Protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination against long COVID syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundThe relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and long COVID has not been firmly established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the association between COVID-19 vaccination and long COVID.MethodsPubMed and EMBASE databases were searched on September 2022 without language restrictions (CRD42022360399) to identify prospective trials and observational studies comparing patients with and without vaccination before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We also included studies reporting symptomatic changes of ongoing long COVID following vaccination among those with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Odds ratios (ORs) for each outcome were synthesized using a random-effects model. Symptomatic changes after vaccination were synthesized by a one-group meta-analysis.ResultsSix observational studies involving 536,291 unvaccinated and 84,603 vaccinated (before SARS-CoV-2 infection) patients (mean age, 41.2–66.6; female, 9.0–67.3%) and six observational studies involving 8,199 long COVID patients (mean age, 40.0 to 53.5; female, 22.2–85.9%) who received vaccination after SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Two-dose vaccination was associated with a lower risk of long COVID compared to no vaccination (OR, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45–0.92) and one-dose vaccination (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.83). Two-dose vaccination compared to no vaccination was associated with a lower risk of persistent fatigue (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93) and pulmonary disorder (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.47–0.52). Among those with ongoing long COVID symptoms, 54.4% (95% CI, 34.3–73.1%) did not report symptomatic changes following vaccination, while 20.3% (95% CI, 8.1–42.4%) experienced symptomatic improvement after two weeks to six months of COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination before SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a lower risk of long COVID, while most of those with ongoing long COVID did not experience symptomatic changes following vaccination.     

COVID-19 vaccine perceptions and uptake in a national prospective cohort of essential workers

IntroductionIn a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time.MethodsInitiated in July 2020, the HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using two follow-up surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorser.ResultsA total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR = 5.46, 95% CI: 1.4–20.8) and effectiveness (aOR = 5.0, 95% CI: 1.3–19.1). Participants’ with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64–0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.40–0.84). Between administrations of the two surveys, 25% of reluctant, 56% reachable, and 83% of endorser groups received the COVID-19 vaccine. The reachable group had large increases in positive responses for questions about vaccine safety (10% of vaccinated, 34% of unvaccinated), and vaccine effectiveness (12% of vaccinated, 27% of unvaccinated).DiscussionOur study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant.ConclusionsPerceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants.     

Association between history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe systemic adverse events after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination among U.S. adults

BackgroundRisk of experiencing a systemic adverse event (AE) after mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination may be greater among persons with a history of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection; data on serious events are limited. We assessed if adults reporting systemic AEs resulting in emergency department visits or hospitalizations during days 0–7 after mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose 1 were more likely to have a history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with persons who reported no or non-severe systemic AEs.MethodsWe conducted a nested case-control study using v-safe surveillance data. Participants were ≥ 18 years and received dose 1 during December 14, 2020─May 9, 2021. Cases reported severe systemic AEs 0–7 days after vaccination. Three controls were frequency matched per case by age, vaccination date, and days since vaccination. Follow-up surveys collected SARS-CoV-2 histories.ResultsFollow-up survey response rates were 38.6 % (potential cases) and 56.8 % (potential controls). In multivariable analyses including 3,862 case-patients and 11,586 controls, the odds of experiencing a severe systemic AE were 2.4 (Moderna, mRNA-1273; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.89, 3.09) and 1.5 (Pfizer-BioNTech, BNT162b2; 95 % CI: 1.17, 2.02) times higher among participants with pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 histories compared with those without. Medical attention of any kind for symptoms during days 0–7 following dose 2 was not common among case-patients or controls.ConclusionsHistory of SARS-CoV-2 infection was significantly associated with severe systemic AEs following dose 1 of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine; the effect varied by vaccine received. Most participants who experienced severe systemic AEs following dose 1 did not require medical attention of any kind for symptoms following dose 2. Vaccine providers can use these findings to counsel patients who had pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection histories, experienced severe systemic AEs following dose 1, and are considering not receiving additional mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses.     

Individual-level factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among U.S. patients with cancer

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19.MethodsWe used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question “Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?” and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it).ResultsMost patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70–89 vs.18–49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33–4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76–3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57–1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25–8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance.ConclusionMost patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity.     

