Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1 variant outbreak in a defined cohort: an epidemiological investigation incorporating longitudinal assessment of humoral response

BACKGROUND

We describe an epidemiological investigation of a COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2-XBB.1 outbreak among healthcare workers (HCWs) returning from a 5-days educational tour abroad.

METHODS

We prospectively followed participants for symptoms and sampled blood for neutralization assays of four SARS-CoV-2 variants (wild type, XBB, EG.5.1, and BA.2.86) at 1, 3, and 6 months after their return. When available, samples from the 3 months preceding the outbreak were also tested. We compared geometric mean titers (GMT) of neutralizing antibody titers of infected vs uninfected HCWs and febrile vs afebrile infected HCWs.

RESULTS

Nineteen (10%) of 181 HCWs were infected, all had mild COVID-19, 90% (17/19) had symptoms, and 16% (3/19) reported fever. Infected individuals tended to have lower pre-exposure XBB-neutralizing antibody titers (GMT of 32 vs 107 ID50, p=0.248). Neutralization against XBB and newer sub-variants peaked at 3 months and was higher among infected individuals (GMT 702 vs 156 [p<0.001], 558 vs 163 [p=0.001], and 558 vs 182 [p=0.002], ID50 for XBB, EG.5.1., and BA.2.86, respectively). By six months, these differences were no longer observed. Fever was positively associated with XBB neutralization (GMT 3474 vs 485, ID50 p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Recently infected individuals are protected from reinfection with newer sub-variants. However, protection is likely short lived.

Immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of a second booster with BNT162b2 or full-dose mRNA-1273: A randomized VACCELERATE trial in adults aged ≥75 years (EU-COVAT-1-AGED Part B)

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and immunogenicity of a fourth vaccination (second booster) in individuals aged ≥75 years.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, 30 µg) or messenger RNA (mRNA)-1273 (Spikevax, 100 µg). The primary end point was the rate of two-fold antibody titer increase 14 days after vaccination, targeting the receptor binding domain (RBD) region of wild-type SARS-CoV-2. The secondary end points included changes in neutralizing activity against wild-type and 25 variants. Safety was assessed by monitoring solicited adverse events (AEs) for 7 days.

RESULTS

A total of 269 participants (mean age 81 years, mRNA-1273 n = 135/BNT162b2 n = 134) were included. Two-fold anti-RBD immunoglobulin (Ig) G titer increase was achieved by 101 of 129 (78%) and 116 of 133 (87%) subjects in the BNT162b2 and the mRNA-1273 group, respectively (P = 0.054). A second booster of mRNA-1273 provided higher anti-RBD IgG geometric mean titer: 21.326 IU/mL (95% confidence interval: 18.235-24.940) vs BNT162b2: 15.181 IU/mL (95% confidence interval: 13.172-17.497). A higher neutralizing activity was noted for the mRNA-1273 group. The most frequent AE was pain at the injection site (51% in mRNA-1273 and 48% in BNT162b2). Participants in the mRNA-1273 group had less vaccine-related AEs (30% vs 39%).

CONCLUSIONS

A second booster of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 provided substantial IgG increase. Full-dose mRNA-1273 provided higher IgG levels and neutralizing capacity against SARS-CoV-2, with similar safety profile for subjects of advanced age.

Worldwide SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection: Emerging sub-variants and future vaccination perspectives

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has sparked widespread concern globally, particularly with the Omicron variant and its sub-lineages emerging as the predominant cause of infection for nearly two years. Taiwan's successful containment of COVID-19, underscored by broad vaccine coverage, the utilization of anti-viral therapeutics, and timely response strategies, has resulted in reduced excess mortality. Moreover, there is a crucial need for a phased exit strategy, balancing efforts to curtail disease transmission with the mitigation of socioeconomic impacts from rigorous measures. In this review, we examined the evolution and the epidemiological landscape of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron sub-variants in Taiwan as well as other countries of the world. We also critically evaluated the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against various SARS-CoV-2 variants. Additionally, we addressed the advantages of heterologous immunization strategies, fluctuations in neutralizing antibody titers, and complexities in establishing protective correlates among swiftly mutating viral variants.

Effect of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease on BNT162b2 immunogenicity against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 omicron variant

BACKGROUND AND AIM

We aimed to investigate the effect of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) on three-dose BNT162b2 immunogenicity to the omicron variant.

METHODS

Adult recipients of three doses of BNT162b2 were prospectively recruited between May and December 2021. The serology of the neutralizing antibody by live virus microneutralization (vMN) to the omicron variant was measured at baseline, day 180, and day 360 after the first dose. The primary outcome was seroconversion (vMN titer ≥ 10) at day 360. Exposure of interest was MASLD, defined as hepatic steatosis (controlled attenuation parameter ≥ 248 dB/m on transient elastography) plus at least one of five cardiometabolic risk factors. Subjects with prior COVID-19 were excluded. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to derive the adjusted odds ratio of seroconversion with MASLD by adjusting for age, sex, antibiotic use, and proton pump inhibitor use.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-eight BNT162b2 recipients (male: 48 [32.4%]; median age: 51.0 years [interquartile range, IQR: 44.5-57.3]) were recruited. The median time from the first dose to the third dose was 8.5 months (IQR: 7.9-8.9). MASLD subjects had a lower seroconversion rate than non-MASLD ones (89.6% vs 99.0%; P = 0.007). MASLD was the only independent risk factor for seroconversion (adjusted odds ratio: 0.051, 95% confidence interval: 0.002-0.440). Subgroup analysis of immunogenicity at 4 months after the third dose shows significantly lower vMN titer (13.06 [IQR: 7.69-22.20] vs 33.49 [IQR: 24.05-46.53]; P = 0.004) and seroconversion rate (76.9% vs 97.4%; P = 0.016) in MASLD than non-MASLD subjects, but not within 4 months from the third dose (vMN titer: 46.87 [IQR: 33.12-66.02] vs 41.86 [IQR: 34.47-50.91], P = 0.240; seroconversion rate: 94.3% vs 100%, P = 0.131).

CONCLUSION

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease was a risk factor for poorer immunogenicity to the omicron variant, with a more pronounced waning effect compared among three-dose BNT162b2 recipients.

