High vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 in the elderly in Finland before and after the emergence of Omicron

Effectiveness of Vaccines and Monoclonal Antibodies Against Respiratory Syncytial Virus: Generic Protocol for Register-Based Cohort Study

Several immunization products are currently being developed against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) for children, pregnant females, and older adults, and some products have already received authorization. Therefore, studies to monitor the effectiveness of these products are needed in the following years. To assist researchers to conduct postmarketing studies, we developed a generic protocol for register-based cohort studies to evaluate immunization product effectiveness against RSV-specific and nonspecific outcomes. To conduct a study on the basis of this generic protocol, the researchers can use any relevant databases or healthcare registers that are available at the study site.

Population-Based Evaluation of Vaccine Effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Severe Illness, and Death, Taiwan

Taiwan provided several COVID-19 vaccine platforms: mRNA (BNT162b2, mRNA-1273), adenoviral vector-based (AZD1222), and protein subunit (MVC-COV1901). After Taiwan shifted from its zero-COVID strategy in April 2022, population-based evaluation of vaccine effectiveness (VE) became possible. We conducted an observational cohort study of 21,416,151 persons to examine VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection, moderate and severe illness, and death during March 22, 2021-September 30, 2022. After adjusting for age and sex, we found that persons who completed 3 vaccine doses (2 primary, 1 booster) or received MVC-COV1901 as the primary series had the lowest hospitalization incidence (0.04-0.20 cases/100,000 person-days). We also found 95.8% VE against hospitalization for 3 doses of BNT162b2, 91.0% for MVC-COV1901, 81.8% for mRNA-1273, and 65.7% for AZD1222, which had the lowest overall VE. Our findings indicated that protein subunit vaccines provide similar protection against SARS-CoV-2---associated hospitalization as mRNA vaccines and can inform mix-and-match vaccine selection in other countries.

Vaccination status and outcomes in critical COVID-19 patients

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure on the basis of their vaccination status at the time of ICU admission.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study using a prospective database of patients admitted to the ICU of a university hospital in the city of Murcia, in Spain, between January 1, 2021 and September 1, 2022. Clinical, analytical, and sociodemographic data were collected and analyzed on the basis of patient vaccination status. We adjusted for confounding variables using propensity score matching and calculated adjusted ORs and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients were included in the study. Of those, 8.3% were fully vaccinated, 12% were partially vaccinated, and 79.7% were unvaccinated. Although fully vaccinated patients had more comorbidities, partially vaccinated patients had higher disease severity. The proportion of patients with severe acute respiratory failure was higher in the unvaccinated group, followed by the partially vaccinated group. No significant differences were found among the different groups regarding complications, duration of ventilatory support, or length of ICU/hospital stay. In the sample selected by propensity score matching, the number of patients with severe complications and the in-hospital mortality rate were higher in unvaccinated patients, but the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study failed to show a significant improvement in outcomes in critically ill COVID-19 patients vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. However, the CIs were wide and the mortality point estimates favored patients who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine.

Assessment of willingness and determinants to receive the COVID-19 vaccine among the general population of the Somali region, Eastern Ethiopia: a 2021 cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

This research aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and the factors influencing it among the population of the Somali region in Ethiopia through a cross-sectional COVID-19 survey.

DESIGN

Community-based cross-sectional study.

SETTING

The survey was conducted in eight selected districts of the Somali region in Ethiopia from 20 October 2021 to 30 October 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were chosen using simple random sampling and data analysis used Stata V.14. Both bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression methods were applied, with variables having a p value below 0.2 considered for inclusion in the final model, where statistically significant factors were identified at p<0.5.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Willingness to take the vaccine.

RESULTS

A total of 1010 respondents participated in this study. The proportion of people's willingness to take the vaccine was 65% (95% CI 62 to 68). When you believe moderately or highly that getting a COVID-19 vaccine will protect others (AOR=6.2, 95% CI 1.43 to 26.6) and (AOR=7.2, 95% CI 1.7 to 29.7), then you will protect others as well. Whereas, a desire to get vaccinated little, moderately and highly (AOR=4.3, 95% CI 1.77 to 10.4), (AOR=20, 95% CI 8.5 to 47) and (AOR=147, 95% CI 55 to 392), respectively, was significantly associated with willingness to take the vaccine. Moreover having close family and friends who want them to get a COVID-19 vaccine (AOR=2, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.57) and religious leaders or community leaders (AOR=1.8, 95% CI 1 to 3.1) were significant factors in the multivariable logistic regression model.

