RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Effectiveness of Primary and Booster COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination against Omicron Variant SARS-CoV-2 Infection in People with a Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.04.19.22274056
DO 10.1101/2022.04.19.22274056
A1 Margaret L. Lind
A1 Alexander James Robertson
A1 Julio Silva
A1 Frederick Warner
A1 Andreas C. Coppi
A1 Nathan Price
A1 Chelsea Duckwall
A1 Peri Sosensky
A1 Erendira C. Di Giuseppe
A1 Ryan Borg
A1 Mariam O Fofana
A1 Otavio T. Ranzani
A1 Natalie E. Dean
A1 Jason R. Andrews
A1 Julio Croda
A1 Akiko Iwasaki
A1 Derek A.T. Cummings
A1 Albert I. Ko
A1 Matt DT Hitchings
A1 Wade L. Schulz
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/25/2022.04.19.22274056.abstract
AB Background The benefit of vaccination in people who experienced a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear.Objective To estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among people with a prior documented infection.Design Test-negative case-control study.Setting Yale New Haven Health System facilities.Participants Vaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022.Measurements We conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people.Results Overall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (6.1% and 7.8% occurred following a prior infection, respectively). The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (CI, 7.1% to 56.1%) for people with and 28.5% (CI, 20.0% to 36.2%) without prior infection. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (CI, 0.56 to 1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (CI, 0.46 to 0.56).Limitations Misclassification, residual confounding, reliance on TaqPath assay analyzed samples.Conclusion While primary vaccination provided protection against BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection, booster vaccination was only associated with additional protection in people without prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination.Primary Funding Source Beatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth and Sendas Family Funds, Merck and Co through their Merck Investigator Studies Program, and the Yale Schools of Public Health and Medicine.Competing Interest StatementA.I.K serves as an expert panel member for Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, scientific advisory board member for Revelar Biotherapeutics and a consultant for Tata Medical and Diagnostics and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and has received grants from Merck, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Tata Medical and Diagnostics for research related to COVID-19. W.L.S. was an investigator for a research agreement, through Yale University, from the Shenzhen Center for Health Information for work to advance intelligent disease prevention and health promotion; collaborates with the National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases in Beijing; is a technical consultant to Hugo Health, a personal health information platform, and co-founder of Refactor Health, an AI-augmented data management platform for healthcare; and has received grants from Merck and Regeneron Pharmaceutical for research related to COVID-19. Other authors declare no conflict of interest.Funding StatementFunding for the Studying COVID-19 Outcomes after SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination (SUCCESS) Study was provided by the Beatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth and Sendas Family Funds, Merck and Co through their Merck Investigator Studies Program, and the Yale Schools of Public Health and Medicine.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 Yale Institutional Review Board (ID# 2000030222).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.YesThe data used in this study belongs to Yale University. Qualified researchers may submit a data share request for de-identified patient level data by contacting the corresponding author with a detailed description of the research question.