Hybrid immunity protection against SARS-CoV-2 and severe COVID-19 in kidney transplantation: A retrospective, comparative cohort study

Hybrid immunity, resulting from a combination of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination, offers robust protection against COVID-19 in the general population. However, its impact on immunocompromised patients remains unexplored. We investigated the effect of hybrid immunity against the Omicron variant in a population of kidney transplant recipients receiving the fourth dose mRNA monovalent vaccination. By extracting data from the clinical records and performing individual interviews, participants were categorized into the hybrid cohort (previously infected and vaccinated individuals) and the vaccine cohort (vaccinated-only individuals). The study comprised 1114 participants, 442 in the hybrid and 672 in the vaccine cohorts. From April 2022 to August 2023, 286 infections, 38 hospitalizations and 9 deaths were reported. The cumulative incidence of infection was 12.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.03-16.03) for the hybrid cohort and 36.54% (95% CI, 32.81-40.54) for the vaccine cohort after 300 days of follow-up. Hybrid immunity was associated to a 72% lower risk of infection (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.21-0.38) and a 96% lower risk of hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.32). No deaths occurred in the hybrid cohort. Hybrid immunity was associated with a lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19, underscoring its importance for risk stratification in this vulnerable patient population.

Association between COVID-19 vaccination and stroke: a nationwide case-control study in Qatar

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the association between Coronavirus Disease 2019 mRNA vaccination and stroke in Qatar.

METHODS

Between December 1, 2020, and April 11, 2023, a matched case-control study was conducted to investigate the association between 3036 acute stroke cases and 3036 controls drawn from the entire population of Qatar.

RESULTS

The adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for vaccination among cases compared to controls was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.75-1.00). The aOR was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.45-1.23) for a single vaccine dose, 0.87 (95% CI: 0.73-1.04) for primary-series vaccination (two doses), and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.66-1.25) for booster vaccination (three or more doses). The aOR was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.72-1.04) for BNT162b2 and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.67-1.11) for mRNA-1273. Subgroup analyses, considering different durations since vaccination, also demonstrated no association. Subgroup analyses based on nationality, age, number of coexisting conditions, or prior infection status yielded similar results. Subgroup analysis, stratified by stroke type, suggested an association between vaccination and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (aOR of 2.50 [95% CI: 0.97-6.44]), but it did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

There was no evidence of an increased risk of stroke following vaccination, both in the short term and in the long term, extending beyond a year after receiving the vaccine.

Real-World Effectiveness of a Third Dose of mRNA-1273 Versus BNT162b2 on Inpatient and Medically Attended COVID-19 Among Immunocompromised US Adults

INTRODUCTION

Recent data have shown elevated infection rates in several subpopulations at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19, including immunocompromised (IC) individuals. Previous research suggests that IC persons have reduced risks of hospitalization and medically attended COVID-19 with two doses of mRNA-1273 (SpikeVax; Moderna) compared to two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty; Pfizer/BioNTech). The main objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare real-world effectiveness of third doses of mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 at multiple time points on occurrence of COVID-19 hospitalization and medically attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the United States (US).

METHODS

This retrospective, observational comparative effectiveness study identified patients from the US HealthVerity database from December 11, 2020, through August 31, 2022. Medically attended SARS-CoV-2 infections and hospitalizations were assessed following a three-dose mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 regimen. Inverse probability weighting was applied to balance baseline confounders between vaccine groups. Relative risk (RR) and risk difference were calculated for subgroup and sensitivity analyses using a non-parametric method.

RESULTS

In propensity score-adjusted analyses, receiving mRNA-1273 vs. BNT162b2 as third dose was associated with 32.4% (relative risk 0.676; 95% confidence interval 0.506-0.887), 29.3% (0.707; 0.573-0.858), and 23.4% (0.766; 0.626-0.927) lower risk of COVID-19 hospitalization after 90, 180, and 270 days, respectively. Corresponding reductions in medically attended COVID-19 were 8.4% (0.916; 0.860-0.976), 6.4% (0.936; 0.895-0.978), and 2.4% (0.976; 0.935-1.017), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest a third dose of mRNA-1273 is more effective than a third dose of BNT162b2 in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization and breakthrough medically attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the US.

Persistent differences in the immunogenicity of the two COVID-19 primary vaccines series, modulated by booster mRNA vaccination and breakthrough infection

INTRODUCTION

The long-term impact of initial immunogenicity induced by different primary COVID-19 vaccine series remains unclear.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted at 10 tertiary hospitals in Korea from March 2021 to September 2022. Immunogenicity assessments included anti-spike protein antibody (Sab), SARS-CoV-2-specific interferon-gamma releasing assay (IGRA), and multiplex cytokine assays for spike protein-stimulated plasma. Spike proteins derived from wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and alpha variant (Spike1) and beta and gamma variant (Spike2) were utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 235 healthcare workers who had received a two-dose primary vaccine series of either ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2, followed by a third booster dose of BNT162b2 (166 in the ChAdOx1/ChAdOx1/BNT162b2 (CCB) group and 69 in the BNT162b2/BNT162b2/BNT162b2 (BBB) group, based on the vaccine series) were included. Following the primary vaccine series, the BBB group exhibited significantly higher increases in Sab levels, IGRA responses, and multiple cytokines (CCL2/MCP-1, CCL3/MIP-1α, CCL4/MIP-1β, interleukin (IL)-1ra, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-4, and IL-10) compared to the CCB group (all P < 0.05). One month after the third BNT162b2 booster, the CCB group showed Sab levels comparable to those of the BBB group, and both groups exhibited lower levels after six months without breakthrough infections (BIs). However, among those who experienced BA.1/2 BIs after the third booster, Sab levels increased significantly more in the BBB group than in the CCB group (P < 0.001). IGRA responses to both Spike1 and Spike2 proteins were significantly stronger in the BBB group than the CCB group after the third booster, while only the Spike2 response were higher after BIs (P = 0.007). The BBB group exhibited stronger enhancement of T-cell cytokines (IL-2, IL-4, and IL-17A) after BIs than in the CCB group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Differences in immunogenicity induced by the two primary vaccine series persisted, modulated by subsequent booster vaccinations and BIs.

Immunogenicity of a bivalent BA.1 COVID-19 booster vaccine in people with HIV in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the immunogenicity of a bivalent BA.1 COVID-19 booster vaccine in people with HIV (PWH).

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

METHODS

PWH aged ≥45 years received Wuhan-BA.1 mRNA-1273.214 and those <45 years Wuhan-BA.1 BNT162b2. Participants were propensity score-matched 1 : 2 to people without HIV (non-PWH) by age, primary vaccine platform (mRNA-based or vector-based), number of prior COVID-19 boosters and SARS-CoV-2 infections, and spike (S1)-specific antibodies on the day of booster administration. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of ancestral S1-specific antibodies from day 0 to 28 in PWH compared to non-PWH. Secondary endpoints included humoral responses, T-cell responses and cytokine responses up to 180 days post-vaccination.