Assessing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake and Effectiveness Through the North West London Vaccination Program: Retrospective Cohort Study

BackgroundOn March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared SARS-CoV-2, causing COVID-19, as a pandemic. The UK mass vaccination program commenced on December 8, 2020, vaccinating groups of the population deemed to be most vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the early vaccine administration coverage and outcome data across an integrated care system in North West London, leveraging a unique population-level care data set. Vaccine effectiveness of a single dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines were compared.MethodsA retrospective cohort study identified 2,183,939 individuals eligible for COVID-19 vaccination between December 8, 2020, and February 24, 2021, within a primary, secondary, and community care integrated care data set. These data were used to assess vaccination hesitancy across ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic deprivation measures (Pearson product-moment correlations); investigate COVID-19 transmission related to vaccination hubs; and assess the early effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination (after a single dose) using time-to-event analyses with multivariable Cox regression analysis to investigate if vaccination independently predicted positive SARS-CoV-2 in those vaccinated compared to those unvaccinated.ResultsIn this study, 5.88% (24,332/413,919) of individuals declined and did not receive a vaccination. Black or Black British individuals had the highest rate of declining a vaccine at 16.14% (4337/26,870). There was a strong negative association between socioeconomic deprivation and rate of declining vaccination (r=–0.94; P=.002) with 13.5% (1980/14,571) of individuals declining vaccination in the most deprived areas compared to 0.98% (869/9609) in the least. In the first 6 days after vaccination, 344 of 389,587 (0.09%) individuals tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rate increased to 0.13% (525/389,243) between days 7 and 13, before then gradually falling week on week. At 28 days post vaccination, there was a 74% (hazard ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.19-0.35) and 78% (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.18-0.27) reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for individuals that received the Oxford/AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines, respectively, when compared with unvaccinated individuals. A very low proportion of hospital admissions were seen in vaccinated individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (288/389,587, 0.07% of all patients vaccinated) providing evidence for vaccination effectiveness after a single dose.ConclusionsThere was no definitive evidence to suggest COVID-19 was transmitted as a result of vaccination hubs during the vaccine administration rollout in North West London, and the risk of contracting COVID-19 or becoming hospitalized after vaccination has been demonstrated to be low in the vaccinated population. This study provides further evidence that a single dose of either the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine or the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is effective at reducing the risk of testing positive for COVID-19 up to 60 days across all age groups, ethnic groups, and risk categories in an urban UK population.     

Estimated COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against seroconversion from SARS-CoV-2 Infection,March–October, 2021

BackgroundMonitoring the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infections remains important to inform public health responses. Estimation of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection might provide an alternative measure of the benefit of vaccination against infection.MethodsWe estimated mRNA COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against development of SARS-CoV-2 anti-nucleocapsid antibodies in March–October 2021, during which the Delta variant became predominant. Participants were enrolled from four participating healthcare systems in the United States, and completed electronic surveys that included vaccination history. Dried blood spot specimens collected on a monthly basis were analyzed for anti-spike antibodies, and, if positive, anti-nucleocapsid antibodies. We used detection of new anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to indicate SARS-CoV-2 infection, and estimated VE by comparing 154 case-participants with new detection of anti-nucleocapsid antibodies to 1,540 seronegative control-participants matched by calendar period. Using conditional logistic regression, we estimated VE ≥ 14 days after the 2nd dose of an mRNA vaccine compared with no receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine dose, adjusting for age group, healthcare worker occupation, urban/suburban/rural residence, healthcare system region, and reported contact with a person testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.ResultsAmong individuals who completed a primary series, estimated VE against seroconversion from SARS-CoV-2 infection was 88.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.6%–93.9%) after any mRNA vaccine, 87.8% (95% CI, 75.9%–93.8%) after BioNTech vaccine and 91.7% (95% CI, 75.7%–97.2%) after Moderna vaccine. VE was estimated to be lower ≥ 3 months after dose 2 compared with < 3 months after dose 2, and among participants who were older or had underlying health conditions, although confidence intervals overlapped between subgroups.ConclusionsVE estimates generated using infection-induced antibodies were consistent with published estimates from clinical trials and observational studies that used virologic tests to confirm infection during the same period. Our findings support recommendations for eligible adults to remain up to date with COVID-19 vaccination.     

