of interest.AimWe assessed rVE against hospitalisation for the spring-summer (fourth vs third monovalent mRNA vaccine doses) and autumn-winter (fifth BA.1/ancestral bivalent vs fourth monovalent mRNA vaccine dose) boosters.MethodsWe performed a prospective single-centre test-negative design case-control study in ≥ 75-year-old people hospitalised with COVID-19 or other acute respiratory disease. We conducted regression analyses controlling for age, sex, socioeconomic status, patient comorbidities, community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, vaccine brand and time between baseline dose and hospitalisation.ResultsWe included 682 controls and 182 cases in the spring-summer booster analysis and 572 controls and 152 cases in the autumn-winter booster analysis. A monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine as fourth dose showed 46.6% rVE (95% confidence interval (CI): 13.9-67.1) vs those not fully boosted. A bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine as fifth dose had 46.7% rVE (95% CI: 18.0-65.1), compared with a fourth monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose.ConclusionsBoth fourth monovalent and fifth BA.1/ancestral mRNA bivalent COVID-19 vaccine doses demonstrated benefit as a booster in older adults. Bivalent mRNA boosters offered similar protection against hospitalisation with Omicron infection to monovalent mRNA boosters given earlier in the year. These findings support immunisation programmes in several European countries that advised the use of BA.1/ancestral bivalent booster doses.

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Alpha- and Delta-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021

IntroductionTwo large multicentre European hospital networks have estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 since 2021.AimWe aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalised severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) patients ≥ 20 years, combining data from these networks during Alpha (March-June)- and Delta (June-December)-dominant periods, 2021.MethodsForty-six participating hospitals across 14 countries follow a similar generic protocol using the test-negative case-control design. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) as two doses of a two-dose or one of a single-dose vaccine ≥ 14 days before onset.ResultsWe included 1,087 cases (538 controls) and 1,669 cases (1,442 controls) in the Alpha- and Delta-dominant periods, respectively. During the Alpha period, VE against hospitalisation with SARS-CoV2 for complete Comirnaty PSV was 85% (95% CI: 69-92) overall and 75% (95% CI: 42-90) in those aged ≥ 80 years. During the Delta period, among SARI patients ≥ 20 years with symptom onset ≥ 150 days from last PSV dose, VE for complete Comirnaty PSV was 54% (95% CI: 18-74). Among those receiving Comirnaty PSV and mRNA booster (any product) ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose, VE was 91% (95% CI: 57-98). In time-since-vaccination analysis, complete all-product PSV VE was > 90% in those with their last dose < 90 days before onset; ≥ 70% in those 90-179 days before onset.ConclusionsOur results from this EU multi-country hospital setting showed that VE for complete PSV alone was higher in the Alpha- than the Delta-dominant period, and addition of a first booster dose during the latter period increased VE to over 90%.

Vaccine efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 for Pfizer BioNTech, Moderna, and AstraZeneca vaccines: a systematic review

The purpose of this systematic review was to report on the vaccine efficacy (VE) of three SARS-CoV-2 vaccines approved by Health Canada: Pfizer BioNTech, Moderna, and AstraZeneca. Four databases were searched for primary publications on population-level VE. Ninety-two publications matched the inclusion criteria, and the extracted data were separated by vaccine type: mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) and the AstraZeneca vaccine. The median VE for PCR-positive patients and various levels of clinical disease was determined for the first and second doses of both vaccine types against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants. The median VE for PCR-positive infections against unidentified variants from an mRNA vaccine was 64.5 and 89%, respectively, after one or two doses. The median VE for PCR-positive infections against unidentified variants from the AstraZeneca vaccine was 53.4 and 69.6%, respectively, after one or two doses. The median VE for two doses of mRNA for asymptomatic, symptomatic, and severe infection against unidentified variants was 85.5, 93.2, and 92.2%, respectively. The median VE for two doses of AstraZeneca for asymptomatic, symptomatic, and severe infection against unidentified variants was 69.7, 71, and 90.2%, respectively. Vaccine efficacy numerically increased from the first to the second dose, increased from the first 2 weeks to the second 2 weeks post-vaccination for both doses, but decreased after 4 months from the second dose. Vaccine efficacy did not differ by person's age.

Prevalence of Side Effects of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 Vaccine: A Multicenter Experience From Pakistan

Introduction The most efficient method of combating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic would be to use effective, safe, and proven vaccines; however, their widespread use has been hampered partly by concerns over possible adverse effects. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the prevalence of Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine side effects among participants. Methods This was a multicenter, cross-sectional study conducted using a non-probability sampling technique. The duration of the study was nine months, from February 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The study included 900 participants who provided informed consent and had received two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine. Demographic characteristics of participants, such as gender, age, comorbidities, AstraZeneca vaccine with both doses along with booster dose, previous exposure to COVID-19 infection, and the prevalence of any local and systemic side effects following the first and second doses of vaccine, were documented. Results The study findings showed that of the 900 participants, 414 (46.0%) were males and 486 (54.0%) were females; their mean age was 40.72 ± 13.47 years. Among them, 198 (22.0%) had hypertension and 144 (16.0%) had diabetes mellitus. Following the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, pain at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect in 594 (66.0%) participants. Moreover, swelling at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect in 522 (58.0%) participants after receiving the second dose of the vaccine. The level of satisfaction showed that the majority of the 648 participants (72.0%) were satisfied with their vaccination. Conclusion This study concluded that pain at the injection site was the most commonly reported side effect, followed by swelling and fever after the first dose of the vaccine. Following the second dose of the vaccine, adverse effects included headache, swelling, and burning at the injection site.

