Dosing interval strategies for two-dose COVID-19 vaccination in 13 middle-income countries of Europe: Health impact modelling and benefit-risk analysis

Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review of mathematical vaccine prioritization models

As the world becomes ever more connected, the chance of pandemics increases as well. The recent COVID-19 pandemic and the concurrent global mass vaccine roll-out provides an ideal setting to learn from and refine our understanding of infectious disease models for better future preparedness. In this review, we systematically analyze and categorize mathematical models that have been developed to design optimal vaccine prioritization strategies of an initially limited vaccine. As older individuals are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, the focus is on models that take age explicitly into account. The lower mobility and activity level of older individuals gives rise to non-trivial trade-offs. Secondary research questions concern the optimal time interval between vaccine doses and spatial vaccine distribution. This review showcases the effect of various modeling assumptions on model outcomes. A solid understanding of these relationships yields better infectious disease models and thus public health decisions during the next pandemic.

Does education influence COVID-19 vaccination? A global view

After the recent hard attempts felt on a global scale, notably in the health sector, the steady efforts of scientists have been materialized in maybe one of the most expected findings of the last decades, i.e. the launching of the COVID-19 vaccines. Although it is not our goal to plead for vaccination, as the decision in this regard is a matter of individual choice, we believe it is necessary and enlightening to analyze how one's educational status interferes with COVID-19 vaccination. There are discrepancies between world states vis-à-vis their well-being and their feedback to crises, and from the collection of features that can segregate the states in handling vaccination, in this paper, the spotlight is on education. We are referring to this topic because, generally, researches converge rather on the linkage between economic issues and COVID-19 vaccination, while education levels are less tackled in relation to this. To notice the weight of each type of education (primary, secondary, tertiary) in this process, we employ an assortment of statistical methods, for three clusters: 45 low-income countries (LICs), 72 middle-income countries (MICs) and 53 high-income countries (HICs). The estimates suggest that education counts in the COVID-19 vaccination, the tertiary one having the greatest meaning in accepting it. It is also illustrated that the imprint of education on vaccination fluctuates across the country groups scrutinized, with HICs recording the upper rates. The heterogeneity of COVID-19 vaccination-related behaviors should determine health authorities to treat this subject differently. To expand the COVID-19 vaccines uptake, they should be in an ongoing dialogue with all population categories and, remarkably, with those belonging to vulnerable communities, originated mostly in LICs. Education is imperative for vaccination, and it would ought to be on the schedule of any state, for being assimilated into health strategies and policies.

Predictive models for health outcomes due to SARS-CoV-2, including the effect of vaccination: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The interaction between modelers and policymakers is becoming more common due to the increase in computing speed seen in recent decades. The recent pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus was no exception. Thus, this study aims to identify and assess epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data, including immunization for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODOLOGY

PubMed, JSTOR, medRxiv, LILACS, EconLit, and other databases were searched for studies employing epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data. We summarized the information qualitatively, and each article included was assessed for bias risk using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PROBAST checklist tool. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022344542.

FINDINGS

In total, 5646 articles were retrieved, of which 411 were included. Most of the information was published in 2021. The countries with the highest number of studies were the United States, Canada, China, and the United Kingdom; no studies were found in low-income countries. The SEIR model (susceptible, exposed, infectious, and recovered) was the most frequently used approach, followed by agent-based modeling. Moreover, the most commonly used software were R, Matlab, and Python, with the most recurring health outcomes being death and recovery. According to the JBI assessment, 61.4% of articles were considered to have a low risk of bias.

INTERPRETATION

The utilization of mathematical models increased following the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Stakeholders have begun to incorporate these analytical tools more extensively into public policy, enabling the construction of various scenarios for public health. This contribution adds value to informed decision-making. Therefore, understanding their advancements, strengths, and limitations is essential.

What we talk about when we talk about COVID-19 vaccination campaign impact: a narrative review

Background

The lack of precise definitions and terminological consensus about the impact studies of COVID-19 vaccination leads to confusing statements from the scientific community about what a vaccination impact study is.

Objective

The present work presents a narrative review, describing and discussing COVID-19 vaccination impact studies, mapping their relevant characteristics, such as study design, approaches and outcome variables, while analyzing their similarities, distinctions, and main insights.

Methods

The articles screening, regarding title, abstract, and full-text reading, included papers addressing perspectives about the impact of vaccines on population outcomes. The screening process included articles published before June 10, 2022, based on the initial papers' relevance to this study's research topics. The main inclusion criteria were data analyses and study designs based on statistical modelling or comparison of pre- and post-vaccination population.

Results

The review included 18 studies evaluating the vaccine impact in a total of 48 countries, including 32 high-income countries (United States, Israel, and 30 Western European countries) and 16 low- and middle-income countries (Brazil, Colombia, and 14 Eastern European countries). We summarize the main characteristics of the vaccination impact studies analyzed in this narrative review.