Adverse Events Following One Dose of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Among US Nursing Home Residents With and Without a Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection

ObjectivesTo compare rates of adverse events following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination among nursing home residents with and without previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.DesignProspective cohort.Setting and ParticipantsA total of 20,918 nursing home residents who received the first dose of messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine from December 18, 2020, through February 14, 2021, in 284 facilities within Genesis Healthcare, a large nursing home provider spanning 24 US states.MethodsWe screened the electronic health record for adverse events, classified by the Brighton Collaboration, occurring within 15 days of a resident’s first COVID-19 vaccine dose. All events were confirmed by physician chart review. To obtain risk ratios, multilevel logistic regression model that accounted for clustering (variability) across nursing homes was implemented. To balance the probability of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection (previous positive test or diagnosis by the International Classification of Diseases, 10^th Revision, Clinical Modification) more than 20 days before vaccination, we used inverse probability weighting. To adjust for multiplicity of adverse events tested, we used a false discovery rate procedure.ResultsStatistically significant differences existed between those without (n = 13,163) and with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection [symptomatic (n = 5617) and asymptomatic (n = 2138)] for all baseline characteristics assessed. Only 1 adverse event was reported among those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (asymptomatic), venous thromboembolism [46.8 per 100,000 residents 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.3–264.5], which was not significantly different from the rate reported for those without previous infection (30.4 per 100,000 95% CI 11.8–78.1). Several other adverse events were observed for those with no previous infection, but were not statistically significantly higher than those reported with previous infection after adjustments for multiple comparisons.Conclusions and ImplicationsAlthough reactogenicity increases with preexisting immunity, we did not find that vaccination among those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection resulted in higher rates of adverse events than those without previous infection. This study stresses the importance of monitoring novel vaccines for adverse events in this vulnerable population.     

COVID-19 outbreak in an elderly care home: Very low vaccine effectiveness and late impact of booster vaccination campaign

BackgroundElderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination.MethodsWe calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE – at on average 6 months after vaccination – as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2).ResultsThe overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI ?28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI ?44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week.ConclusionVE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.     

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and its socio-demographic and emotional determinants: A multi-country cross-sectional study

BackgroundMultiple COVID-19 vaccines have now been licensed for human use, with other candidate vaccines in different stages of development. Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 have been essential in achieving global reductions in severe disease caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but multiple factors, including vaccine supply and vaccine confidence, continue to impact global uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. In this study, we explore determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intent across17 countries worldwide.MethodsIn this large-scale multi-country study, we explored intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and the socio-demographic and emotional determinants of uptake for 17 countries and over 19,000 individuals surveyed in June and July 2020 via nationally representative samples. We used Bayesian ordinal logistic regressions to probe the relationship between intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and individuals’ socio-demographic status, their confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and their recent emotional status. Gibbs sampling was used for Bayesian model inference, with 95% Bayesian highest posterior density intervals used to capture uncertainty.FindingsIntent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine was found to be highest in India, where 77?8% (95% HPD, 75?5 to 80?0%) of respondents strongly agreeing that they would take a new COVID-19 vaccine if it were available. The Democratic Republic of Congo (15?5%, 12?2 to 18?6%) and France (26?4%, 23?7 to 29?2%) had the lowest share of respondents who strongly agreed that they would accept a COVID-19. Confidence in the safety, importance, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines are the most widely informative determinants of vaccination intent. Socio-demographic and emotional determinants played a lesser role, with being male and having higher education associated with increased uptake intent in five countries and being fearful of catching COVID-19 also a strong determinant of uptake intent.InterpretationBarriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance are found to be country and context dependent. These findings highlight the importance of regular monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine confidence to identify groups less likely to vaccinate.     