Modelling the Interplay between Responsive Individual Vaccination Decisions and the Spread of SARS-CoV-2

The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines remains low despite their high effectiveness. Epidemic models that represent decision-making psychology can provide insight into the potential impact of vaccine promotion interventions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We coupled a network-based mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Georgia, USA with a social-psychological vaccination decision-making model in which vaccine side effects, post-vaccination infections, and other unidentified community-level factors could "nudge" individuals towards vaccine resistance while hospitalization spikes could nudge them towards willingness. Combining an increased probability of hospitalization-prompted resistant-to-willing switches with a decreased probability of willing-to-resistant switches prompted by unidentified community-level factors increased vaccine uptake and decreased SARS-CoV-2 incidence by as much as 30.7% and 24.0%, respectively. The latter probability had a greater impact than the former. This illustrates the disease prevention potential of vaccine promotion interventions that address community-level factors influencing decision-making and anticipate the case curve instead of reacting to it.

Unveiling a New Perspective on Distinguishing Omicron Breakthrough Cases and Postimmune COVID-19-Naive Individuals: Insights from Antibody Profiles

In the situation of mass vaccination against COVID-19, few studies have reported on the early kinetics of specific antibodies (IgG/IgM/IgA) of vaccine breakthrough cases. There is still a lack of epidemiological evidence about the value of serological indicators in the auxiliary diagnosis of COVID-19 infection, especially when the nucleic acid results were undetectable. Omicron breakthrough cases post-inactivated vaccination (n = 456) and COVID-19-naive individuals with two doses of inactivated vaccination (n = 693) were enrolled. Blood samples were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels based on the magnetic chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay. Among Omicron breakthrough cases, the serum IgG antibody level was 36.34 Sample/CutOff (S/CO) (95% confidence interval [CI], 31.89 to 40.79) in the acute phase and 88.45 S/CO (95% CI, 82.79 to 94.12) in the recovery phase. Serum IgA can be detected in the first week post-symptom onset (PSO) and showed an almost linear increase within 5 weeks PSO. Compared with those of breakthrough cases, IgG and IgA titers of the postimmune group were much lower (4.70 S/CO and 0.46 S/CO, respectively). Multivariate regression showed that serum IgG and IgA levels in Omicron breakthrough cases were mainly affected by the weeks PSO (P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic ROC0 curve analysis showed that the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.744 and 0.806 when the cutoff values of IgA and IgG were 1 S/CO and 15 S/CO, respectively. Omicron breakthrough infection can lead to a further increase in IgG and IgA levels relative to those of the immunized population. When nucleic acid real-time PCR was negative, we would use the kinetics of IgG and IgA levels to distinguish the breakthrough cases from the immunized population. IMPORTANCE This study fills a gap in the epidemiological evidence by investigating the value of serological indicators, particularly IgG and IgA levels, in the auxiliary diagnosis of COVID-19 infections when nucleic acid results are undetectable. The findings reveal that among Omicron breakthrough cases, both IgG and IgA antibody levels exhibit significant changes. Serum IgG levels increase during the acute phase and rise further in the recovery phase. Serum IgA can be detected as early as the first week post-symptom onset (PSO), showing a consistent linear increase within 5 weeks PSO. Furthermore, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrates the potential of IgG and IgA cutoff values as diagnostic markers. The study's conclusion underscores the importance of monitoring IgG and IgA kinetics in distinguishing Omicron breakthrough cases from vaccinated individuals. These findings contribute to the development of more accurate diagnostic approaches and help inform public health strategies during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Differences among epitopes recognized by neutralizing antibodies induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination

SARS-CoV-2 has gradually acquired amino acid substitutions in its S protein that reduce the potency of neutralizing antibodies, leading to decreased vaccine efficacy. Here, we attempted to obtain mutant viruses by passaging SARS-CoV-2 in the presence of plasma samples from convalescent patients or vaccinees to determine which amino acid substitutions affect the antigenicity of SARS-CoV-2. Several amino acid substitutions in the S2 region, as well as the N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD), affected the neutralization potency of plasma samples collected from vaccinees, indicating that amino acid substitutions in the S2 region as well as those in the NTD and RBD affect neutralization by vaccine-induced antibodies. Furthermore, the neutralizing potency of vaccinee plasma samples against mutant viruses we obtained or circulating viruses differed among individuals. These findings suggest that genetic backgrounds of vaccinees influence the recognition of neutralizing epitopes.