CONCLUSION

This study found that COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was low in the Somali region. Factors positively linked to one's willingness to get vaccinated included the belief that it protects others, personal desire for vaccination and support from family, friends, community and religious leaders.

Effectiveness of homologous/heterologous booster COVID-19 vaccination schedules against severe illness in general population and clinical subgroups in three European countries

Using 4 data-sources (Spain, Italy, United Kingdom) data and a 1:1 matched cohort study, we aimed to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections with hospitalisations (±30 days) and death (±56 days) in general population and clinical subgroups with homologous/heterologous booster schedules (Comirnaty-BNT and Spikevax-MOD original COVID-19 vaccines) by comparison with unboosted individuals, during Delta and beginning of Omicron variants. Hazard Ratio (HR, by Cox models) and VE ([1-HR]*100) were calculated by inverse probability weights. Between December 2020-February 2022, in adults without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, we matched 5.5 million people (>1 million with immunodeficiency, 343,727 with cancer) with a booster (3rd) dose by considering doses 1 and 2 vaccine brands and calendar time, age, sex, region, and comorbidities (immunodeficiency, cancer, severe renal disease, transplant recipient, Down Syndrome). We studied booster doses of BNT and MOD administered after doses 1 and 2 with BNT, MOD, or Oxford-AstraZeneca during a median follow-up between 9 and 16 weeks. BNT or MOD showed VE ranging from 70 to 86% across data sources as heterologous 3rd doses, whereas it was 42-88% as homologous 3rd doses. Depending on the severity and available follow-up, 3rd-dose effectiveness lasted between 1 and 5 months. In people with immunodeficiency and cancer, protection across data sources was detected with both heterologous (VE = 54-83%) and homologous (VE = 49-80%) 3rd doses. Overall, both heterologous and homologous 3rd doses with BTN or MOD showed additional protection against the severe effects of SARS-CoV-2 infections for the general population and for patients at potentially high risk of severe COVID-19 (elderly, people with immunodeficiency and cancer) in comparison with two doses schemes during Delta or early Omicron periods. The early VE after vaccination may be due to less testing among vaccinated pairs and unknown confounders, deserving cautious interpretation. The VE wane over time needs further in-depth research to properly envisage when or whether a booster of those vaccines should be administered.

Antibody Response After the Third SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients and People Living With HIV (COVERALL-2)

Background

After basic immunization with 2 mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses, only a small proportion of patients who are severely immunocompromised generate a sufficient antibody response. Hence, we assessed the additional benefit of a third SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in patients with different levels of immunosuppression.

Methods

In this observational extension of the COVERALL trial (Corona Vaccine Trial Platform), we recruited patients from the Swiss HIV Cohort Study and the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study (ie, lung and kidney transplant recipients). We collected blood samples before and 8 weeks after the third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination with either mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants showing an antibody response (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S test; threshold ≥100 U/mL) 8 weeks after the third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. We also compared the proportion of patients who reached the primary outcome from basic immunization (the first and second vaccines) to the third vaccination.

Results

Nearly all participants (97.2% [95% CI, 95.9%-98.6%], 564/580) had an antibody response. This response was comparable between mRNA-1273 (96.1% [95% CI, 93.7%-98.6%], 245/255) and BNT162b2 (98.2% [95% CI, 96.7%-99.6%], 319/325). Stratification by cohort showed that 99.8% (502/503) of people living with HIV and 80.5% (62/77) of recipients of solid organ transplants achieved the primary endpoint. The proportion of patients with an antibody response in solid organ transplant recipients improved from the second vaccination (22.7%, 15/66) to the third (80.5%, 62/77).

Conclusions

People living with HIV had a high antibody response. The third vaccine increased the proportion of solid organ transplant recipients with an antibody response. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT04805125 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Protection of homologous and heterologous boosters after primary schemes of rAd26-rAd5, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BBIBP-CorV during the omicron outbreak in adults of 50 years and older in Argentina: a test-negative case-control study

Background

After primary vaccination schemes with rAd26-rAd5 (Sputnik V), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, BBIBP-CorV or heterologous combinations, the effectiveness of homologous or heterologous boosters (Sputnik V, ChAdOx, Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna) against SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations and deaths has been scarcely studied.

