RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Evaluating primary and booster vaccination prioritization strategies for COVID-19 by age and high-contact employment status using data from contact surveys
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.12.02.22283040
DO 10.1101/2022.12.02.22283040
A1 Ethan Roubenoff
A1 Dennis Feehan
A1 Ayesha S. Mahmud
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/12/04/2022.12.02.22283040.abstract
AB The debate around vaccine prioritization for COVID-19 has revolved around balancing the benefits from: (1) the direct protection conferred by the vaccine amongst those at highest risk of severe disease outcomes, and (2) the indirect protection through vaccinating those that are at highest risk of being infected and of transmitting the virus. While adults aged 65+ are at highest risk for severe disease and death from COVID-19, essential service and other in-person workers with greater rates of contact may be at higher risk of acquiring and transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Unfortunately, there have been relatively little data available to understand heterogeneity in contact rates and risk across these demographic groups. Here, we retrospectively analyze and evaluate vaccination prioritization strategies by age and worker status. We use a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and uniquely detailed contact data collected as part of the Berkeley Interpersonal Contact Survey to evaluate five vaccination prioritization strategies: (1) prioritizing only adults over age 65, (2) prioritizing only high-contact workers, (3) splitting prioritization between adults 65+ and high-contact workers, (4) tiered prioritization of adults over age 65 followed by high-contact workers, and (5) tiered prioritization of high-contact workers followed by adults. We find that for the primary two-dose vaccination schedule, assuming 70% uptake, a tiered roll-out that first prioritizes adults 65+ averts the most deaths (31% fewer deaths compared to a no-vaccination scenario) while a tiered roll-out that prioritizes high contact workers averts the most number of clinical infections (14% fewer clinical infections compared to a no-vaccination scenario). We also consider prioritization strategies for booster doses during a subsequent outbreak of a hypothetical new SARS-CoV-2 variant. We find that a tiered roll-out that prioritizes adults 65+ for booster doses consistently averts the most deaths, and it may also avert the most number of clinical cases depending on the epidemiology of the SARS-CoV-2 variant and the vaccine efficacy.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSeed funding was provided by a Berkeley Population Center pilot grant (NICHD P2CHD073964) and further funding was provided by the Hellman Fellows Program.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:IRB of University of California, Berkeley gave ethical approval for this workI 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.Yes4.1 Data availability We have deposited our data in the Harvard Dataverse, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/K8YPVZ (Roubenoff, D. Feehan, and Mahmud 2022a). 4.2 Replication Code All analyses was conducted using R software (version R version 4.0.2). Replication code is publicly available at https://github.com/eroubenoff/BICS_employment_replication_code (Roubenoff, D. Feehan, and Mahmud 2022b).