RESULTS

Forty PWH received mRNA-1273.214 ( N  = 35) or BNT162b2 ( N  = 5) following mRNA-based ( N  = 29) or vector-based ( N  = 11) primary vaccination. PWH were predominantly male (87% vs. 26% of non-PWH) and median 57 years [interquartile range (IQR) 53-59]. Their median CD4 + T-cell count was 775 (IQR 511-965) and the plasma HIV-RNA load was <50 copies/ml in 39/40. The GMR of S1-specific antibodies by 28 days post-vaccination was comparable between PWH [4.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.24-6.19] and non-PWH (4.07, 95% CI 3.42-4.83). S1-specific antibody responses were comparable between PWH and non-PWH up to 180 days, and T-cell responses up to 90 days post-vaccination. Interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-2, and IL-4 cytokine concentrations increased 28 days post-vaccination in PWH.

CONCLUSION

A bivalent BA.1 booster vaccine was immunogenic in well treated PWH, eliciting comparable humoral responses to non-PWH. However, T-cell responses waned faster after 90 days in PWH compared to non-PWH.

COVID-19 Booster Vaccination Status and Long COVID in the United States: A Nationally Representative Cross-Sectional Study

Early studies have found that the initial COVID-19 vaccination series was protective against severe symptoms and long COVID. However, few studies have explored the association of booster doses on severe disease outcomes and long COVID. This cross-sectional analysis used data from the 2022 US National Health Interview Survey data to investigate how vaccination status correlates with COVID-19 infection severity and long COVID among previously infected individuals. Participants were categorized into three groups: those who had received at least one booster, those with only the initial complete vaccination series, and those with either an incomplete series or no vaccinations. Out of 9521 survey respondents who reported a past positive COVID-19 test, 51.2% experienced moderate/severe infections, and 17.6% experienced long COVID. Multivariable regression models revealed that receiving at least one booster shot was associated with lower odds of experiencing moderate/severe symptoms (aOR = 0.78, p < 0.001) compared to those unvaccinated or with an incomplete series. Additionally, having at least one booster reduced long COVID odds by 24% (aOR = 0.76, p = 0.003). Completing only the primary vaccine series did not significantly decrease the likelihood of severe illness or long COVID. These findings support the continued promotion of booster vaccinations to mitigate long COVID risks in vulnerable populations.

Effectiveness of the fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccines against severe COVID-19 among adults 40 years or older in Brazil: a population-based cohort study

Background

The emergence of COVID-19 variants with immune scape and the waning of primary vaccine schemes effectiveness have prompted many countries to indicate first and second booster COVID-19 vaccine doses to prevent severe COVID-19. However, current available evidence on second booster dose effectiveness are mostly limited to high-income countries, older adults, and mRNA-based vaccination schemes scenarios. We aimed to investigate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the fourth dose compared to three doses for severe COVID-19 outcomes in Brazil; and compare the rVE of a fourth dose with an mRNA vaccine compared to adenovirus-based product in the same settings.

Methods

We performed a target emulated trial using a population-based cohort of individuals aged 40 years or older who have received a homologous primary scheme of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, or BNT162b2, and any third dose product and were eligible for the fourth dose in Brazil. The primary outcome was COVID-19 associated hospitalization or death. We built Cohort A matching individuals vaccinated with a fourth dose to individuals who received three doses to estimate the rVE of the fourth dose. We built Cohort B, a subset of Cohort A, matching mRNA-based (mRNA) to adenovirus-based fourth dose vaccinated individuals to compare their relative hazards for severe COVID-19.

Findings

46,693,484 individuals were included in Cohort A and 6,763,016 in Cohort B. 45% of them were aged between 40 and 60 years old, and 48% between 60 and 79 years old. In Cohort A, the most common previous series was a ChAdOx1 two-dose followed by BNT162b2 (44%), and a CoronaVac two-dose followed by a BNT162b2 (36%). Among those fourth dose vaccinated, 36.9% received ChAdOx1, 32.7% Ad26.COV2.S, 25.8% BNT162b2, and 4.7% CoronaVac. In Cohort B, among those who received an adenovirus fourth dose, 53.7% received ChAdOx1 and 46.3% received Ad26.COV2.S. The estimated rVE for the primary outcome of four doses compared to three doses was 44.1% (95% CI 42.3-46.0), with some waning during follow-up (rVE 7-60 days 46.8% [95% CI 44.4-49.1], rVE after 120 days 33.8% [95% CI 18.0-46.6]). Among fourth dose vaccinated individuals, mRNA-based vaccinated individuals had lower hazards for hospitalization or death compared to adenovirus-vaccinated individuals (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87). After 120 days, no difference in hazards between groups was observed (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.93-1.97). Similar findings were observed for hospitalization and death separately, except no evidence for differences between fourth dose brands for death in Cohort B.

Interpretation

In a heterogeneous scenario of primary and first booster vaccination combinations, a fourth dose provided meaningful and durable protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes. Compared to adenovirus-based booster, a fourth dose wild-type mRNA vaccine was associated with immediate lower hazards of hospitalization or death unsustained after 120 days.

Funding

None.

Effectiveness of two and three doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines against infection, symptoms, and severity in the pre-omicron era: A time-dependent gradient

BACKGROUND

Vaccines were developed and deployed to combat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. This study aimed to characterize patterns in the protection provided by the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 mRNA vaccines against a spectrum of SARS-CoV-2 infection symptoms and severities.

METHODS

A national, matched, test-negative, case-control study was conducted in Qatar between January 1 and December 18, 2021, utilizing a sample of 238,896 PCR-positive tests and 6,533,739 PCR-negative tests. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated against asymptomatic, symptomatic, severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), critical COVID-19, and fatal COVID-19 infections. Data sources included Qatar's national databases for COVID-19 laboratory testing, vaccination, hospitalization, and death.

RESULTS

Effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 75.6% (95% CI: 73.6-77.5) against asymptomatic infection and 76.5% (95% CI: 75.1-77.9) against symptomatic infection. Effectiveness against each of severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19 infections surpassed 90%. Immediately after the second dose, all categories-namely, asymptomatic, symptomatic, severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19-exhibited similarly high effectiveness. However, from 181 to 270 days post-second dose, effectiveness against asymptomatic and symptomatic infections declined to below 40%, while effectiveness against each of severe, critical, and fatal COVID-19 infections remained consistently high. However, estimates against fatal COVID-19 often had wide 95% confidence intervals. Analogous patterns were observed in three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination and two- and three-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results.

CONCLUSION

A gradient in vaccine effectiveness exists and is linked to the symptoms and severity of infection, providing higher protection against more symptomatic and severe cases. This gradient intensifies over time as vaccine immunity wanes after the last vaccine dose. These patterns appear consistent irrespective of the vaccine type or whether the vaccination involves the primary series or a booster.