Conclusion

Although all studies claim to address the impact of a vaccination program, they differ significantly in their objectives since they adopt different definitions of impact, methodologies, and outcome variables. These and other differences are related to distinct data sources, designs, analysis methods, models, and approaches.

Assessing the impacts of COVID-19 vaccination programme's timing and speed on health benefits, cost-effectiveness, and relative affordability in 27 African countries

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 vaccine supply shortage in 2021 constrained roll-out efforts in Africa while populations experienced waves of epidemics. As supply improves, a key question is whether vaccination remains an impactful and cost-effective strategy given changes in the timing of implementation.

METHODS

We assessed the impact of vaccination programme timing using an epidemiological and economic model. We fitted an age-specific dynamic transmission model to reported COVID-19 deaths in 27 African countries to approximate existing immunity resulting from infection before substantial vaccine roll-out. We then projected health outcomes (from symptomatic cases to overall disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted) for different programme start dates (01 January to 01 December 2021, n = 12) and roll-out rates (slow, medium, fast; 275, 826, and 2066 doses/million population-day, respectively) for viral vector and mRNA vaccines by the end of 2022. Roll-out rates used were derived from observed uptake trajectories in this region. Vaccination programmes were assumed to prioritise those above 60 years before other adults. We collected data on vaccine delivery costs, calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) compared to no vaccine use, and compared these ICERs to GDP per capita. We additionally calculated a relative affordability measure of vaccination programmes to assess potential nonmarginal budget impacts.

RESULTS

Vaccination programmes with early start dates yielded the most health benefits and lowest ICERs compared to those with late starts. While producing the most health benefits, fast vaccine roll-out did not always result in the lowest ICERs. The highest marginal effectiveness within vaccination programmes was found among older adults. High country income groups, high proportions of populations over 60 years or non-susceptible at the start of vaccination programmes are associated with low ICERs relative to GDP per capita. Most vaccination programmes with small ICERs relative to GDP per capita were also relatively affordable.

CONCLUSION

Although ICERs increased significantly as vaccination programmes were delayed, programmes starting late in 2021 may still generate low ICERs and manageable affordability measures. Looking forward, lower vaccine purchasing costs and vaccines with improved efficacies can help increase the economic value of COVID-19 vaccination programmes.

The impacts of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose separation and targeting on the COVID-19 epidemic in England

In late 2020, the JCVI (the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, which provides advice to the Department of Health and Social Care, England) made two important recommendations for the initial roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine. The first was that vaccines should be targeted to older and vulnerable people, with the aim of maximally preventing disease rather than infection. The second was to increase the interval between first and second doses from 3 to 12 weeks. Here, we re-examine these recommendations through a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 infection in England. We show that targeting the most vulnerable had the biggest immediate impact (compared to targeting younger individuals who may be more responsible for transmission). The 12-week delay was also highly beneficial, estimated to have averted between 32-72 thousand hospital admissions and 4-9 thousand deaths over the first ten months of the campaign (December 2020-September 2021) depending on the assumed interaction between dose interval and efficacy.

In-silico evaluation of adenoviral COVID-19 vaccination protocols: Assessment of immunological memory up to 6 months after the third dose

Background

The immune response to adenoviral COVID-19 vaccines is affected by the interval between doses. The optimal interval is unknown.

Aim

We aim to explore in-silico the effect of the interval between vaccine administrations on immunogenicity and to analyze the contribution of pre-existing levels of antibodies, plasma cells, and memory B and T lymphocytes.

Methods

We used a stochastic agent-based immune simulation platform to simulate two-dose and three-dose vaccination protocols with an adenoviral vaccine. We identified the model’s parameters fitting anti-Spike antibody levels from individuals immunized with the COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1-S, Vaxzevria). We used several statistical methods, such as principal component analysis and binary classification, to analyze the correlation between pre-existing levels of antibodies, plasma cells, and memory B and T cells to the magnitude of the antibody response following a booster dose.

Results and conclusions

We find that the magnitude of the antibody response to a booster depends on the number of pre-existing memory B cells, which, in turn, is highly correlated to the number of T helper cells and plasma cells, and the antibody titers. Pre-existing memory T cytotoxic cells and antibodies directly influence antigen availability hence limiting the magnitude of the immune response. The optimal immunogenicity of the third dose is achieved over a large time window, spanning from 6 to 16 months after the second dose. Interestingly, after any vaccine dose, individuals can be classified into two groups, sustainers and decayers, that differ in the kinetics of decline of their antibody titers due to differences in long-lived plasma cells. This suggests that the decayers may benefit from a tailored boosting schedule with a shorter interval to avoid the temporary loss of serological immunity.