Methods

Test-negative, case-control study, conducted in Argentina during omicron BA.1 predominance, in adults ≥50 years old tested for SARS-CoV-2 who had received two or three doses of COVID-19 vaccines. Outcomes were COVID-associated infections, hospitalisations and deaths after administering mRNA and vectored boosters, < or ≥60 days from the last dose.

Findings

Of 422,124 individuals tested for SARS-CoV-2, 221,993 (52.5%) tested positive; 190,884 (45.2%) and 231,260 (54.8%) had received 2-dose and 3-dose vaccination schemes, respectively. The 3-dose scheme reduced infections, hospitalisations and death (OR 0.81 [0.80-0.83]; 0.28 [0.25-0.32] and 0.25 [0.22-0.28] respectively), but protection dropped after 60 days to 1.04 [1.01-1.06]; 0.52 [0.44-0.61] and 0.38 [0.33-0.45]). Compared with 2-dose-schemes, homologous boosters after primary schemes with vectored-vaccines provided lower protection against infections < and ≥60 days (0.94 [0.92-0.97] and 1.05 [1.01-1.09], respectively) but protected against hospitalisations (0.30 [0.26-0.35]) and deaths (0.29 [0.25-0.33]), decreasing after 60 days (0.59 [0.47-0.74] and 0.51 [0.41-0.64], respectively). Heterologous boosters protected against infections (0.70 [0.68-0.71]) but decreased after 60 days (1.01 [0.98-1.04]) and against hospitalisations and deaths (0.26 [0.22-0.31] and 0.22 [0.18-0.25], respectively), which also decreased after 60 days (0.43 [0.35-0.53] and 0.33 [0.26-0.41], respectively). Heterologous boosters protected against infections when applied <60 days (0.70 [0.68-0.71], p < 0.001), against hospitalisations when applied ≥60 days (0.43 [0.35-0.53], p < 0.01), and against deaths < and ≥60 days (0.22 [0.18-0.25], p < 0.01 and 0.33 [0.26-0.41], p < 0.001).

Interpretation

During omicron predominance, heterologous boosters such as viral vectored and mRNA vaccines, following Sputnik V, ChAdOx1, Sinopharm or heterologous primary schemes might provide better protection against death; this effect might last longer in individuals aged ≥50 than homologous boosters.

Funding

None.

Comparison of the clinical characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) infected patients from a single hospitalist service

BACKGROUND

While existing evidence suggests less severe clinical manifestations and lower mortality are associated with the Omicron variant as compared to the Delta variant. However, these studies fail to control for differences in health systems facilities and providers. By comparing patients hospitalized on a single medical service during the Delta and Omicron surges we were able to conduct a more accurate comparison of the two varaints' clinical manifestations and outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective study of 364 Omicron (BA.1) infected patients on a single hospitalist service and compared these findings to a retrospective analysis of 241 Delta variant infected patients managed on the same service. We examined differences in symptoms, laboratory measures, and clinical severity between the two variants and assessed potential risk drivers for case mortality.

FINDINGS

Patients infected with Omicron were older and had more underlying medical conditions increasing their risk of death. Although they were less severely ill and required less supplemental oxygen and dexamethasone, in-hospital mortality was similar to Delta cases, 7.14% vs. 4.98% for Delta (q-value = 0.38). Patients older than 60 years or with immunocompromised conditions had much higher risk of death during hospitalization, with estimated odds ratios of 17.46 (95% CI: 5.05, 110.51) and 2.80 (1.03, 7.08) respectively. Neither vaccine history nor variant type played a significant role in case fatality. The Rothman score, NEWS-2 score, level of neutrophils, level of care, age, and creatinine level at admission were highly predictive of in-hospital death.

INTERPRETATION

In hospitalized patients, the Omicron variant is less virulent than the Delta variant but is associated with a comparable mortality. Clinical and laboratory features at admission are informative about the risk of death.