Antibody responses in blood and saliva post COVID-19 bivalent booster do not reveal an Omicron BA.4/BA.5- specific response

Introduction

Current SARS-CoV-2 strains continue to mutate and attempt to evade the antibody response elicited by previous exposures and vaccinations. In September of 2022, the first updated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, designed to create immune responses specific for the variants circulating in 2022, were approved. These new vaccines, known commonly as the bivalent boost(er), include mRNA that encodes both the original Wuhan-Hu-1 spike protein as well as the spike protein specific to the Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 variants.

Methods

We recruited volunteers from University of Massachusetts student, faculty and staff members to provide samples of blood and saliva at four different time points, including pre-boost and three times post boost and analyzed samples for antibody production as well as neutralization of virus.

Results

Our data provide a comprehensive analysis of the antibody response following a single dose of the bivalent boost over a 6-month period and support previous findings that the response induced after the bivalent boost does not create a strong BA.4/BA.5-specific antibody response.

Conclusion

We found no evidence of a specific anti-BA.4/BA.5 response developing over time, including in a sub-population of individuals who become infected after a single dose of the bivalent booster. Additionally, we present data that support the use of saliva samples as a reliable alternative to blood for antibody detection against specific SARS-CoV-2 antigens.

Incidence and outcome of COVID-19 following vaccine and hybrid immunity in patients on immunosuppressive therapy: identification of protective post-immunisation anti-RBD antibody levels in a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To assess incidence, severity and predictors of COVID-19, including protective post-vaccination levels of antibodies to the receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (anti-RBD), informing further vaccine strategies for patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) on immunosuppressive medication.

METHODS

IMIDs on immunosuppressives and healthy controls (HC) receiving SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were included in this prospective observational study. COVID-19 and outcome were registered and anti-RBD antibodies measured 2-5 weeks post-immunisation.

RESULTS

Between 15 February 2021 and 15 February 2023, 1729 IMIDs and 350 HC provided blood samples and self-reported COVID-19. The incidence of COVID-19 was 66% in patients and 67% in HC, with re-infection occurring in 12% of patients. Severe COVID-19 was recorded in 22 (2%) patients and no HC. No COVID-19-related deaths occurred. Vaccine-induced immunity gave higher risk of COVID-19 (HR 5.89 (95% CI 4.45 to 7.80)) than hybrid immunity. Post-immunisation anti-RBD levels <6000 binding antibody units/mL were associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 following three (HR 1.37 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.74)) and four doses (HR 1.28 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.62)), and of COVID-19 re-infection (HR 4.47 (95% CI 1.87 to 10.67)).

CONCLUSION

Vaccinated patients with IMID have a low risk of severe COVID-19. Hybrid immunity lowers the risk of infection. High post-immunisation anti-RBD levels protect against COVID-19. These results suggest that knowledge on COVID-19 history, and assessment of antibody levels post-immunisation can help individualise vaccination programme series in high-risk individuals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04798625.

Immune responses to mRNA-based vaccines given as a third COVID-19 vaccine dose in people living with HIV-a literature review

People living with HIV (PLWH) were not included in the first efficacy studies of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. In this literature review, we investigate evidence of humoral and cellular immunity after a third dose of an mRNA vaccine in PLWH. We performed a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and SCOPUS published between 1 January 2020 and 31 December 2022. Selection criteria were studies on immunological responses in PLWH, who were given an mRNA-based vaccine as a third vaccine dose against SARS-CoV-2. Eight articles complied with our selection criteria. All studies found a strong humoral response after the third dose. Five studies investigated cellular immunity and found an increased cellular response after the third vaccine dose in PLWH. No difference in humoral response was observed between PLWH and controls after three doses. However, some of the studies suggested a weaker cellular response among PLWH than in controls, which was associated with lower nadir or current CD4+ T-cell counts. In conclusion, we found evidence of strong humoral immunity in PLWH after receiving an mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine as a third dose, while the cellular immunity may be impaired compared to controls.

Addressing bias in the definition of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection: implications for underestimation

Introduction

Reinfections are increasingly becoming a feature in the epidemiology of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, accurately defining reinfection poses methodological challenges. Conventionally, reinfection is defined as a positive test occurring at least 90 days after a previous infection diagnosis. Yet, this extended time window may lead to an underestimation of reinfection occurrences. This study investigated the prospect of adopting an alternative, shorter time window for defining reinfection.

Methods

A longitudinal study was conducted to assess the incidence of reinfections in the total population of Qatar, from February 28, 2020 to November 20, 2023. The assessment considered a range of time windows for defining reinfection, spanning from 1 day to 180 days. Subgroup analyses comparing first versus repeat reinfections and a sensitivity analysis, focusing exclusively on individuals who underwent frequent testing, were performed.

Results

The relationship between the number of reinfections in the population and the duration of the time window used to define reinfection revealed two distinct dynamical domains. Within the initial 15 days post-infection diagnosis, almost all positive tests for SARS-CoV-2 were attributed to the original infection. However, surpassing the 30-day post-infection threshold, nearly all positive tests were attributed to reinfections. A 40-day time window emerged as a sufficiently conservative definition for reinfection. By setting the time window at 40 days, the estimated number of reinfections in the population increased from 84,565 to 88,384, compared to the 90-day time window. The maximum observed reinfections were 6 and 4 for the 40-day and 90-day time windows, respectively. The 40-day time window was appropriate for defining reinfection, irrespective of whether it was the first, second, third, or fourth occurrence. The sensitivity analysis, confined to high testers exclusively, replicated similar patterns and results.

Discussion

A 40-day time window is optimal for defining reinfection, providing an informed alternative to the conventional 90-day time window. Reinfections are prevalent, with some individuals experiencing multiple instances since the onset of the pandemic.

Effectiveness of a fourth SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in previously infected individuals from Austria

INTRODUCTION

Evidence is limited on the effectiveness of a fourth vaccine dose against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in populations with prior severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. We estimated the risk of COVID-19 deaths and SARS-CoV-2 infections according to vaccination status in previously infected individuals in Austria.

METHODS

This is a nationwide retrospective observational study. We calculated age and gender adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) of COVID-19 deaths (primary outcome) and SARS-CoV-2 infections (secondary outcome) from 1 November to 31 December 2022, primarily comparing individuals with four versus three vaccine doses. Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) was calculated as (1-HR) X 100.

