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

COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness rates by week and sources of bias

Anna Ostropolets, George Hripcsak
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.22.21268253
Anna Ostropolets
1Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
George Hripcsak
1Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA
2Medical Informatics Services, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: gh13@cumc.columbia.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Importance Randomized clinical trials and observational studies have demonstrated high overall effectiveness for the three US-authorized COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic COVID-19 infection. Nevertheless, the challenges associated with the use of observational data can undermine the results of the studies.

Objective To assess the feasibility of using observational data for vaccine effectiveness studies by examining granular weekly effectiveness.

Design, Settings and Participants In this retrospective cohort study, we used Columbia University Medical Center data linked to State and City Immunization Registries to assess the weekly effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted manual chart review of cases in week one in both groups along with a set of sensitivity analyses for Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Janssen vaccines.

Main Outcomes and Measures We used propensity score matching with up to 54,987 covariates and fitted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios and constructed Kaplan-Meier plots for two main outcomes (COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-associated hospitalization).

Results The study included 179,666 patients. We observed increasing effectiveness after the first dose of mRNA vaccines with week 6 effectiveness approximating 84% (95% CI 72-91%) for COVID-19 infection and 86% (95% CI 69-95) for COVID-19-associated hospitalization. When analyzing unexpectedly high effectiveness in week one, chart review revealed that vaccinated patients are less likely to seek care after vaccination and are more likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19 during the encounters for other conditions. Sensitivity analyses showed potential outcome misclassification for COVID-19 ICD10-CM diagnosis and the influence of excluding patients with prior COVID-19 infection and anchoring in the unexposed group. Overall vaccine effectiveness analysis in fully vaccinated patients matched the results of the randomized trials.

Conclusions and Relevance Observational data can be used to ascertain vaccine effectiveness if potential biases are accounted for. The data need to be scrutinized to ensure that compared groups exhibit similar health seeking behavior and are equally likely to be captured in the data. Given the difference in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics, indirect comparison of vaccines may produce biased results.

Question When accounted for all potential biases, what is the weekly effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines?

Findings In this cohort study we replicated the results of randomized clinical trials, discovered plausible increase in effectiveness after week one following the first dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and found differences in temporal trends of vaccine exposure and baseline characteristics in vaccinated groups.

Meaning Observational data can be used to reliably estimate vaccine effectiveness if the biases are accounted for. Vaccines need to be directly compared.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

US National Library of Medicine (R01 LM006910), US Food and Drug Administration CBER BEST Initiative (75F40120D00039).

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:

The protocol for this research was approved by the Columbia University Institutional Review Board (AAAO7805).

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

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript

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-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 25, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

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.
COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness rates by week and sources of bias
(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
COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness rates by week and sources of bias
Anna Ostropolets, George Hripcsak
medRxiv 2021.12.22.21268253; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.22.21268253
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
COVID-19 vaccination effectiveness rates by week and sources of bias
Anna Ostropolets, George Hripcsak
medRxiv 2021.12.22.21268253; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.22.21268253

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

  • Health Informatics
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (227)
  • Allergy and Immunology (500)
  • Anesthesia (110)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1227)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (205)
  • Dermatology (147)
  • Emergency Medicine (282)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (528)
  • Epidemiology (10001)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (497)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2443)
  • Geriatric Medicine (236)
  • Health Economics (479)
  • Health Informatics (1635)
  • Health Policy (751)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (633)
  • Hematology (247)
  • HIV/AIDS (531)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11855)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (625)
  • Medical Education (251)
  • Medical Ethics (74)
  • Nephrology (267)
  • Neurology (2272)
  • Nursing (139)
  • Nutrition (349)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (451)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (532)
  • Oncology (1244)
  • Ophthalmology (375)
  • Orthopedics (133)
  • Otolaryngology (226)
  • Pain Medicine (154)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (324)
  • Pediatrics (729)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (311)
  • Primary Care Research (281)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2280)
  • Public and Global Health (4824)
  • Radiology and Imaging (833)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (488)
  • Respiratory Medicine (650)
  • Rheumatology (283)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (237)
  • Sports Medicine (224)
  • Surgery (266)
  • Toxicology (44)
  • Transplantation (124)
  • Urology (99)