Retrospective analysis of epidemiologic features and clinical course of COVID-19 patients and comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients

At our Pneumology Department, we dealt with three waves of COVID-19 pandemics. The purpose of this study is to compare patients' epidemiological and clinical characteristics across waves and to assess the effect of vaccination on clinical presentation, course, and prognosis. From March 2020 to March 2022, a retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare patient characteristics. Based on the time of hospital admission, data from 456 patients were collected and divided into three groups (IW, IIW, and IIIW). In addition, we looked at the link between vaccination and clinical presentation and hospitalization outcome. The average age and comorbidities of patients increased, as did the worsening of respiratory conditions at admission (PaO2/FiO2 median 207 in IW, 95.5 in IIW, and 99 in IIIW). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was the primary respiratory support during the first wave, but an increase in the use of high flow nasal cannula and noninvasive ventilation was later observed, resulting in a higher hospital discharge rate and a lower intubation rate. Vaccinated patients had less severe COVID-19-related respiratory failure, a better clinical course, and a higher hospital discharge rate (71.4% in V-group vs 44.7% in NV-group, p<0.001). Patients' characteristics changed over the three waves, possibly due to virus mutations. The advancement of clinical and therapeutic management knowledge has contributed to a reduction in the severity of respiratory failure. The vaccination campaign improved the clinical course and reduced mortality.

Comparative effectiveness of heterologous third dose vaccine schedules against severe covid-19 during omicron predominance in Nordic countries: population based cohort analyses

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the comparative vaccine effectiveness of heterologous booster schedules (ie, three vaccine doses) compared with primary schedules (two vaccine doses) and with homologous mRNA vaccine booster schedules (three vaccine doses) during a period of omicron predominance.

DESIGN

Population based cohort analyses.

SETTING

Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, 27 December 2020 to 31 December 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

All adults aged ≥18 years who had received at least a primary vaccination schedule of AZD1222 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) or monovalent SARS-CoV-2 wild type (ancestral) strain based mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna), in any combination.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was country combined risks of covid-19 related hospital admission and death with covid-19 and additional outcomes of covid-19 related admission to an intensive care unit and SARS-CoV-2 infection. During a period of omicron predominance, these outcomes were compared in those who received a heterologous booster versus primary schedule (matched analyses) and versus those who received a homologous mRNA vaccine booster (weighted analyses). Follow-up was for 75 days from day 14 after the booster dose; comparative vaccine effectiveness was calculated as 1-risk ratio.

RESULTS

Across the four Nordic countries, 1 086 418 participants had received a heterologous booster schedule of AZD1222+BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 and 2 505 093 had received a heterologous booster schedule of BNT162b2+mRNA-1273. Compared with the primary schedule only (two doses), the vaccine effectiveness of heterologous booster schedules comprising AZD1222+BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2+mRNA-1273 was 82.7% (95% confidence interval 77.1% to 88.2%) and 81.5% (78.9% to 84.2%) for covid-19 related hospital admission and 95.9% (91.6% to 100.0%) and 87.5% (82.5% to 92.6%) for death with covid-19, respectively. Homologous mRNA booster schedules were similarly associated with increased protection against covid-19 related hospital admission (≥76.5%) and death with covid-19 (≥84.1%) compared with previous primary course vaccination only. When a heterologous booster schedule was compared with the homologous booster schedule, vaccine effectiveness was 27.2% (3.7% to 50.6%) for AZD1222+BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 and 23.3% (15.8% to 30.8%) for BNT162b2+mRNA-1273 schedules against covid-19 related hospital admission and 21.7% (-8.3% to 51.7%) and 18.4% (-15.7% to 52.5%) against death with covid-19, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Heterologous booster schedules are associated with increased protection against severe, omicron related covid-19 outcomes compared with primary course schedules and homologous booster schedules.

Have Diagnostics, Therapies, and Vaccines Made the Difference in the Pandemic Evolution of COVID-19 in Comparison with "Spanish Flu"?

