Abstract
Objectives With vaccination shortage persisting in many countries, adopting an optimal vaccination program is of crucial importance. Given the slow pace of vaccination campaigns globally, a very relevant and burning public health question is whether it is better to delay the second COVID-19 vaccine shot until all priority group people have received at least one shot. Currently, many countries are looking to administer a third dose (booster shot), which raises the question of how to distribute the available daily doses to maximize the effectively vaccinated population.
Methods We formulate a generalized optimization problem with a total of 
vaccine doses, that have to be optimally distributed between n different sub-populations, where sub-population ui represents people receiving the i-th dose of the vaccine with efficacy αi. The particular case where n = 2 is solved first, followed by the general case of n dose regimen.
Results In the case of a two dose regimen, if the efficacy of the second dose is less than (or equal to) twice the efficacy of the first dose, the optimal strategy to maximize the number of effectively vaccinated people is to delay the second vaccine as much as possible. Otherwise, the optimal strategy would consist of administering the second dose as quickly as possible. In the general case, the optimal vaccination strategy would be to administer the k−th dose corresponding to the index providing the maximum inter-dose efficacy difference (αi − αi−1) for all possible values of i ∈ {1, …, n}, with α0 = 0.
Conclusion Our results suggest that although extending the interval between doses beyond 12 weeks was likely optimal earlier in the pandemic, the reduced single dose efficacy of vaccines against the delta variant make this approach no longer viable.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research work is supported by the National Research Council of Canada, under the grants NSERC-DG RGPIN-2020-04759 and NSERC-DG RGPIN-2020-0627.
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:
CER-UQO
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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
atayebi{at}lakeheadu.ca
hintissa{at}uwo.ca
Michael.Silverman{at}sjhc.london.on.ca
saverio.stranges{at}uwo.ca
A correction to the formula has been made. The previous formula assumes the use of the second dose efficacy for those who are not protected by the first dose. However, the two doses efficacy announced is understood to include people who are protected by first or second dose. A generalization of the approach to a multiple dose regimen has also been included in this revision.
Data Availability
There is not data associated with this paper.