RESULTS

Among 3,986,312 previously infected individuals, 281,291 (7,1%) had four and 1,545,242 (38.8%) had three vaccinations at baseline. We recorded 69 COVID-19 deaths and 89,056 SARS-CoV-2 infections. rVE for four versus three vaccine doses was -24% (95% CI: -120 to 30) against COVID-19 deaths, and 17% (95% CI: 14-19) against SARS-CoV-2 infections. This latter effect rapidly diminished over time and infection risk with four vaccinations was higher compared to less vaccinated individuals during extended follow-up until June 2023. Adjusted HR (95% CI) for all-cause mortality for four versus three vaccinations was 0.79 (0.74-0.85).

DISCUSSION

In previously infected individuals, a fourth vaccination was not associated with COVID-19 death risk, but with transiently reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections and reversal of this effect in longer follow-up. All-cause mortality data suggest healthy vaccinee bias.

Real-world Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Among US Nursing Home Residents Aged ≥65 Years in the Pre-Delta and High Delta Periods

Background

Long-term care residents were among the most vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Medicare nursing home residents aged ≥65 years during pre-Delta and high Delta periods.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 13 December 2020 to 20 November 2021 using Medicare claims data. Exposures included 2 and 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. We used inverse probability weighting and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate absolute and relative vaccine effectiveness.

Results

Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death was 69.8% (95% CI, 65.9%‒73.3%) during the pre-Delta period and 55.7% (49.5%‒61.1%) during the high Delta period, without adjusting for time since vaccination. We observed substantial waning of effectiveness from 65.1% (54.2%‒73.5%) within 6 months from second-dose vaccination to 45.2% (30.6%‒56.7%) ≥6 months after second-dose vaccination in the high Delta period. Three doses provided 88.7% (73.5%‒95.2%) vaccine effectiveness against death, and the incremental benefit of 3 vs 2 doses was 74.6% (40.4%‒89.2%) during high Delta. Among beneficiaries with a prior COVID-19 infection, 3-dose vaccine effectiveness for preventing death was 78.6% (50.0%‒90.8%), and the additional protection of 3 vs 2 doses was 70.0% (30.1%‒87.1%) during high Delta. Vaccine effectiveness estimates against less severe outcomes (eg, infection) were lower.

Conclusions

This nationwide real-world study demonstrated that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provided substantial protection against COVID-19-related death. Two-dose protection waned after 6 months. Third doses during the high Delta period provided significant additional protection for individuals with or without a prior COVID-19 infection.

Immunogenicity phase II study evaluating booster capacity of nonadjuvanted AKS-452 SARS-Cov-2 RBD Fc vaccine

AKS-452, a subunit vaccine comprising an Fc fusion of the ancestral wild-type (WT) SARS-CoV-2 virus spike protein receptor binding domain (SP/RBD), was evaluated without adjuvant in a single cohort, non-randomized, open-labelled phase II study (NCT05124483) at a single site in The Netherlands for safety and immunogenicity. A single 90 µg subcutaneous booster dose of AKS-452 was administered to 71 adults previously primed with a registered mRNA- or adenovirus-based vaccine and evaluated for 273 days. All AEs were mild and no SAEs were attributable to AKS-452. While all subjects showed pre-existing SP/RBD binding and ACE2-inhibitory IgG titers, 60-68% responded to AKS-452 via ≥2-fold increase from days 28 to 90 and progressively decreased back to baseline by day 180 (days 28 and 90 mean fold-increases, 14.7 ± 6.3 and 8.0 ± 2.2). Similar response kinetics against RBD mutant proteins (including omicrons) were observed but with slightly reduced titers relative to WT. There was an expected strong inverse correlation between day-0 titers and the fold-increase in titers at day 28. AKS-452 enhanced neutralization potency against live virus, consistent with IgG titers. Nucleocapsid protein (Np) titers suggested infection occurred in 66% (46 of 70) of subjects, in which only 20 reported mild symptomatic COVID-19. These favorable safety and immunogenicity profiles support booster evaluation in a planned phase III universal booster study of this room-temperature stable vaccine that can be rapidly and inexpensively manufactured to serve vaccination at a global scale without the need of a complex distribution or cold chain.

The mRNA-LNP vaccines - the good, the bad and the ugly?

The mRNA-LNP vaccine has received much attention during the COVID-19 pandemic since it served as the basis of the most widely used SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in Western countries. Based on early clinical trial data, these vaccines were deemed safe and effective for all demographics. However, the latest data raise serious concerns about the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines. Here, we review some of the safety and efficacy concerns identified to date. We also discuss the potential mechanism of observed adverse events related to the use of these vaccines and whether they can be mitigated by alterations of this vaccine mechanism approach.

The immune response to SARS-CoV-2 in people with HIV

This review examines the intersection of the HIV and SARS-CoV-2 pandemics. People with HIV (PWH) are a heterogeneous group that differ in their degree of immune suppression, immune reconstitution, and viral control. While COVID-19 in those with well-controlled HIV infection poses no greater risk than that for HIV-uninfected individuals, people with advanced HIV disease are more vulnerable to poor COVID-19 outcomes. COVID-19 vaccines are effective and well tolerated in the majority of PWH, though reduced vaccine efficacy, breakthrough infections and faster waning of vaccine effectiveness have been demonstrated in PWH. This is likely a result of suboptimal humoral and cellular immune responses after vaccination. People with advanced HIV may also experience prolonged infection that may give rise to new epidemiologically significant variants, but initiation or resumption of antiretroviral therapy (ART) can effectively clear persistent infection. COVID-19 vaccine guidelines reflect these increased risks and recommend prioritization for vaccination and additional booster doses for PWH who are moderately to severely immunocompromised. We recommend continued research and monitoring of PWH with SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially in areas with a high HIV burden.

One dose versus two doses of COVID-19 vaccine for the prevention of breakthrough infections among people previously infected with SARS-Cov-2

Studies have suggested the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among those previously infected. However, it is not yet clear if one dose of the vaccine is enough to prevent breakthrough infections compared to two doses. Using data from Optum deidentified COVID-19 Electronic Health Record (EHR) data set, we assessed breakthrough infection risks in individuals previously infected, comparing those with one vaccine dose to those with two doses. Propensity scores were applied to mitigate confounding factors. Follow-up spanned 6 months, beginning 2 weeks postvaccination. Among 213 845 individuals, those receiving one vaccine dose had a significantly higher breakthrough infection risk than the two-dose group (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.54-1.85). This pattern was observed across genders, racial/ethnic groups, age categories, and vaccine types. This study reveals a substantial disparity in the risk of breakthrough infections between individuals receiving one versus two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, suggesting that a single dose may not provide adequate protection against reinfection.

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.

