Abstract
Background We aimed at minimizing loss of lives in the Covid-19 pandemic in the USA by identifying optimal vaccination strategies during a 100-day period with limited vaccine supplies. While lethality is highest in the elderly, transmission and case numbers are highest in the younger. A strategy of first vaccinating the elderly is widely used, thought to protect the vulnerable, elderly best. Despite lower immunogenicity in the elderly, mRNA vaccines retain high efficacy, implying that in the younger, reduced vaccine doses might suffice, thereby increasing vaccination counts with a given vaccine supply.
Methods Using published immunogenicity data of the Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine, we examined the value of personalized-dose vaccination strategies, using a modeling approach incorporating age-related vaccine immunogenicity, social contact patterns, population structure, Covid-19 case and death rates in the USA in late January 2021. An increase if the number of persons that can be vaccinated and a potential reduction of the individual protective efficacy was accounted for.
Results Age-personalized dosing strategies reduced cases faster, shortening the pandemic, reducing the delay to reaching <100’000 cases/day from 64 to 30 days and avoiding 25’000 deaths within 100 days in the USA. In an “elderly first” vaccination strategy, mortality is higher even in the elderly. Findings were robust with transmission blocking efficacies of reduced dose vaccination between 30% to 90%, and with a vaccine supply from 1 to 3 million full dose vaccinations per day.
Conclusion In a vaccination strategy model, rapid reduction of Covid-19 case and death rate in the USA in 100 days with a limited vaccine supply is best achieved when personalized, age-tailored dosing for highly effective vaccines is used. Protecting the vulnerable is most effectively achieved by personalized-dose vaccination of all population segments, while an “elderly first” approach costs more lives, even in the elderly.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Self-funded study
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
According the Ethical Committee of Northwestern Switzerland, this type of study, a computer modeling study, requires no ethical committee approval.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: Self-funded
Conflicts of interest: None
Ethics committee approval: Declaration that computer modelling studies do not fall under its jurisdiction received from Ethisches Kommittee Nordwestschweiz.
Sharpened the abstract and conclusion
Data Availability
Data will be available after publication in journal, or according to specific discussion with the author.