Heterologous Booster with BNT162b2 Induced High Specific Antibody Levels in CoronaVac Vaccinees

Immune responses after COVID-19 vaccination should be evaluated in different populations around the world. This study compared antibody responses induced by ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, CoronaVac, and BNT162b2 vaccines. Blood samples from vaccinees were collected pre- and post-vaccinations with the second and third doses. The study enrolled 78 vaccinees, of whom 62.8% were women, with the following median ages: 26 years-ChAdOx1 nCoV-19; 40 years-CoronaVac; 30 years-BNT162b2. Serum samples were quantified for anti-RBD IgG and anti-RBD IgA and anti-spike IgG by ELISA. After two vaccine doses, BNT162b2 vaccinees produced higher levels of anti-RBD IgA and IgG, and anti-spike IgG compared to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and CoronaVac vaccinees. The third dose booster with BNT162b2 induced higher levels of anti-RBD IgA and IgG, and anti-spike IgG in CoronaVac vaccinees. Individuals who reported a SARS-CoV-2 infection before or during the study had higher anti-RBD IgA and IgG production. In conclusion, two doses of the studied vaccines induced detectable levels of anti-RBD IgA and IgG and anti-spike IgG in vaccinees. The heterologous booster with BNT162b2 increased anti-RBD IgA and IgG and anti-spike IgG levels in CoronaVac vaccinees and anti-RBD IgA levels in ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccinees. Furthermore, SARS-CoV-2 infection induced higher anti-RBD IgA and IgG levels in CoronaVac vaccinees.

Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine against COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations among Lebanese Adults ≥75 Years Old-Lebanon, April-May 2021

In Lebanon, the nationwide vaccination against COVID-19 was launched in February 2021 using the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and prioritizing elderly people, persons with comorbidities, and healthcare workers. Our study aims to estimate the post-introduction vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations among elderly people ≥75 years old in Lebanon. A case-control study design was used. Case patients were Lebanese, ≥75 years old, and hospitalized with positive PCR results during April-May 2021, and randomly selected from the database of the Epidemiological Surveillance Unit at the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH). Each case patient was matched by age and locality to two controls. The controls were hospitalized, non-COVID-19 patients, randomly selected from the MOPH hospital admission database. VE was calculated for fully (2 doses ≥14 days) and partially vaccinated (≥14 days of the first or within 14 days of the second dose) participants using multivariate logistic regression. A total of 345 case patients and 814 controls were recruited. Half were females, with a mean age of 83 years. A total of 14 case patients (5%) and 143 controls (22%) were fully vaccinated. A bivariate analysis showed a significant association with gender, month of confirmation/hospital admission, general health, chronic medical conditions, main income source, and living arrangement. After adjusting for a month of hospital admission and gender, the multivariate analysis yielded a VE of 82% (95% CI = 69-90%) against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations for those fully vaccinated and 53% (95% CI = 23-71%) for those partially vaccinated. Our study shows that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is effective in reducing the risk for COVID-19-associated hospitalizations of Lebanese elderly people (≥75 years old). Additional studies are warranted to explore VE in reducing hospitalizations for younger age groups, as well as reducing COVID-19 infections.

Outcomes associated with SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in individuals with natural and hybrid immunity

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection outcomes among individuals with previous infection (natural immunity) and previous infection plus vaccination (hybrid immunity) are limited.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study comparing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among patients with hybrid immunity (cases) and natural immunity (controls) from March 2020 to February 2022. Reinfection was defined as positive PCR > 90 days after initial laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Outcomes included time to reinfection, symptom severity, COVID-19-related hospitalization, critical COVID-19 illness (need for intensive care unit, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death), length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

A total of 773 (42%) vaccinated and 1073 (58%) unvaccinated patients with reinfection were included. Most patients (62.7%) were asymptomatic. Median time to reinfection was longer with hybrid immunity (391 [311-440] vs 294 [229-406] days, p < 0.001). Cases were less likely to be symptomatic (34.1% vs 39.6%, p = 0.001) or develop critical COVID-19 (2.3% vs 4.3%, p = 0.023). However, there was no significant difference in rates of COVID-19-related hospitalization (2.6% vs 3.8%, p = 0.142) or LOS (5 [2-9] vs 5 [3-10] days, p = 0.446). Boosted patients had longer time to reinfection (439 [IQR 372-467] vs 324 [IQR 256-414] days, p < 0.001) and were less likely to be symptomatic (26.8% vs 38%, p = 0.002) compared to unboosted patients. Rates of hospitalization, progression to critical illness and LOS were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Natural and hybrid immunity provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and hospitalization. However, hybrid immunity conferred stronger protection against symptomatic disease and progression to critical illness and was associated with longer time to reinfection. The stronger protection conferred by hybrid immunity against severe outcomes due to COVID-19 should be emphasized with the public to further the vaccination effort, especially in high-risk individuals.