Humoral Immune Responses after an Omicron-Adapted Booster BNT162b2 Vaccination in Patients with Lymphoid Malignancies

To accommodate waning COVID-19 vaccine immunity to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants, variant-adapted mRNA vaccines have been introduced. Here, we examine serological responses to the BA.1 and BA.4-5 Omicron variant-adapted BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccines in people with lymphoid malignancies. We included 233 patients with lymphoid malignancies (chronic lymphocytic B-cell leukemia: 73 (31.3%), lymphoma: 89 (38.2%), multiple myeloma/amyloidosis: 71 (30.5%)), who received an Omicron-adapted mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine. IgG and neutralizing antibodies specific for the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 were measured using ELISA-based methods. Differences in antibody concentrations and neutralizing capacity and associations with risk factors were assessed using mixed-effects models. Over the period of vaccination with an Omicron-adapted COVID-19 vaccine, the predicted mean concentration of anti-RBD IgG increased by 0.09 log10 AU/mL/month (95% CI: 0.07; 0.11) in patients with lymphoid malignancies across diagnoses. The predicted mean neutralizing capacity increased by 0.9 percent points/month (95% CI: 0.2; 1.6). We found no associations between the increase in antibody concentration or neutralizing capacity and the variant included in the adapted vaccine. In conclusion, a discrete increase in antibody concentrations and neutralizing capacity was found over the course of Omicron-adapted vaccination in patients with lymphoid malignancies regardless of the adapted vaccine variant, indicating a beneficial effect of Omicron-adapted booster vaccination in this population.

Protective effect of previous infection and vaccination against reinfection with BA.5 Omicron subvariant: a nationwide population-based study in Japan

Background

The Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 was reported to evade immunity derived from vaccination and previous infection. A better understanding of hybrid immunity informs effective infection control strategies. Since the reinfection risk was not well-assessed in East Asia, this study aims to evaluate the risk of infection with Omicron subvariant BA.5 among previously infected individuals in Japan.

Methods

All notified cases were extracted from the Japanese national COVID-19 surveillance database including 20,297,335 records up to 25 September 2022. Reinfection with BA.5 was defined as the infection notified during the BA.5 dominated period with any prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The protective effect of prior infections against reinfections with BA.5 was estimated by applying a case-population design and the protective effect of vaccination was estimated by a multivariable Cox regression adjusting for age, sex, variants of prior infection, and the time since the last vaccination.

Findings

Among 19,830,548 SARS-CoV-2 first infections, 233,424 (1.2%) were reinfected with BA.5. The protective effect against BA.5 reinfection of prior infection with Wuhan strain was 46%, Alpha variant was 35%, Delta variant was 41%, and BA.1/BA.2 subvariant was 74%. The reduced risk of BA.5 reinfection by 7%, 33%, and 66% was associated with two, three, and four doses of vaccination, respectively, compared with one-dose vaccination.

Interpretation

The prior infections with Omicron subvariant BA.1/BA.2 protected BA.5 reinfection more than pre-Omicron variants. Increased frequency of vaccination led to more protection from reinfection with BA.5. Up-to-date vaccination may be encouraged to prevent future reinfection among the previously infected population.

Funding

None.

Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a first booster with BNT162b2 or full-dose mRNA-1273: A randomised VACCELERATE trial in adults ≥75 years (EU-COVAT-1)

BACKGROUND

Vaccination remains crucial for protection against severe SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially for people of advanced age, however, optimal dosing regimens are as yet lacking.

METHODS

EU-COVAT-1-AGED Part A is a randomised controlled, adaptive, multicentre phase II trial evaluating safety and immunogenicity of a 3rd vaccination (1st booster) in individuals ≥75 years. Fifty-three participants were randomised to full-doses of either mRNA-1273 (Spikevax®, 100 µg) or BNT162b2 (Comirnaty®, 30 µg). The primary endpoint was the rate of 2-fold circulating antibody titre increase 14 days post-vaccination measured by quantitative electrochemiluminescence (ECL) immunoassay, targeting RBD region of Wuhan wild-type SARS-CoV-2. Secondary endpoints included the changes in neutralising capacity against wild-type and 25 variants of concern at 14 days and up to 12 months. Safety was assessed by monitoring of solicited adverse events (AEs) for seven days after on-study vaccination. Unsolicited AEs were collected until the end of follow-up at 12 months, SAEs were pursued for a further 30 days.

RESULTS

Between 08th of November 2021 and 04th of January 2022, 53 participants ≥75 years received a COVID-19 vaccine as 1st booster. Fifty subjects (BNT162b2 n = 25/mRNA-1273 n = 25) were included in the analyses for immunogenicity at day 14. The primary endpoint of a 2-fold anti-RBD IgG titre increase 14 days after vaccination was reached for all subjects. A 3rd vaccination of full-dose mRNA-1273 provided higher anti-RBD IgG titres (Geometric mean titre) D14 mRNA-127310711 IU/mL (95 %-CI: 8003;14336) vs. BNT162b2: 7090 IU/mL (95 %-CI: 5688;8837). We detected a pattern showing higher neutralising capacity of full-dose mRNA-1273 against wild-type as well as for 23 out of 25 tested variants.

INTERPRETATION

Third doses of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 provide substantial circulating antibody increase 14 days after vaccination. Full-dose mRNA-1273 provides higher antibody levels with an overall similar safety profile for people ≥75 years.

FUNDING

This trial was funded by the European Commission (Framework Program HORIZON 2020).

Selective adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron under booster vaccine pressure: a multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

High rates of vaccination and natural infection drive immunity and redirect selective viral adaptation. Updated boosters are installed to cope with drifted viruses, yet data on adaptive evolution under increasing immune pressure in a real-world situation are lacking.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study to characterise SARS-CoV-2 mutational dynamics and selective adaptation over >1 year in relation to vaccine status, viral phylogenetics, and associated clinical and demographic variables.

FINDINGS

The study of >5400 SARS-CoV-2 infections between July 2021 and August 2022 in metropolitan New York portrayed the evolutionary transition from Delta to Omicron BA.1-BA.5 variants. Booster vaccinations were implemented during the Delta wave, yet booster breakthrough infections and SARS-CoV-2 re-infections were almost exclusive to Omicron. In adjusted logistic regression analyses, BA.1, BA.2, and BA.5 had a significant growth advantage over co-occurring lineages in the boosted population, unlike BA.2.12.1 or BA.4. Selection pressure by booster shots translated into diffuse adaptive evolution in Delta spike, contrasting with strong, receptor-binding motif-focused adaptive evolution in BA.2-BA.5 spike (Fisher Exact tests; non-synonymous/synonymous mutation rates per site). Convergent evolution has become common in Omicron, engaging spike positions crucial for immune escape, receptor binding, or cleavage.