In 1918 many countries, but not Spain, were fighting World War I. Spanish press could report about the diffusion and severity of a new infection without censorship for the first-time, so that this pandemic is commonly defined as "Spanish flu", even though Spain was not its place of origin. "Spanish flu" was one of the deadliest pandemics in history and has been frequently compared with the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. These pandemics share similarities, being both caused by highly variable and transmissible respiratory RNA viruses, and diversity, represented by diagnostics, therapies, and especially vaccines, which were made rapidly available for COVID-19, but not for "Spanish flu". Most comparison studies have been carried out in the first period of COVID-19, when these resources were either not yet available or their use had not long started. Conversely, we wanted to analyze the role that the advanced diagnostics, anti-viral agents, including monoclonal antibodies, and innovative COVID-19 vaccines, may have had in the pandemic containment. Early diagnosis, therapies, and anti-COVID-19 vaccines have markedly reduced the pandemic severity and mortality, thus preventing the collapse of the public health services. However, their influence on the reduction of infections and re-infections, thus on the transition from pandemic to endemic condition, appears to be of minor relevance. The high viral variability of influenza and coronavirus may probably be contained by the development of universal vaccines, which are not easy to be obtained. The only effective weapon still remains the disease prevention, to be achieved with the reduction of promiscuity between the animal reservoirs of these zoonotic diseases and humans.

Waning vaccine response to severe COVID-19 outcomes during omicron predominance in Thailand

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has evolved quickly, with different variants of concern resulting in the need to offer continued protection through booster vaccinations. The duration of enhanced protection with booster doses against severe COVID-19 is still unclear. Understanding this is critical to recommendations on the frequency of future booster doses.

METHODS

Utilising a Hospital Information System for COVID-19 established in Chiang Mai, Thailand, we conducted a cohort study by linking patient-level data of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases to the national immunization records, during the omicron predominant period (1 February- 31 July 2022).

RESULTS

Out of 261,103 adults with COVID-19 included in the study, there were 333 (0.13%) severe COVID-19 cases and 190 (0.07%) deaths. Protection against severe COVID-19 was highest with boosters received >14-60 days prior to positive test (93%) and persisted at >60-120 days (91%) but started to wane at >120-180 days (77%) and further at >180 days (68%). The rate of waning differed with age. Those ≥70 years showed faster waning of booster vaccine responses as compared to those aged 18-49 years, who retained good responses up to 180 days. Equivalent risk reduction against severe COVID-19 was seen with all the vaccine types used as boosters in Thailand.

CONCLUSIONS

Booster doses provided high levels of protection against severe COVID-19 with omicron, up to 4 months. Repeat boosters will be required to continue protection beyond 4 months, particularly in the elderly. mRNA and viral vector vaccines can be used flexibly to improve booster coverage.

Vaccine-induced or hybrid immunity and COVID-19-associated mortality during the Omicron wave

BACKGROUND

It is not yet entirely clear to what extent vaccine-induced or hybrid immunity protects individuals in Germany from death during the omicron wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we evaluated 470 159 cases over age 59 in the German federal state of Bavaria who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 January and 30 June 2022. Cox models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for dying within 60 days of the infection, depending on sex, age, time point of infection, and a range of immunity levels.

RESULTS

Over the period of observation, 3836 COVID-19-associated deaths were registered (case fatality rate 0.82 %). Risk of death was significantly lower in cases with a higher immunity level than in unvaccinated cases (aHR for a full primary immunity level, if reached less than six months before the time of the infection: 0.30, 95 %-confidence interval [0.23; 0.39]; if reached more than six months before: aHR 0.46 [0.35; 0.60]). A boosted immunity level lowered risk of death even further (if reached less than three months before the infection: aHR 0.17 [0.15; 0.20]; if reached more than three months before: aHR 0.25 [0.21; 0.29]).

CONCLUSION

Among elderly persons in Bavaria, a higher immunity level was associated with a substantial degree of protection against death during the Omicron wave; the strength of protection may have diminished somewhat over time.

Heterologous prime-boost immunization with ChAdOx1-S and BNT162b2: reactogenicity and immunogenicity in a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Regarding reactogenicity and immunogenicity, heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens are considered as an alternative to conventional immunization schemes.

METHODS

Individuals receiving either heterologous (ChAdOx1-S [AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK]/BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech, Mainz, Germany]; n = 306) or homologous (messenger RNA [mRNA]-1273 [Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA]; n = 139) vaccination were asked to participate when receiving their second dose. Reactogenicity was assessed after 1 month, immunogenicity after 1, 3, and/or 6 months, including a third dose, through SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G, surrogate virus neutralization test, and a plaque reduction neutralization test against the Delta (B.1.167.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA.1) variants of concern.