A Meta-Analysis To Ascertain the Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With COVID-19 Infection in North America

The challenges in controlling the pandemic have been exacerbated by the disease's morbidity and the emergence of additional COVID-19 variants. The use of emergency vaccines to circumvent these challenges has sparked mixed opinions on their effectiveness. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines on clinical outcomes such as incidence, hospitalization, and ventilation rates in both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials were searched on April 21, 2022, to extract published articles comparing vaccinated COVID-19 patients versus unvaccinated COVID-19 patients and their clinical outcomes. The clinical outcomes studied were incidence rate, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, and hospitalization rates. The analysis was performed with Review Manager (RevMan) software. Random-effect models were used to calculate pooled odds ratio and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). In our meta-analysis, we have identified a total of 250 published findings, encompassing 15 studies that involved a cumulative count of 24,164,227 individuals diagnosed with COVID-19. Being unvaccinated had a significant association with severe clinical outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Unvaccinated individuals were 2.36 times more likely to be infected, with a 95% CI ranging from 1.13 to 4.94 (p = 0.02). Unvaccinated subjects with COVID-19 infection were 6.93 times more likely to be admitted to the ICU than their vaccinated counterparts, with a 95% CI ranging from 3.57 to 13.46 (p < 0.0001). The hospitalization rate was 3.37 higher among the unvaccinated compared to those vaccinated, with a 95% CI ranging from 1.92 to 5.93 (p < 0.0001). In addition, patients with COVID-19 infection who are unvaccinated were 6.44 times more likely to be mechanically ventilated than those vaccinated, with a 95% CI ranging from 3.13 to 13.23 (p < 0.0001). Overall, our study revealed that vaccination against COVID-19 disease is beneficial and effective in mitigating the spread of the infection and associated clinical outcomes. However, more awareness and proper education must be made to increase vaccine acceptance. We, therefore, recommend and urge all stakeholders involved in COVID-19 prevention, management, and control to strengthen awareness and educate the people on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccination, risk-compensatory behaviours, and contacts in the UK

The physiological effects of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) are well documented, yet the behavioural effects not well known. Risk compensation suggests that gains in personal safety, as a result of vaccination, are offset by increases in risky behaviour, such as socialising, commuting and working outside the home. This is potentially important because transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is driven by contacts, which could be amplified by vaccine-related risk compensation. Here, we show that behaviours were overall unrelated to personal vaccination, but-adjusting for variation in mitigation policies-were responsive to the level of vaccination in the wider population: individuals in the UK were risk compensating when rates of vaccination were rising. This effect was observed across four nations of the UK, each of which varied policies autonomously.

Relationships Between Social Vulnerability and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Coverage and Vaccine Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure risk and access to healthcare are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE.

METHODS

We used electronic health record data from 7 health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis.

RESULTS

In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.

Severity and Outcome of Post-Vaccine COVID-19 among Healthcare Workers in a University Hospital in India

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of COVID-19 infection despite vaccination. Limited data exist on COVID-19 cases among vaccinated HCWs. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of RT PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases in vaccinated HCWs, at a COVID clinic in a medical college hospital. This single-center, prospective cohort study included HCWs who received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine and tested positive for COVID-19 within 6 months. Data on demographics, symptoms, work category, COVID-19 vaccination interval, and infection severity were collected. Of 2381 vaccinated HCWs, 105 tested positive and were categorized as mild, moderate, or severe cases. Among vaccinated HCWs, 4.41% had post-vaccine COVID-19 infections. All 105 cases received the first dose, and 79 received the second dose. Of the cases, 47.6% were partially vaccinated, and 53.3% were breakthrough cases. The mean age was 30.90±8.69 years, with 63.8% male and 36.2% female cases. Most cases (85.7%) acquired infection in the hospital, and 47.6% had direct contact with COVID-19 patients. Common symptoms included fatigue (85.7%), fever (82.9%), and cough (64.8%). Among cases, 93.3% were mild, 5.7% were moderate, and 0.9% were severe. Hospital admission and supplemental oxygen therapy were required for moderate and severe cases. No mortality was reported. Certain variables were associated with age, preventive measures, workplace type, symptoms, and comorbidities. Breakthrough infections can occur among fully vaccinated HCWs but with reduced severity and mortality. Monitoring and infection control measures remain crucial even in vaccinated individuals. This study provides insights into clinical presentations, oxygen therapy requirements, and outcomes of post-vaccine COVID-19 cases among HCWs. The data will inform strategies for booster doses to prevent COVID-19.