Does BCG provide long-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection? A case–control study in Quebec,Canada

BackgroundEarly in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, before severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines became available, it was hypothesized that BCG (Bacillus Calmette–Guérin), which stimulates innate immunity, could provide protection against SARS-CoV-2. Numerous ecological studies, plagued by methodological deficiencies, revealed a country-level association between BCG use and lower COVID-19 incidence and mortality. We aimed to determine whether BCG administered in early life decreased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in adulthood and the severity of COVID-19.MethodsThis case-control study was conducted in Quebec, Canada. Cases were patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification test performed at two hospitals between March–October 2020. Controls were identified among patients with non-COVID-19 samples processed by the same microbiology laboratories during the same period. Enrolment was limited to individuals born in Quebec between 1956 and 1976, whose vaccine status was accessible in a computerized registry of 4.2 million BCG vaccinations.ResultsWe recruited 920 cases and 2123 controls. Fifty-four percent of cases (n = 424) and 53% of controls (n = 1127) had received BCG during childhood (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.89–1.21), while 12% of cases (n = 114) and 11% of controls (n = 235) had received two or more BCG doses (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.88–1.46). After adjusting for age, sex, material deprivation, recruiting hospital and occupation there was no evidence of protection conferred by BCG against SARS-CoV-2 (AOR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.84–1.21). Among cases, 77 (8.4%) needed hospitalization and 18 (2.0%) died. The vaccinated were as likely as the unvaccinated to require hospitalization (AOR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.62–1.67) or to die (AOR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.32–2.39).ConclusionsBCG does not provide long-term protection against symptomatic COVID-19 or severe forms of the disease.     

Association of COVID-19 mortality with COVID-19 vaccination rates in Rhineland-Palatinate (Germany) from calendar week 1 to 20 in the year 2021: a registry-based analysis

Vaccination is among the measures implemented by authorities to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, real-world evidence of population-level effects of vaccination campaigns against COVID-19 are required to confirm that positive results from clinical trials translate into positive public health outcomes. Since the age group 80?+?years is most at risk for severe COVID-19 disease progression, this group was prioritized during vaccine rollout in Germany. Based on comprehensive vaccination data from the German federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate for calendar week 1–20 in the year 2021, we calculated sex- and age-specific vaccination coverage. Furthermore, we calculated the proportion of weekly COVID-19 fatalities and reported SARS-CoV-2 infections formed by each age group. Vaccination coverage in the age group 80?+?years increased to a level of 80% (men) and 75% (women). Increasing vaccination coverage coincided with a reduction in the age group’s proportion of COVID-19 fatalities. In multivariable logistic regression, vaccination coverage was associated both with a reduction in an age-group’s proportion of COVID-19 fatalities [odds ratio (OR) per 5 percentage points?=?0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI)?=?0.82–0.96, p?=?0.0013] and of reported SARS-CoV-2 infections (OR per 5 percentage points?=?0.82, 95% CI 0.76–0.88, p?<?0.0001). The results are consistent with a protective effect afforded by the vaccination campaign against severe COVID-19 disease in the oldest age group.

     

Statin Use and COVID-19 Infectivity and Severity in South Korea: Two Population-Based Nationwide Cohort Studies

BackgroundBasic studies suggest that statins as add-on therapy may benefit patients with COVID-19; however, real-world evidence of such a beneficial association is lacking.ObjectiveWe investigated differences in SARS-CoV-2 test positivity and clinical outcomes of COVID-19 (composite endpoint: admission to intensive care unit, invasive ventilation, or death) between statin users and nonusers.MethodsTwo independent population-based cohorts were analyzed, and we investigated the differences in SARS-CoV-2 test positivity and severe clinical outcomes of COVID-19, such as admission to the intensive care unit, invasive ventilation, or death, between statin users and nonusers. One group comprised an unmatched cohort of 214,207 patients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing from the Global Research Collaboration Project (GRCP)-COVID cohort, and the other group comprised an unmatched cohort of 74,866 patients who underwent SARS-CoV-2 testing from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS)-COVID cohort.ResultsThe GRCP-COVID cohort with propensity score matching had 29,701 statin users and 29,701 matched nonusers. The SARS-CoV-2 test positivity rate was not associated with statin use (statin users, 2.82% [837/29,701]; nonusers, 2.65% [787/29,701]; adjusted relative risk [aRR] 0.97; 95% CI 0.88-1.07). Among patients with confirmed COVID-19 in the GRCP-COVID cohort, 804 were statin users and 1573 were matched nonusers. Statin users were associated with a decreased likelihood of severe clinical outcomes (statin users, 3.98% [32/804]; nonusers, 5.40% [85/1573]; aRR 0.62; 95% CI 0.41-0.91) and length of hospital stay (statin users, 23.8 days; nonusers, 26.3 days; adjusted mean difference –2.87; 95% CI –5.68 to –0.93) than nonusers. The results of the NHIS-COVID cohort were similar to the primary results of the GRCP-COVID cohort.ConclusionsOur findings indicate that prior statin use is related to a decreased risk of worsening clinical outcomes of COVID-19 and length of hospital stay but not to that of SARS-CoV-2 infection.     