RESULTS

The overall reactogenicity was lower after heterologous vaccination. In both cohorts, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G concentrations waned over time with the heterologous vaccination demonstrating higher neutralizing activity than homologous mRNA vaccination after 3 months to low neutralizing levels in the Delta plaque reduction neutralization test after 6 months. At this point, 3.2% of the heterologous and 11.4% of the homologous cohort yielded low neutralizing activity against Omicron. After a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, ≥99% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity against Delta. Depending on the vaccination scheme and against Omicron, 60% to 87.5% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity.

CONCLUSION

ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccination demonstrated an acceptable reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile. A third dose of an mRNA vaccine is necessary to maintain neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. However, variants of concern-adapted versions of the vaccines would be desirable.

Estimation of Vaccine Effectiveness of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 Against Severe Outcomes Over Time Among Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Omicron

IMPORTANCE

Few studies have evaluated the waning of vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes caused by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection. Hong Kong is providing inactivated and mRNA vaccines, but the population had limited protection from natural infections before the Omicron variant emerged.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the change in vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization and mortality due to the Omicron variant over time.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This case-control study included adults with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection who died or were hospitalized in Hong Kong from January 1 to June 5, 2022 (ie, case participants), and adults with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron, sampled from the public health registry during the study period (ie, control participants), who were matched to case participants by propensity score.

EXPOSURES

Vaccination status of the individuals.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Estimated vaccine effectiveness against death, death or hospitalization, and death among hospitalized patients. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated as 1 - adjusted odds ratio obtained by conditional logistic regression adjusted with covariates for each period following vaccination.

RESULTS

There were 32 823 case participants (25 546 [77.8%] ≥65 years; 16 930 [47.4%] female) and 131 328 control participants (100 041 [76.2%] ≥65 years; 66 625 [46.6%] female) in the sample analyzed for the death or hospitalization outcome. Vaccine effectiveness against death or hospitalization was maintained for at least 6 months after the second dose of both CoronaVac (74.0%; 95% CI, 71.8%-75.8%) and BNT162b2 (77.4%; 95% CI, 75.5%-79.0%) vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness against death in those aged 18 to 49 years was 86.4% (95% CI, 85.8%-87.0%) and 92.9% (95% CI, 92.6%-93.2%) for those receiving 2 doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2, respectively, while for patients aged 80 years or older, it dropped to 61.4% (95% CI, 59.8%-63.2%) and 52.7% (95% CI, 50.2%-55.6%) for CoronaVac and BNT162b2, respectively. Nevertheless, overall vaccine effectiveness against death at 4 to 6 months after the third dose was greater than 90% for CoronaVac, BNT162b2, and the mixed vaccine schedule (eg, mixed vaccines: vaccine effectiveness, 92.2%; 95% CI, 89.2%-95.1%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

While vaccines were generally estimated to be effective against severe outcomes caused by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection, this analysis found that protection in older patients was more likely to wane 6 months after the second dose. Hence, a booster dose is recommended for older patients to restore immunity. This is especially critical in a setting like Hong Kong, where third-dose coverage is still insufficient among older residents.

Long-term durability of immune responses to the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines based on dosage, age and sex

The lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-formulated mRNA vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are a widely adopted multi vaccination public health strategy to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical trial data has described the immunogenicity of the vaccine, albeit within a limited study time frame. Here, we use a within-host mathematical model for LNP-formulated mRNA vaccines, informed by available clinical trial data from 2020 to September 2021, to project a longer term understanding of immunity as a function of vaccine type, dosage amount, age, and sex. We estimate that two standard doses of either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2, with dosage times separated by the company-mandated intervals, results in individuals losing more than 99% humoral immunity relative to peak immunity by 8 months following the second dose. We predict that within an 8 month period following dose two (corresponding to the original CDC time-frame for administration of a third dose), there exists a period of time longer than 1 month where an individual has lost more than 99% humoral immunity relative to peak immunity, regardless of which vaccine was administered. We further find that age has a strong influence in maintaining humoral immunity; by 8 months following dose two we predict that individuals aged 18-55 have a four-fold humoral advantage compared to aged 56-70 and 70+ individuals. We find that sex has little effect on the immune response and long-term IgG counts. Finally, we find that humoral immunity generated from two low doses of mRNA-1273 decays at a substantially slower rate relative to peak immunity gained compared to two standard doses of either mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2. Our predictions highlight the importance of the recommended third booster dose in order to maintain elevated levels of antibodies.