INTERPRETATION

Booster shots are required to cope with gaps in immunity. Their discriminative immune pressure contributes to their effectiveness but also requires monitoring of selective viral adaptation processes. Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 had a selective advantage under booster vaccination pressure, contributing to the evolution of BA.2 and BA.5 sublineages and recombinant forms that predominate in 2023.

FUNDING

The study was supported by NYU institutional funds and partly by the Cancer Center Support Grant P30CA016087 at the Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center.

Short- and longer-term all-cause mortality among SARS-CoV-2- infected individuals and the pull-forward phenomenon in Qatar: a national cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We assessed short-, medium-, and long-term all-cause mortality risks after a primary SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

A national, matched, retrospective cohort study was conducted in Qatar to assess risk of all-cause mortality in the national SARS-CoV-2 primary infection cohort compared with the national infection-naïve cohort. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazards regression models. Analyses were stratified by vaccination status and clinical vulnerability status.

RESULTS

Among unvaccinated persons, within 90 days after primary infection, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) comparing mortality incidence in the primary-infection cohort with the infection-naïve cohort was 1.19 (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.39). aHR was 1.34 (1.11-1.63) in persons more clinically vulnerable to severe COVID-19 and 0.94 (0.72-1.24) in those less clinically vulnerable. Beyond 90 days after primary infection, aHR was 0.50 (0.37-0.68); aHR was 0.41 (0.28-0.58) at 3-7 months and 0.76 (0.46-1.26) at ≥8 months. The aHR was 0.37 (0.25-0.54) in more clinically vulnerable persons and 0.77 (0.48-1.24) in less clinically vulnerable persons. Among vaccinated persons, mortality incidence was comparable in the primary-infection versus infection-naïve cohorts, regardless of clinical vulnerability status.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 mortality was primarily driven by an accelerated onset of death among individuals who were already vulnerable to all-cause mortality, but vaccination prevented these accelerated deaths.

History of primary-series and booster vaccination and protection against Omicron reinfection

Laboratory evidence suggests a possibility of immune imprinting for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We investigated the differences in the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of persons who had a primary Omicron infection, but different vaccination histories using matched, national, retrospective, cohort studies. Adjusted hazard ratio for reinfection incidence, factoring adjustment for differences in testing rate, was 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.39 to 0.49] comparing history of two-dose vaccination to no vaccination, 1.47 (95% CI: 1.23 to 1.76) comparing history of three-dose vaccination to two-dose vaccination, and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.48 to 0.68) comparing history of three-dose vaccination to no vaccination. Divergence in cumulative incidence curves increased markedly when the incidence was dominated by BA.4/BA.5 and BA.2.75* Omicron subvariants. The history of primary-series vaccination enhanced immune protection against Omicron reinfection, but history of booster vaccination compromised protection against Omicron reinfection. These findings do not undermine the public health utility of booster vaccination.

The impact of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine on adaptive and innate immune responses

The mRNA-based BNT162b2 protects against severe disease and mortality caused by SARS-CoV-2 via induction of specific antibody and T-cell responses. Much less is known about its broad effects on immune responses against other pathogens. Here, we investigated the adaptive immune responses induced by BNT162b2 vaccination against various SARS-CoV-2 variants and its effects on the responsiveness of immune cells upon stimulation with heterologous stimuli. BNT162b2 vaccination induced effective humoral and cellular immunity against SARS-CoV-2 that started to wane after six months. We also observed long-term transcriptional changes in immune cells after vaccination. Additionally, vaccination with BNT162b2 modulated innate immune responses as measured by inflammatory cytokine production after stimulation - higher IL-1/IL-6 release and decreased IFN-α production. Altogether, these data expand our knowledge regarding the overall immunological effects of this new class of vaccines and underline the need for additional studies to elucidate their effects on both innate and adaptive immune responses.

Impact of vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions on COVID-19: a review of simulation modeling studies in Asia

Introduction

Epidemiological modeling is widely used to offer insights into the COVID-19 pandemic situation in Asia. We reviewed published computational (mathematical/simulation) models conducted in Asia that assessed impacts of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions against COVID-19 and their implications for vaccination strategy.

Methods

A search of the PubMed database for peer-reviewed, published, and accessible articles in English was performed up to November 2022 to capture studies in Asian populations based on computational modeling of outcomes in the COVID-19 pandemic. Extracted data included model type (mechanistic compartmental/agent-based, statistical, both), intervention type (pharmacological, non-pharmacological), and procedures for parameterizing age. Findings are summarized with descriptive statistics and discussed in terms of the evolving COVID-19 situation.

Results

The literature search identified 378 results, of which 59 met criteria for data extraction. China, Japan, and South Korea accounted for approximately half of studies, with fewer from South and South-East Asia. Mechanistic models were most common, either compartmental (61.0%), agent-based (1.7%), or combination (18.6%) models. Statistical modeling was applied less frequently (11.9%). Pharmacological interventions were examined in 59.3% of studies, and most considered vaccination, except one study of an antiviral treatment. Non-pharmacological interventions were also considered in 84.7% of studies. Infection, hospitalization, and mortality were outcomes in 91.5%, 30.5%, and 30.5% of studies, respectively. Approximately a third of studies accounted for age, including 10 that also examined mortality. Four of these studies emphasized benefits in terms of mortality from prioritizing older adults for vaccination under conditions of a limited supply; however, one study noted potential benefits to infection rates from early vaccination of younger adults. Few studies (5.1%) considered the impact of vaccination among children.

Conclusion

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, non-pharmacological interventions helped to mitigate the health burden of COVID-19; however, modeling indicates that high population coverage of effective vaccines will complement and reduce reliance on such interventions. Thus, increasing and maintaining immunity levels in populations through regular booster shots, particularly among at-risk and vulnerable groups, including older adults, might help to protect public health. Future modeling efforts should consider new vaccines and alternative therapies alongside an evolving virus in populations with varied vaccination histories.

Bivalent mRNA-1273.214 vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 omicron XBB* infections

Effectiveness of the 50-μg mRNA-1273.214 bivalent vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection was modest at 25% in a matched, retrospective, cohort study in Qatar comparing infection incidence in the bivalent cohort to that in the national no-recent-vaccination resident cohort. XBB* immune evasion, immune imprinting effects, or both, may explain findings.

Effects of previous infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity against symptomatic Alpha, Beta, and Delta SARS-CoV-2 infections: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Protection against SARS-CoV-2 symptomatic infection and severe COVID-19 of previous infection, mRNA two-dose vaccination, mRNA three-dose vaccination, and hybrid immunity of previous infection and vaccination were investigated in Qatar for the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants.

METHODS

Six national, matched, test-negative, case-control studies were conducted between January 18 and December 18, 2021 on a sample of 239,120 PCR-positive tests and 6,103,365 PCR-negative tests.