Association of Sources of COVID-19 Information with Vaccine Uptake,Preventive Behaviors,and Perceived Severity of COVID-19

ObjectiveTo investigate the association of using informal sources and reliance on multiple sources of information with actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake, the number of doses of vaccine received, COVID-19 testing, essential preventive measures, and perceived severity of COVID-19.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.Setting and ParticipantsOur study sample consisted of 9584 community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries, representing a weighted 50,029,030 beneficiaries from the Winter 2021 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey COVID-19 Supplement.MethodsTwo key independent variables were whether a respondent relied on a formal source (ie, traditional news, government guidance, or health care providers) or an informal source (ie, social media, Internet, or friends/family) the most for the COVID-19 information and the total number of information sources a respondent relied on.ResultsCompared with beneficiaries relying on formal sources of information, those relying on informal sources of information were less likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56–0.75) and COVID-19 testing (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74–0.98), to engage in preventive behaviors (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50–0.74), to have high perception of COVID-19 severity, and were more likely to be unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.41–1.91). Relying on more information sources was significantly associated with higher odds of actual vaccine uptake (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.17–1.26), COVID-19 testing (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07–1.15), engagement of essential preventive behaviors (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.25–1.42), having high perception of COVID-19 severity, and with lower likelihood of being unvaccinated vs 2 doses of vaccine (RRR, 0.82; 0.79–0.85).Conclusions and ImplicationsThe COVID-19 pandemic has made communicating information about coronavirus more important than ever. Our findings suggest that information from formal sources with expertise and more balanced sources of information were key to effective communication to prevent from COVID-19 infection among older adults.     

Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who inject drugs

IntroductionWe studied characteristics of COVID-19 vaccination uptake among people who inject drugs (PWID).MethodsParticipants aged ≥18 years who injected drugs ≤1 month ago were recruited into a community-based cohort from October 2020 to September 2021 in San Diego, California Poisson regression identified correlates of having had ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose based on semi-annual follow-up interviews through March 15, 2022.ResultsOf 360 participants, 74.7% were male, mean age was 42 years; 63.1% were Hispanic/Mexican/Latinx. More than one-third had ≥1 co-morbidity. HIV and HCV seroprevalence were 4.2% and 50.6% respectively; 41.1% lacked health insurance. Only 37.8% reported having ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. None received ≥3 doses. However, of those vaccinated, 37.5% were previously unwilling/unsure about COVID-19 vaccines. Believing COVID-19 vaccines include tracking devices (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.42,0.92) and lacking health insurance (aIRR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.40,0.91) were associated with approximately 40% lower COVID-19 vaccination rates). Ever receiving influenza vaccines (aIRR: 2.16; 95%CI: 1.46, 3.20) and testing HIV-seropositive (aIRR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.03, 6.10) or SARS-CoV-2 RNA-positive (aIRR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.05, 3.16) independently predicted higher COVID-19 vaccination rates. Older age, knowing more vaccinated people, and recent incarceration were also independently associated with higher COVID-19 vaccination rates.ConclusionsOne year after COVID-19 vaccines became available to U.S. adults, only one third of PWID had received ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. Multi-faceted approaches that dispel disinformation, integrate public health and social services and increase access to free, community-based COVID-19 vaccines are urgently needed.     