Status of and perspectives on COVID-19 vaccination after lifting of the dynamic zero-COVID policy in China

On December 7, 2022, China's National Health Commission issued the Ten New Covid Rules lifting the dynamic zero-COVID policy. In the interim, vaccination campaigns continue to be promoted. We assessed the potential impacts on the status, perceptions, and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines via an online self-administered questionnaire. Among 1,170 participants, 1,142 (97.6%) participants were vaccinated against COVID-19, and 51.8% (591/1,142) have already received the booster. More than half of the participants who were vaccinated were ages 31 to 50 (51.8%). Participants believed the following strategies could improve the vaccination rate: timely feedback of the vaccination data (such as safety, efficacy, and other issues of public concern) from authoritative media (95.6%), increasing the number of vaccination sites and availability of vaccines and using more convenient methods of making appointment (95.2%), recommendations from friends and relatives (94.8%), and presenting the qualifications of the staff performing vaccination (89.1%). More measures, including targeted measures for different age groups and timely feedback on the vaccination data including safety and efficacy from authoritative media, are likely to help improve vaccination rates.

National epidemiological analysis of the association of COVID-19 vaccination and incidence of COVID-19 cases in Canada, January to August 2021

Background

In December 2020, Canada began its coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine rollout campaign. Canadians were vaccinated with differing time intervals between doses, vaccine products and vaccine schedules, based on age, timing of vaccination and jurisdiction. The objective of this study is to describe the epidemiology and association between the incidence of COVID-19 cases following vaccination, time since completion of primary series, time between doses and/or product combination and probability of developing severe outcomes.

Methods

The national COVID-19 case data and vaccination coverage data were extracted from the National COVID-19 Surveillance System, and the Canadian COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Surveillance System. Population estimates from Statistics Canada were used as denominators for rates and for number of people "not fully vaccinated". Two binomial generalized linear models were constructed for analysis.

Results

Within the analysis period, fully vaccinated (i.e. completed primary series) cases (n=17,206) were more commonly female and older, and had fewer reported severe outcomes relative to not fully vaccinated cases (n=615,999). Episode date of fully vaccinated cases most frequently occurred two months after receiving their second dose, and time-between doses of 29-49 and 50-77 days were most common. The probability of becoming a detected COVID-19 case in not fully vaccinated individuals was higher than those fully vaccinated. Those receiving two doses of AstraZeneca and those with shortest time intervals between doses had higher probabilities of becoming COVID-19 cases.

Conclusion

Findings from Canada's national surveillance systems support that being fully vaccinated against COVID-19, having a longer time interval between doses and receiving a messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine schedule compared to other vaccines reduce the probability of becoming a case, using data from January to August 2021.

Effectiveness of Three Doses of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines in the Hemodialysis Population during the Omicron Period

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness studies in the hemodialysis population have demonstrated that two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe complications when Alpha and Delta were predominant variants of concern. Vaccine effectiveness after a third dose versus two doses for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 in the hemodialysis population against Omicron is not known.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, between December 1, 2021, and February 28, 2022, in the maintenance hemodialysis population who had received two versus three doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. COVID-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 infection, and related hospitalization and death were determined from provincial databases. The primary outcome was the first RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, and the secondary outcome was a SARS-CoV-2-related severe outcome, defined as either hospitalization or death.

RESULTS

A total of 8457 individuals receiving in-center hemodialysis were included. At study initiation, 2334 (28%) individuals received three doses, which increased to 7468 (88%) individuals by the end of the study period. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50 to 0.67) and severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) (aHR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.56) were lower after three versus two doses of mRNA vaccine. Prior infection, independent of vaccine status, was associated with a lower risk of reinfection, with an aHR of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Three-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe SARS-CoV-2-related outcomes during the Omicron period compared with two doses.

Optimization of 5'UTR to evade SARS-CoV-2 Nonstructural protein 1-directed inhibition of protein synthesis in cells

Maximizing the expression level of therapeutic proteins in cells is the general goal for DNA/mRNA therapies. It is particularly challenging to achieve efficient protein expression in the cellular contexts with inhibited translation machineries, such as in the presence of cellular Nonstructural protein 1 (Nsp1) of coronaviruses (CoVs) that has been reported to inhibit overall protein synthesis of host genes and exogenously delivered mRNAs/DNAs. In this study, we thoroughly examined the sequence and structure contexts of viral and non-viral 5'UTRs that determine the protein expression levels of exogenously delivered DNAs and mRNAs in cells expressing SARS-CoV-2 Nsp1. It was found that high 5'-proximal A/U content promotes an escape from Nsp1-directed inhibition of protein synthesis and results in selective protein expression. Furthermore, 5'-proximal Cs were found to significantly enhance the protein expression in an Nsp1-dependent manner, while Gs located at a specific window close to the 5'-end counteract such enhancement. The distinct protein expression levels resulted from different 5'UTRs were found correlated to Nsp1-induced mRNA degradations. These findings ultimately enabled rational designs for optimized 5'UTRs that lead to strong expression of exogenous proteins regardless of the translationally repressive Nsp1. On the other hand, we have also identified several 5'-proximal sequences derived from host genes that are capable of mediating the escapes. These results provided novel perspectives to the optimizations of 5'UTRs for DNA/mRNA therapies and/or vaccinations, as well as shedding light on the potential host escapees from Nsp1-directed translational shutoffs. KEY POINTS: • The 5'-proximal SL1 and 5a/b derived from SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA promote exogenous protein synthesis in cells expressing Nsp1 comparing with non-specific 5'UTRs. • Specific 5'-proximal sequence contexts are the key determinants of the escapes from Nsp1-directed translational repression and thereby enhance protein expressions. • Systematic mutagenesis identified optimized 5'UTRs that strongly enhance protein expression and promote resistance to Nsp1-induced translational repression and RNA degradation.

