RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Waning effectiveness of BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines over six months since second dose: a cohort study using linked electronic health records
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.23.22272804
DO 10.1101/2022.03.23.22272804
A1 Horne, Elsie MF
A1 Hulme, William J
A1 Keogh, Ruth H
A1 Palmer, Tom M
A1 Williamson, Elizabeth J
A1 Parker, Edward PK
A1 Green, Amelia
A1 Walker, Venexia
A1 Walker, Alex J
A1 Curtis, Helen
A1 Fisher, Louis
A1 MacKenna, Brian
A1 Croker, Richard
A1 Hopcroft, Lisa
A1 Park, Robin Y
A1 Massey, Jon
A1 Morley, Jessica
A1 Mehrkar, Amir
A1 Bacon, Sebastian
A1 Evans, David
A1 Inglesby, Peter
A1 Morton, Caroline E
A1 Hickman, George
A1 Davy, Simon
A1 Ward, Tom
A1 Dillingham, Iain
A1 Goldacre, Ben
A1 Hernán, Miguel A
A1 Sterne, Jonathan AC
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/23/2022.03.23.22272804.abstract
AB Background The rate at which COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes over time is crucial for vaccination policies, but is incompletely understood with conflicting results from different studies.Methods This cohort study, using the OpenSAFELY-TPP database and approved by NHS England, included individuals without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection assigned to vaccines priority groups 2-12 defined by the UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation. We compared individuals who had received two doses of BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 with unvaccinated individuals during six 4-week comparison periods, separately for subgroups aged 65+ years; 16-64 years and clinically vulnerable; 40-64 years and 18-39 years. We used Cox regression, stratified by first dose eligibility and geographical region and controlled for calendar time, to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated individuals, and quantified waning vaccine effectiveness as ratios of aHRs per-4-week period. The outcomes were COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death, positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and non-COVID-19 death.Findings The BNT162b2, ChAdOx1 and unvaccinated groups comprised 1,773,970, 2,961,011 and 2,433,988 individuals, respectively. Waning of vaccine effectiveness was similar across outcomes and vaccine brands: e.g. in the 65+ years subgroup ratios of aHRs versus unvaccinated for COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and positive SARS-CoV-2 test ranged from 1.23 (95% CI 1.15-1.32) to 1.27 (1.20-1.34) for BNT162b2 and 1.16 (0.98-1.37) to 1.20 (1.14-1.27) for ChAdOx1. Despite waning, rates of COVID-19 hospitalisation and COVID-19 death were substantially lower among vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals up to 26 weeks after second dose, with estimated aHRs <0.20 (>80% vaccine effectiveness) for BNT162b2, and <0.26 (>74%) for ChAdOx1. By weeks 23-26, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection in fully vaccinated individuals were similar to or higher than those in unvaccinated individuals: aHRs ranged from 0.85 (0.78-0.92) to 1.53 (1.07-2.18) for BNT162b2, and 1.21 (1.13-1.30) to 1.99 (1.94-2.05) for ChAdOx1.Interpretation The rate at which estimated vaccine effectiveness waned was strikingly consistent for COVID-19 hospitalisation, COVID-19 death and positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and similar across subgroups defined by age and clinical vulnerability. If sustained to outcomes of infection with the Omicron variant and to booster vaccination, these findings will facilitate scheduling of booster vaccination doses.Competing Interest StatementBen Goldacre has received research funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the NHS National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), the NIHR School of Primary Care Research, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, the Mohn-Westlake Foundation, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley, the Wellcome Trust, the Good Thinking Foundation, Health Data Research UK, the Health Foundation, the World Health Organisation, UKRI, Asthma UK, the British Lung Foundation, and the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing strand of the National Core Studies programme; he receives personal income from speaking and writing for lay audiences on the misuse of science; he is also a Non-executive Director of NHS Digital.Funding StatementThis work was supported by the This work was supported by the Longitudinal Health and Wellbeing COVID-19 National Core Study (UKRI Medical Research Council MC_PC_20030 and MC_PC_20059), Asthma UK, and NIHR grant MR/V015737/1. The OpenSAFELY software platform is funded by Wellcome and by the Data and Connectivity COVID-19 National Core Study which is led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation (grant ref MC_PC_20058). TPP provided technical expertise and infrastructure within their data centre pro bono in the context of a national emergency. BG's work on better use of data in healthcare more broadly is currently funded in part by: NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Applied Research Collaboration Oxford and Thames Valley, the Mohn-Westlake Foundation, NHS England, and the Health Foundation, all DataLab staff are supported by BG's grants on this work. RHK was funded by UK Research and Innovation (Future Leaders Fellowship MR/S017968/1). VW and TMP were supported by the MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit which receives funding from the UKRI Medical Research Council and the University of Bristol (MC_UU_00011/1 and MC_UU_00011/3). EPKP was funded by UK Research and Innovation (COVID-19 data analysis secondment MR/W021420/1). EW holds grants from MRC. JACS is supported by the NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre and by Health Data Research UK. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS England, Public Health England or the Department of Health and Social Care. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was approved by the Health Research Authority (REC reference 20/LO/0651) and by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Ethics Board (reference 21863).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.YesI 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).YesI 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.YesAll data were linked, stored and analysed securely within the OpenSAFELY platform: https://opensafely.org/. Data include pseudonymised data such as coded diagnoses, medications and physiological parameters. No free text data are included. All code is shared openly for review and re-use under MIT open license https://github.com/opensafely/covid-ve-change-over-time. Detailed pseudonymised patient data is potentially re-identifiable and therefore not shared. Codelists are available at https://www.opencodelists.org/. https://github.com/opensafely/covid-ve-change-over-time