Vaccine effectiveness of the mRNA-1273 3-dose primary series against COVID-19 in an immunocompromised population: A prospective observational cohort study

BackgroundData on the effectiveness of the 3-dose mRNA-1273 primary series are limited, particularly in comparison to 2 doses. Given suboptimal COVID-19 vaccine uptake among immunocompromised populations, it is important to monitor the effectiveness of fewer than the recommended doses in this population.MethodsWe conducted a matched cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California to evaluate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the 3-dose series vs 2 doses of mRNA-1273 in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes among immunocompromised individuals.ResultsWe included 21,942 3-dose recipients who were 1:1 matched with randomly selected 2-dose recipients (third doses accrued 08/12/2021–12/31/2021, with follow-up through 01/31/2022). Adjusted rVE of 3 vs 2 doses of mRNA-1273 against SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 hospitalization, and COVID-19 hospital death were 55.0 % (95 % CI: 50.8–58.9 %), 83.0 % (75.4–88.3 %), and 87.1 % (30.6–97.6 %), respectively.ConclusionThree doses of mRNA-1273 were associated with a significantly higher rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, compared to 2 doses. These findings were consistent across subgroups of demographic and clinical characteristics, and mostly consistent across subgroups of immunocompromising conditions. Our study highlights the importance of completing the 3-dose series for immunocompromised populations.     

Seropositivity to Nucleoprotein to detect mild and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: A complementary tool to detect breakthrough infections after COVID-19 vaccination?

BackgroundWith COVID-19 vaccine roll-out ongoing in many countries globally, monitoring of breakthrough infections is of great importance. Antibodies persist in the blood after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Since COVID-19 vaccines induce immune response to the Spike protein of the virus, which is the main serosurveillance target to date, alternative targets should be explored to distinguish infection from vaccination.MethodsMultiplex immunoassay data from 1,513 SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR-tested individuals (352 positive and 1,161 negative) without COVID-19 vaccination history were used to determine the accuracy of Nucleoprotein-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) in detecting past SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also described Spike S1 and Nucleoprotein-specific IgG responses in 230 COVID-19 vaccinated individuals (Pfizer/BioNTech).ResultsThe sensitivity of Nucleoprotein seropositivity was 85% (95% confidence interval: 80–90%) for mild COVID-19 in the first two months following symptom onset. Sensitivity was lower in asymptomatic individuals (67%, 50–81%). Participants who had experienced a SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 11 months preceding vaccination, as assessed by Spike S1 seropositivity or RT-qPCR, produced 2.7-fold higher median levels of IgG to Spike S1 ≥ 14 days after the first dose as compared to those unexposed to SARS-CoV-2 at ≥ 7 days after the second dose (p = 0.011). Nucleoprotein-specific IgG concentrations were not affected by vaccination in infection-naïve participants.ConclusionsSerological responses to Nucleoprotein may prove helpful in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections after vaccination. Furthermore, it can help interpret IgG to Spike S1 after COVID-19 vaccination as particularly high responses shortly after vaccination could be explained by prior exposure history.     

Waning effectiveness of CoronaVac in real life: A retrospective cohort study in health care workers

BackgroundReal-world studies showed varying levels of effectiveness of CoronaVac vaccine against COVID-19 disease. This study aimed to assess the association between the vaccination with CoronaVac and the COVID-19 infections among the health care workers in a university hospital and to determine the vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 in a period when alpha variant was dominant.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a university hospital in Istanbul, Turkey employs 4067 health care workers. The follow-up period was defined as starting 14 days after receiving the second dose for fully vaccinated group. Health care workers were censored when have a positive PCR test result or at the end of the study. Unvaccinated health care workers were censored if they receive any COVID-19 vaccine doses. The incidence rate ratio and Cox regression were used to estimate the unadjusted and adjusted effectiveness of the vaccine.Findings: Seventy-one percent of the health care workers were fully vaccinated whereas 29% percent did not receive any doses. The incidence rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 133.7 vs 70.7 per 100.000 person-days in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups, respectively. The unadjusted effectiveness against COVID-19 infection was 47% (95% CI 31–59%) whereas adjusted effectiveness was 39% (95% CI 20–64%).Interpretation: This real life study conducted in health care workers demonstrated that the effectiveness of two doses of the CoronaVac vaccine (39%) was lower than that determined in clinical trials. Due to reduce in protection over time or against variants, booster doses may be needed.     