Associations of habitual glucosamine use with SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospital admission and death with COVID-19: Evidence from a large population based cohort study

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a fundamental number of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Glucosamine was indicated to help prevent and control RNA virus infection preclinically, while its potential therapeutic effects on COVID-19-related outcomes are largely unknown. To assess the association of habitual glucosamine use with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hospital admission, and mortality with COVID-19 in a large population based cohort. Participants from UK Biobank were reinvited between June and September 2021 to have SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing. The associations between glucosamine use and the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection were estimated by logistic regression. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for COVID-19-related outcomes were calculated using COX proportional hazards model. Furthermore, we carried out propensity-score matching (PSM) and stratified analyses. At baseline, 42 673 (20.7%) of the 205 704 participants reported as habitual glucosamine users. During median follow-up of 1.67 years, there were 15 299 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 4214 cases of COVID-19 hospital admission, and 1141 cases of COVID-19 mortality. The fully adjusted odds ratio of SARS-CoV-2 infection with glucosamine use was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.92-1.01). The fully adjusted HR were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.87) for hospital admission, and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.69-0.95) for mortality. The logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard analyses after PSM yielded consistent results. Our study demonstrated that habitual glucosamine use is associated with reduced risks of hospital admission and death with COVID-19, but not the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Combining viral genomics and clinical data to assess risk factors for severe COVID-19 (mortality, ICU admission, or intubation) amongst hospital patients in a large acute UK NHS hospital Trust

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, valuable datasets have been collected on the effects of the virus SARS-CoV-2. In this study, we combined whole genome sequencing data with clinical data (including clinical outcomes, demographics, comorbidity, treatment information) for 929 patient cases seen at a large UK hospital Trust between March 2020 and May 2021. We identified associations between acute physiological status and three measures of disease severity; admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), requirement for intubation, and mortality. Whilst the maximum National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) was moderately associated with severe COVID-19 (A = 0.48), the admission NEWS2 was only weakly associated (A = 0.17), suggesting it is ineffective as an early predictor of severity. Patient outcome was weakly associated with myriad factors linked to acute physiological status and human genetics, including age, sex and pre-existing conditions. Overall, we found no significant links between viral genomics and severe outcomes, but saw evidence that variant subtype may impact relative risk for certain sub-populations. Specific mutations of SARS-CoV-2 appear to have little impact on overall severity risk in these data, suggesting that emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants do not result in more severe patient outcomes. However, our results show that determining a causal relationship between mutations and severe COVID-19 in the viral genome is challenging. Whilst improved understanding of the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 has been achieved through genomics, few studies on how these evolutionary changes impact on clinical outcomes have been seen due to complexities associated with data linkage. By combining viral genomics with patient records in a large acute UK hospital, this study represents a significant resource for understanding risk factors associated with COVID-19 severity. However, further understanding will likely arise from studies of the role of host genetics on disease progression.

Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster doses against Omicron severe outcomes

We estimated the effectiveness of booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among adults in Ontario, Canada. We used a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization or death among SARS-CoV-2-tested adults aged ≥50 years from January 2 to October 1, 2022, stratified by age and time since vaccination. We also compared VE during BA.1/BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 sublineage predominance. We included 11,160 cases and 62,880 tests for test-negative controls. Depending on the age group, compared to unvaccinated adults, VE was 91-98% 7-59 days after a third dose, waned to 76-87% after ≥240 days, was restored to 92-97% 7-59 days after a fourth dose, and waned to 86-89% after ≥120 days. VE was lower and declined faster during BA.4/BA.5 versus BA.1/BA.2 predominance, particularly after ≥120 days. Here we show that booster doses of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines restored strong protection against severe outcomes for at least 3 months after vaccination. Across the entire study period, protection declined slightly over time, but waned more during BA.4/BA.5 predominance.

Association of COVID-19 Vaccination With Breakthrough Infections and Complications in Patients With Cancer

Importance

Patients with cancer are known to have increased risk of COVID-19 complications, including death.

Objective

To determine the association of COVID-19 vaccination with breakthrough infections and complications in patients with cancer compared to noncancer controls.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective population-based cohort study using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, in residents 18 years and older who received COVID-19 vaccination. Three matched groups were identified (based on age, sex, type of vaccine, date of vaccine): 1:4 match for patients with hematologic and solid cancer to noncancer controls (hematologic and solid cancers separately analyzed), 1:1 match between patients with hematologic and patients with solid cancer.