FINDINGS

Effectiveness of previous infection against Alpha, Beta, and Delta reinfection was 89.5% (95% CI: 85.5-92.3%), 87.9% (95% CI: 85.4-89.9%), and 90.0% (95% CI: 86.7-92.5%), respectively. Effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Alpha, Beta, and Delta infection was 90.5% (95% CI, 83.9-94.4%), 80.5% (95% CI: 79.0-82.0%), and 58.1% (95% CI: 54.6-61.3%), respectively. Effectiveness of three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination against Delta infection was 91.7% (95% CI: 87.1-94.7%). Effectiveness of hybrid immunity of previous infection and two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 97.4% (95% CI: 95.4-98.5%) against Beta infection and 94.5% (95% CI: 92.8-95.8%) against Delta infection. Effectiveness of previous infection and three-dose BNT162b2 vaccination was 98.1% (95% CI: 85.7-99.7%) against Delta infection. All five forms of immunity had >90% protection against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 regardless of variant. Similar effectiveness estimates were observed for mRNA-1273. A mathematical model accurately predicted hybrid immunity protection by assuming that the individual effects of previous infection and vaccination acted independently.

INTERPRETATION

Hybrid immunity, offering the strongest protection, was mathematically predicted by assuming that the immunities obtained from previous infection and vaccination act independently, without synergy or redundancy.

FUNDING

The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, Qatar University Biomedical Research Center, and Qatar University Internal Grant ID QUCG-CAS-23/24-114.

Population immunity of natural infection, primary-series vaccination, and booster vaccination in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study

Background

Waning of natural infection protection and vaccine protection highlight the need to evaluate changes in population immunity over time. Population immunity of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection or of COVID-19 vaccination are defined, respectively, as the overall protection against reinfection or against breakthrough infection at a given point in time in a given population.

Methods

We estimated these population immunities in Qatar's population between July 1, 2020 and November 30, 2022, to discern generic features of the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Effectiveness of previous infection, mRNA primary-series vaccination, and mRNA booster (third-dose) vaccination in preventing infection were estimated, month by month, using matched, test-negative, case-control studies.

Findings

Previous-infection effectiveness against reinfection was strong before emergence of Omicron, but declined with time after a wave and rebounded after a new wave. Effectiveness dropped after Omicron emergence from 88.3% (95% CI: 84.8-91.0%) in November 2021 to 51.0% (95% CI: 48.3-53.6%) in December 2021. Primary-series effectiveness against infection was 84.0% (95% CI: 83.0-85.0%) in April 2021, soon after introduction of vaccination, before waning gradually to 52.7% (95% CI: 46.5-58.2%) by November 2021. Effectiveness declined linearly by ∼1 percentage point every 5 days. After Omicron emergence, effectiveness dropped from 52.7% (95% CI: 46.5-58.2%) in November 2021 to negligible levels in December 2021. Booster effectiveness dropped after Omicron emergence from 83.0% (95% CI: 65.6-91.6%) in November 2021 to 32.9% (95% CI: 26.7-38.5%) in December 2021, and continued to decline thereafter. Effectiveness of previous infection and vaccination against severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 were generally >80% throughout the study duration.

Interpretation

High population immunity against infection may not be sustained beyond a year, but population immunity against severe COVID-19 is durable with slow waning even after Omicron emergence.

Funding

The Biomedical Research Program and the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and the Biomathematics Research Core, both at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, Ministry of Public Health, Hamad Medical Corporation, Sidra Medicine, Qatar Genome Programme, Qatar University Biomedical Research Center, and Qatar University Internal Grant ID QUCG-CAS-23/24-114.

Humoral and cellular immune responses eleven months after the third dose of BNT162b2 an mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine in people with HIV - a prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

We investigated long-term durability of humoral and cellular immune responses to third dose of BNT162b2 in people with HIV (PWH) and controls.

METHODS

In 378 PWH with undetectable viral replication and 224 matched controls vaccinated with three doses of BNT162b2, we measured IgG-antibodies against the receptor binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein three months before third dose of BNT162b2, and four and eleven months after. In 178 PWH and 135 controls, the cellular response was assessed by interferon-γ (IFN-γ) release in whole blood four months after third dose. Differences in antibody or IFN-γ concentrations were assessed by uni- and multivariable linear regressions.

FINDINGS

Before the third dose the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was lower in PWH than in controls (unadjusted geometric mean ratio (GMR): 0.68 (95% CI: 0.54-0.86, p = 0.002). We observed no differences in antibody concentrations between PWH and controls after four (0.90 (95% CI: 0.75-1.09), p = 0.285) or eleven months (0.89 (95% CI: 0.69-1.14), p = 0.346) after the third dose. We found no difference in IFN-γ concentrations four months after the third dose between PWH and controls (1.06 (95% CI: 0.71-1.60), p = 0.767).

INTERPRETATION

We found no differences in antibody concentrations or cellular response between PWH and controls up to eleven months after third dose of BNT162b2. Our findings indicate that PWH with undetectable viral replication and controls have comparable immune responses to three doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine.

FUNDING

This work was funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation (NFF205A0063505, NNF20SA0064201), the Carlsberg Foundation (CF20-476 0045), the Svend Andersen Research Foundation (SARF2021), and Bio- and Genome Bank Denmark.

All-cause and COVID-19 mortality in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To investigate all-cause mortality, COVID-19 mortality and all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality in Qatar during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A national, retrospective cohort analysis and national, matched, retrospective cohort studies were conducted between 5 February 2020 and 19 September 2022.

RESULTS

There were 5025 deaths during a follow-up time of 5 247 220 person-years, of which 675 were COVID-19 related. Incidence rates were 0.96 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.98) per 1000 person-years for all-cause mortality, 0.13 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.14) per 1000 person-years for COVID-19 mortality and 0.83 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.85) per 1000 person-years for all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality. Adjusted HR, comparing all-cause non-COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 0.38 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.44), highest for Filipinos at 0.56 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.69) and was 0.51 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.58) for craft and manual workers (CMWs). Adjusted HR, comparing COVID-19 mortality relative to Qataris, was lowest for Indians at 1.54 (95% CI 0.97 to 2.44), highest for Nepalese at 5.34 (95% CI 1.56 to 18.34) and was 1.86 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.60) for CMWs. Incidence rate of all-cause mortality for each nationality group was lower than the crude death rate in the country of origin.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of non-COVID-19 death was low and was lowest among CMWs, perhaps reflecting the healthy worker effect. Risk of COVID-19 death was also low, but was highest among CMWs, largely reflecting higher exposure during first epidemic wave, before advent of effective COVID-19 treatments and vaccines.