A case-crossover study of the effect of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 transmission relevant behaviours during a period of national lockdown in England and Wales

BackgroundStudies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness show increases in COVID-19 cases within 14 days of a first dose, potentially reflecting post-vaccination behaviour changes associated with SARS-CoV-2 transmission before vaccine protection. However, direct evidence for a relationship between vaccination and behaviour is lacking. We aimed to examine the association between vaccination status and self-reported non-household contacts and non-essential activities during a national lockdown in England and Wales.MethodsParticipants (n = 1154) who had received the first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine reported non-household contacts and non-essential activities from February to March 2021 in monthly surveys during a national lockdown in England and Wales. We used a case-crossover study design and conditional logistic regression to examine the association between vaccination status (pre-vaccination vs 14 days post-vaccination) and self-reported contacts and activities within individuals. Stratified subgroup analyses examined potential effect heterogeneity by sociodemographic characteristics such as sex, household income or age group.Results457/1154 (39.60 %) participants reported non-household contacts post-vaccination compared with 371/1154 (32.15 %) participants pre-vaccination. 100/1154 (8.67 %) participants reported use of non-essential shops or services post-vaccination compared with 74/1154 (6.41 %) participants pre-vaccination. Post-vaccination status was associated with increased odds of reporting non-household contacts (OR 1.65, 95 % CI 1.31–2.06, p < 0.001) and use of non-essential shops or services (OR 1.50, 95 % CI 1.03–2.17, p = 0.032). This effect varied between men and women and different age groups.ConclusionParticipants had higher odds of reporting non-household contacts and use of non-essential shops or services within 14 days of their first COVID-19 vaccine compared to pre-vaccination. Public health emphasis on maintaining protective behaviours during this post-vaccination time period when individuals have yet to develop full protection from vaccination could reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.     

Trends,patterns and psychological influences on COVID-19 vaccination intention: Findings from a large prospective community cohort study in England and Wales (Virus Watch)

BackgroundVaccination intention is key to the success of any vaccination programme, alongside vaccine availability and access. Public intention to take a COVID-19 vaccine is high in England and Wales compared to other countries, but vaccination rate disparities between ethnic, social and age groups has led to concern.MethodsOnline survey of prospective household community cohort study participants across England and Wales (Virus Watch). Vaccination intention was measured by individual participant responses to ‘Would you accept a COVID-19 vaccine if offered?’, collected in December 2020 and February 2021. Responses to a 13-item questionnaire collected in January 2021 were analysed using factor analysis to investigate psychological influences on vaccination intention.ResultsSurvey response rate was 56% (20,785/36,998) in December 2020 and 53% (20,590/38,727) in February 2021, with 14,880 adults reporting across both time points. In December 2020, 1,469 (10%) participants responded ‘No’ or ‘Unsure’. Of these people, 1,266 (86%) changed their mind and responded ‘Yes’ or ‘Already had a COVID-19 vaccine’ by February 2021. Vaccination intention increased across all ethnic groups and levels of social deprivation. Age was most strongly associated with vaccination intention, with 16–24-year-olds more likely to respond “Unsure” or “No” versus “Yes” than 65–74-year-olds in December 2020 (OR: 4.63, 95 %CI: 3.42, 6.27 & OR 7.17 95 %CI: 4.26, 12.07 respectively) and February 2021 (OR: 27.92 95 %CI: 13.79, 56.51 & OR 17.16 95 %CI: 4.12, 71.55). The association between ethnicity and vaccination intention weakened, but did not disappear, over time. Both vaccine- and illness-related psychological factors were shown to influence vaccination intention.ConclusionsFour in five adults (86%) who were reluctant or intending to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine in December 2020 had changed their mind in February 2021 and planned to accept, or had already accepted, a vaccine.