Exposures

Cancer diagnosis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes occurring 14 days after receipt of second COVID-19 vaccination dose: primary outcome was SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection; secondary outcomes were emergency department visit, hospitalization, and death within 4 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 infection (end of follow-up March 31, 2022). Multivariable cumulative incidence function models were used to obtain adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% CIs.

Results

A total of 289 400 vaccinated patients with cancer (39 880 hematologic; 249 520 solid) with 1 157 600 matched noncancer controls were identified; the cohort was 65.4% female, and mean (SD) age was 66 (14.0) years. SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection was higher in patients with hematologic cancer (aHR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.20-1.46; P < .001) but not in patients with solid cancer (aHR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.96-1.05; P = .87). COVID-19 severe outcomes (composite of hospitalization and death) were significantly higher in patients with cancer compared to patients without cancer (aHR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.42-1.63; P < .001). Risk of severe outcomes was higher among patients with hematologic cancer (aHR, 2.51; 95% CI, 2.21-2.85; P < .001) than patients with solid cancer (aHR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.24-1.64; P < .001). Patients receiving active treatment had a further heightened risk for COVID-19 severe outcomes, particularly those who received anti-CD20 therapy. Third vaccination dose was associated with lower infection and COVID-19 complications, except for patients receiving anti-CD20 therapy.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this large population-based cohort study, patients with cancer had greater risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and worse outcomes than patients without cancer, and the risk was highest for patients with hematologic cancer and any patients with cancer receiving active treatment. Triple vaccination was associated with lower risk of poor outcomes.

Addressing misclassification bias in vaccine effectiveness studies with an application to Covid-19

Safe and effective vaccines are crucial for the control of Covid-19 and to protect individuals at higher risk of severe disease. The test-negative design is a popular option for evaluating the effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines. However, the findings could be biased by several factors, including imperfect sensitivity and/or specificity of the test used for diagnosing the SARS-Cov-2 infection. We propose a simple Bayesian modeling approach for estimating vaccine effectiveness that is robust even when the diagnostic test is imperfect. We use simulation studies to demonstrate the robustness of our method to misclassification bias and illustrate the utility of our approach using real-world examples.

Current Challenges With the Use of Test-Negative Designs for Modeling COVID-19 Vaccination and Outcomes

The widespread testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection has facilitated the use of test-negative designs (TNDs) for modeling coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and outcomes. Despite the comprehensive literature on TND, the use of TND in COVID-19 studies is relatively new and calls for robust design and analysis to adapt to a rapidly changing and dynamically evolving pandemic and to account for changes in testing and reporting practices. In this commentary, we aim to draw the attention of researchers to COVID-specific challenges in using TND as we are analyzing data amassed over more than two years of the pandemic. We first review when and why TND works and general challenges in TND studies presented in the literature. We then discuss COVID-specific challenges which have not received adequate acknowledgment but may add to the risk of invalid conclusions in TND studies of COVID-19.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 against SARS-CoV-2 household transmission: a prospective cohort study in England

Background: The ability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to protect against infection and onward transmission determines whether immunisation can control global circulation. We estimated the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) and Oxford AstraZeneca adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx1) vaccines against acquisition and transmission of the Alpha and Delta variants in a prospective household study in England. Methods: Households were recruited based on adult purported index cases testing positive after reverse transcription-quantitative (RT-q)PCR testing of oral-nasal swabs. Purported index cases and their household contacts took oral-nasal swabs on days 1, 3 and 7 after enrolment and a subset of the PCR-positive swabs underwent genomic sequencing conducted on a subset. We used Bayesian logistic regression to infer vaccine effectiveness against acquisition and transmission, adjusted for age, vaccination history and variant. Results: Between 2 February 2021 and 10 September 2021, 213 index cases and 312 contacts were followed up. After excluding households lacking genomic proximity (N=2) or with unlikely serial intervals (N=16), 195 households with 278 contacts remained, of whom 113 (41%) became PCR positive. Delta lineages had 1.53 times the risk (95% Credible Interval: 1.04 – 2.20) of transmission than Alpha; contacts older than 18 years old were 1.48 (1.20 – 1.91) and 1.02 (0.93 – 1.16) times more likely to acquire an Alpha or Delta infection than children. Effectiveness of two doses of BNT162b2 against transmission of Delta was 36% (-1%, 66%) and 49% (18%, 73%) for ChAdOx1, similar to their effectiveness for Alpha. Protection against infection with Alpha was higher than for Delta, 69% (9%, 95%) vs. 18% (-11%, 59%), respectively, for BNT162b2 and 24% (-41%, 72%) vs. 9% (-15%, 42%), respectively, for ChAdOx1. Conclusions: BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 reduce transmission of the Delta variant from breakthrough infections in the household setting, although their protection against infection within this setting is low.

Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccines Against Hospitalization and Death in Canada: A Multiprovincial, Test-Negative Design Study

BACKGROUND

A major goal of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of messenger RNA (mRNA) and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in 4 Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021.

