Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control study

Nick Andrews, Julia Stowe, Freja Kirsebom, Charlotte Gower, Mary Ramsay, Jamie Lopez Bernal
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.15.21266341
Nick Andrews
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
2NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Vaccines and Immunisation, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julia Stowe
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
2NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Vaccines and Immunisation, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Freja Kirsebom
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Charlotte Gower
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mary Ramsay
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
2NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Vaccines and Immunisation, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jamie Lopez Bernal
1UK Health Security Agency, London, UK
2NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Vaccines and Immunisation, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK
3NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Respiratory Infections, Imperial College London, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: jamie.lopezbernal2@phe.gov.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background In September 2021, the UK Government introduced a booster programme targeting individuals over 50 and those in a clinical risk group. Individuals were offered either a full dose of the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine or a half dose of the mRNA-1273 (Spikevax, Moderna) vaccine, irrespective of the vaccine received as the primary course

Methods We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate the Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) of the booster dose BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) in those aged over 50 against symptomatic disease in post booster time intervals compared to individuals at least 140 days post a second dose with no booster dose recorded. In a secondary analysis, we also compared to unvaccinated individuals and to the 2 to 6 day period after a booster dose was received. Analyses were stratified by which primary doses had been received and any mixed primary courses were excluded.

Results The relative VE estimate in the 14 days after the BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) booster dose, compared to individuals that received a two-dose primary course, was 87.4 (95% confidence interval 84.9-89.4) in those individuals who received two doses ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria, AstraZeneca) as a primary course and 84.4 (95% confidence interval 82.8-85.8) in those individuals who received two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) as a primary course. Using the 2-6 day period post the booster dose as the baseline gave similar results. The absolute VE from 14 days after the booster, using the unvaccinated baseline, was 93.1(95% confidence interval 91.7-94.3) in those with ChAdOx1-S (Vaxzevria, AstraZeneca) as their primary course and 94.0 (93.4-94.6) for BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) as their primary course.

Conclusions Our study provides real world evidence of significant increased protection from the booster vaccine dose against symptomatic disease in those aged over 50 year of age irrespective of which primary course was received.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

There was no external funding for this 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:

Surveillance of covid-19 testing and vaccination is undertaken under Regulation 3 of The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002 to collect confidential patient information (www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/1438/regulation/3/ made) under Sections 3(i) (a) to (c), 3(i)(d) (i) and (ii) and 3(3). The study protocol was subject to an internal review by the Public Health England Research Ethics and Governance Group and was found to be fully compliant with all regulatory requirements. As no regulatory issues were identified, and ethical review is not a requirement for this type of work, it was decided that a full ethical review would not be necessary.

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

  • ↵* Joint first authors

Data Availability

Data cannot be made publicly available for ethical and legal reasons, i.e. public availability would compromise patient confidentiality as data tables list single counts of individuals rather than aggregated data

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 15, 2021.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control study
Nick Andrews, Julia Stowe, Freja Kirsebom, Charlotte Gower, Mary Ramsay, Jamie Lopez Bernal
medRxiv 2021.11.15.21266341; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.15.21266341
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty, Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 booster vaccine against covid-19 related symptoms in England: test negative case-control study
Nick Andrews, Julia Stowe, Freja Kirsebom, Charlotte Gower, Mary Ramsay, Jamie Lopez Bernal
medRxiv 2021.11.15.21266341; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.11.15.21266341

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Epidemiology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (216)
  • Allergy and Immunology (495)
  • Anesthesia (106)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1099)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (196)
  • Dermatology (141)
  • Emergency Medicine (274)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (502)
  • Epidemiology (9781)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (481)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2317)
  • Geriatric Medicine (223)
  • Health Economics (462)
  • Health Informatics (1563)
  • Health Policy (737)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (605)
  • Hematology (238)
  • HIV/AIDS (506)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11655)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (617)
  • Medical Education (239)
  • Medical Ethics (67)
  • Nephrology (258)
  • Neurology (2146)
  • Nursing (134)
  • Nutrition (338)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (427)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (518)
  • Oncology (1183)
  • Ophthalmology (365)
  • Orthopedics (128)
  • Otolaryngology (220)
  • Pain Medicine (147)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (312)
  • Pediatrics (698)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (302)
  • Primary Care Research (267)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2187)
  • Public and Global Health (4672)
  • Radiology and Imaging (781)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (457)
  • Respiratory Medicine (624)
  • Rheumatology (274)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (226)
  • Sports Medicine (210)
  • Surgery (252)
  • Toxicology (43)
  • Transplantation (120)
  • Urology (94)