METHODS

We conducted this multiprovincial, retrospective, test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We included 2 508 296 tested participants, with 31 776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose and 98% after a second dose against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes, effectiveness was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95% CI, 96%-99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95% CI, 75%-94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95% CI, 91%-99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower 1-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants.

CONCLUSIONS

Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccine provide excellent protection against severe outcomes.

Autopsies Revealed Pathological Features of COVID-19 in Unvaccinated vs. Vaccinated Patients

Background: In Italy, by the end of 2021, a new pandemic wave led to increased hospitalizations and death, even in some vaccinated people. We aimed to investigate the death of COVID-19-vaccinated patients who acquired infection and developed severe disease, and to assess differences with fatal COVID-19 in unvaccinated subjects by studying the pathological events triggered by SARS-CoV-2. Methods: Detailed autoptic examination was performed on five fully vaccinated compared to five unvaccinated patients. Histopathological analysis focused on the lung and heart, the two major affected organs. Results: COVID-19 caused, or contributed to death, in all the unvaccinated cases. By contrast, in vaccinated group, pre-existing pathologies played a major role, and death was not COVID-19-related in four out of five patients. These patients did not show the histological features of SARS-CoV-2 lung damage. Diffuse inflammatory macrophages infiltration recently emerged as the main feature of COVID-19 cardiac injury. Interestingly, the most striking difference between the two groups was the absence of increased macrophage infiltration in the heart of vaccinated patients. Conclusions: Results of this study confirm the efficacy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in protecting organs from injury and support the need to maintain an adequate immune response by booster dose administration.

Population-based evaluation of the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for reducing hospital admissions and mortality from COVID-19

BACKGROUND

A randomized controlled trial involving a high-risk, unvaccinated population that was conducted before the Omicron variant emerged found that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was effective in preventing progression to severe COVID-19. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in preventing severe COVID-19 while Omicron and its subvariants predominate.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study in Ontario that included all residents who were older than 17 years of age and had a positive polymerase chain reaction test for SARS-CoV-2 between Apr. 4 and Aug. 31, 2022. We compared patients treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir with patients who were not treated and measured the primary outcome of hospital admission from COVID-19 or all-cause death at 1-30 days, and a secondary outcome of all-cause death. We used weighted logistic regression to calculate weighted odds ratios (ORs) with confidence intervals (CIs) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for confounding.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 177 545 patients, 8876 (5.0%) who were treated with nirmatrelvir-ritonavir and 168 669 (95.0%) who were not treated. The groups were well balanced with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics after applying stabilized IPTW. We found that the occurrence of hospital admission or death was lower in the group given nirmatrelvir-ritonavir than in those who were not (2.1% v. 3.7%; weighted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47-0.67). For death alone, the weighted OR was 0.49 (95% CI 0.39-0.62). Our findings were similar across strata of age, drug-drug interactions, vaccination status and comorbidities. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 case of severe COVID-19 was 62 (95% CI 43-80), which varied across strata.

INTERPRETATION

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was associated with significantly reduced odds of hospital admission and death from COVID-19, which supports use to treat patients with mild COVID-19 who are at risk for severe disease.

Maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy and delta or omicron infection or hospital admission in infants: test negative design study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effectiveness of maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy against delta and omicron severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and hospital admission in infants.

DESIGN

Test negative design study.

SETTING

Community and hospital testing in Ontario, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

Infants younger than six months of age, born between 7 May 2021 and 31 March 2022, who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 7 May 2021 and 5 September 2022.

INTERVENTION

Maternal mRNA covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Laboratory confirmed delta or omicron infection or hospital admission of the infant. Multivariable logistic regression estimated vaccine effectiveness, with adjustments for clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with vaccination and infection.

RESULTS

8809 infants met eligibility criteria, including 99 delta cases (4365 controls) and 1501 omicron cases (4847 controls). Infant vaccine effectiveness from two maternal doses was 95% (95% confidence interval 88% to 98%) against delta infection and 97% (73% to 100%) against infant hospital admission due to delta and 45% (37% to 53%) against omicron infection and 53% (39% to 64%) against hospital admission due to omicron. Vaccine effectiveness for three doses was 73% (61% to 80%) against omicron infection and 80% (64% to 89%) against hospital admission due to omicron. Vaccine effectiveness for two doses against infant omicron infection was highest with the second dose in the third trimester (53% (42% to 62%)) compared with the first (47% (31% to 59%)) or second (37% (24% to 47%)) trimesters. Vaccine effectiveness for two doses against infant omicron infection decreased from 57% (44% to 66%) between birth and eight weeks to 40% (21% to 54%) after 16 weeks of age.

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal covid-19 vaccination with a second dose during pregnancy was highly effective against delta and moderately effective against omicron infection and hospital admission in infants during the first six months of life. A third vaccine dose bolstered protection against omicron. Effectiveness for two doses was highest with maternal vaccination in the third trimester, and effectiveness decreased in infants beyond eight weeks of age.