Adverse events of special interest and mortality following vaccination with mRNA (BNT162b2) and inactivated (CoronaVac) SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in Hong Kong: A retrospective study

BackgroundSafety monitoring of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines is crucial during mass vaccination rollout to inform the choice of vaccines and reduce vaccine hesitancy. Considering the scant evidence directly comparing the safety profiles of mRNA and inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, this territory-wide cohort study aims to compare the incidence of various adverse events of special interest (AESIs) and all-cause mortality between CoronaVac (inactivated vaccine) and BNT162b2 (mRNA-based vaccine). Our results can help vaccine recipients make an informed choice.Methods and findingsA retrospective, population-based cohort of individuals who had received at least 1 dose of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac from 23 February to 9 September 2021 in Hong Kong, and had data linkage to the electronic medical records of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority, were included. Those who had received mixed doses were excluded. Individuals were observed from the date of vaccination (first or second dose) until mortality, second dose vaccination (for first dose analysis), 21 days after vaccination, or 30 September 2021, whichever came first. Baseline characteristics of vaccinated individuals were balanced between groups using propensity score weighting. Outcome events were AESIs and all-cause mortality recorded during 21 days of post-vaccination follow-up after each dose, except anaphylaxis, for which the observation period was restricted to 2 days after each dose. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of AESIs and mortality comparing between CoronaVac and BNT162b2 recipients were estimated after each dose using Poisson regression models. Among 2,333,379 vaccinated individuals aged 18 years or above, the first dose analysis included 1,308,820 BNT162b2 and 955,859 CoronaVac recipients, while the second dose analysis included 1,116,677 and 821,560 individuals, respectively. The most frequently reported AESI among CoronaVac and BNT162b2 recipients was thromboembolism (first dose: 431 and 290 per 100,000 person-years; second dose: 385 and 266 per 100,000 person-years). After the first dose, incidence rates of overall AESIs (IRR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.89–1.08, p = 0.703) and mortality (IRR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.63–1.48, p = 0.868) associated with CoronaVac were generally comparable to those for BNT162b2, except for Bell palsy (IRR = 1.95, 95% CI 1.12–3.41, p = 0.018), anaphylaxis (IRR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.14–0.79, p = 0.012), and sleeping disturbance or disorder (IRR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.49–0.89, p = 0.006). After the second dose, incidence rates of overall AESIs (IRR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.87–1.08, p = 0.545) and mortality (IRR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.51–1.40, p = 0.516) were comparable between CoronaVac and BNT162b2 recipients, with no significant differences observed for specific AESIs. The main limitations of this study include residual confounding due to its observational nature, and the possibility of its being underpowered for some AESIs with very low observed incidences.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed that the incidences of AESIs (cumulative incidence rate of 0.06%–0.09%) and mortality following the first and second doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccination were very low. The safety profiles of the vaccines were generally comparable, except for a significantly higher incidence rate of Bell palsy, but lower incidence rates of anaphylaxis and sleeping disturbance or disorder, following first dose CoronaVac versus BNT162b2 vaccination. Our results could help inform the choice of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines, mainly administered in low- and middle-income countries with large populations, in comparison to the safety of mRNA vaccines. Long-term surveillance on the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines should continue.

In a retrospective study, Carlos King Ho Wong, Kristy Tsz Kwan Lau, and colleagues study adverse events reported following COVID-19 vaccination in Hong Kong.     

Total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies measured 6 months after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination in healthcare workers

BackgroundThis study aimed at monitoring the kinetics of serum total anti-SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) antibodies in a cohort of healthcare workers after voluntary vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA-based vaccine.MethodsThe study population consisted of 787 healthcare workers (mean age 44±12 years; 66% females), who received two 30 mg doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, 3 weeks apart. Venous blood was drawn before the first vaccine dose, immediately before the second vaccine dose, and then at 1, 3 and 6 months after the second vaccine dose. Serological testing employed the total antiSARS-CoV-2 antibodies measurement with Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S chemiluminescent immunoassay.ResultsThe median serum levels of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies reached the peak (1762 kU/L) 1 month after the second vaccine dose, but tended to progressively decline at the 3-month (1086 kU/L) and 6-month (802 kU/L) follow-up points. Overall, the values after 3and 6months were 37% and 57% lower than the corresponding concentrations measured at the peak. No healthcare worker had total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies below the method-dependent cut-off after 6 months. The decline compared to the peak was more accentuated in baseline seropositive persons than in those who were baseline seronegative (74% vs. 52%) cohort. The 6-month post-vaccination anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in subjects aged <65 years remained over 2-fold higher than in those aged ≥65 years (813 vs. 343 kU/L) and also remained consistently higher in women than in men.ConclusionsGradual decline of total anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies occurred 6 months after Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination, though values remained higher than the method-dependent cut-off, with no case of sero-negativization.     

Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection,hospitalization, and death when combining a first dose ChAdOx1 vaccine with a subsequent mRNA vaccine in Denmark: A nationwide population-based cohort study

BackgroundThe recommendations in several countries to stop using the ChAdOx1 vaccine has led to vaccine programs combining different Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine types, which necessitates knowledge on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of heterologous vaccine schedules. The aim of this Danish nationwide population-based cohort study was therefore to estimate the VE against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19–related hospitalization and death following the first dose of the ChAdOx1 vaccine and the combination of the ChAdOx1/mRNA vaccines.Methods and findingsAll individuals alive in or immigrating to Denmark from 9 February 2021 to 23 June 2021 were identified in the Danish Civil Registration System. Information on exposure, outcomes, and covariates was obtained from Danish national registries. Poisson and Cox regression models were used to calculate crude and adjusted VE, respectively, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19–related hospitalization or death comparing vaccinated versus unvaccinated individuals. The VE estimates were adjusted for calendar time as underlying time and for sex, age, comorbidity, country of origin, and hospital admission. The analyses included 5,542,079 individuals (97.6% of the total Danish population). A total of 144,360 individuals were vaccinated with the ChAdOx1 vaccine as the first dose, and of these, 136,551 individuals received an mRNA vaccine as the second dose. A total of 1,691,464 person-years and 83,034 SARS-CoV-2 infections were included. The individuals vaccinated with the first dose of the ChAdOx1 vaccine dose had a median age of 45 years. The study population was characterized by an equal distribution of males and females; 6.7% and 9.2% originated from high-income and other countries, respectively. The VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection when combining the ChAdOx1 and an mRNA vaccine was 88% (95% CI: 83; 92) 14 days after the second dose and onwards. There were no COVID-19–related hospitalizations or deaths among the individuals vaccinated with the combined vaccine schedule during the study period. Study limitations including unmeasured confounders such as risk behavior and increasing overall vaccine coverage in the general population creating herd immunity are important to take into consideration when interpreting the results.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed a large reduction in the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection when combining the ChAdOx1 and an mRNA vaccine, compared with unvaccinated individuals.

Mie Agermose Gram and co-workers study the effectiveness of heterologous SARS-CoV-2 vaccine combinations in the Danish population.     

Understanding COVID-19 vaccine demand and hesitancy: A nationwide online survey in China

BackgroundThis study attempts to understand coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine demand and hesitancy by assessing the public’s vaccination intention and willingness-to-pay (WTP). Confidence in COVID-19 vaccines produced in China and preference for domestically-made or foreign-made vaccines was also investigated.MethodsA nationwide cross-sectional, self-administered online survey was conducted on 1–19 May 2020. The health belief model (HBM) was used as a theoretical framework for understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP.ResultsA total of 3,541 complete responses were received. The majority reported a probably yes intent (54.6%), followed by a definite yes intent (28.7%). The perception that vaccination decreases the chances of getting COVID-19 under the perceived benefit construct (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 2.05–4.83) and not being concerned about the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines under the perceived barriers construct (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.31–2.09) were found to have the highest significant odds of a definite intention to take the COVID-19 vaccine. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) of WTP for COVID-19 vaccine was CNY¥200/US$28 (IQR CNY¥100–500/USD$14–72). The highest marginal WTP for the vaccine was influenced by socio-economic factors. The majority were confident (48.7%) and completely confident (46.1%) in domestically-made COVID-19 vaccine. 64.2% reported a preference for a domestically-made over foreign-made COVID-19 vaccine.ConclusionsThe findings demonstrate the utility of HBM constructs in understanding COVID-19 vaccination intent and WTP. It is important to improve health promotion and reduce the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination.     

Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha,Delta, or Omicron SARS-CoV-2 variant: A nationwide Danish cohort study

BackgroundThe continued occurrence of more contagious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants and waning immunity over time require ongoing reevaluation of the vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness in 2 age groups (12 to 59 and 60 years or above) of 2 or 3 vaccine doses (BNT162b2 mRNA or mRNA-1273) by time since vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalization in an Alpha-, Delta-, or Omicron-dominated period.Methods and findingsA Danish nationwide cohort study design was used to estimate VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha, Delta, or Omicron variant. Information was obtained from nationwide registries and linked using a unique personal identification number. The study included all previously uninfected residents in Denmark aged 12 years or above (18 years or above for the analysis of 3 doses) in the Alpha (February 20 to June 15, 2021), Delta (July 4 to November 20, 2021), and Omicron (December 21, 2021 to January 31, 2022) dominated periods. VE estimates including 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated (1-hazard ratio∙100) using Cox proportional hazard regression models with underlying calendar time and adjustments for age, sex, comorbidity, and geographical region. Vaccination status was included as a time-varying exposure. In the oldest age group, VE against infection after 2 doses was 90.7% (95% CI: 88.2; 92.7) for the Alpha variant, 82.3% (95% CI: 75.5; 87.2) for the Delta variant, and 39.9% (95% CI: 26.3; 50.9) for the Omicron variant 14 to 30 days since vaccination. The VE waned over time and was 73.2% (Alpha, 95% CI: 57.1; 83.3), 50.0% (Delta, 95% CI: 46.7; 53.0), and 4.4% (Omicron, 95% CI: −0.1; 8.7) >120 days since vaccination. Higher estimates were observed after the third dose with VE estimates against infection of 86.1% (Delta, 95% CI: 83.3; 88.4) and 57.7% (Omicron, 95% CI: 55.9; 59.5) 14 to 30 days since vaccination. Among both age groups, VE against COVID-19 hospitalization 14 to 30 days since vaccination with 2 or 3 doses was 98.1% or above for the Alpha and Delta variants. Among both age groups, VE against COVID-19 hospitalization 14 to 30 days since vaccination with 2 or 3 doses was 95.5% or above for the Omicron variant. The main limitation of this study is the nonrandomized study design including potential differences between the unvaccinated (reference group) and vaccinated individuals.ConclusionsTwo vaccine doses provided high protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha and Delta variants with protection, notably against infection, waning over time. Two vaccine doses provided only limited and short-lived protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron. However, the protection against COVID-19 hospitalization following Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher. The third vaccine dose substantially increased the level and duration of protection against infection with the Omicron variant and provided a high level of sustained protection against COVID-19 hospitalization among the +60-year-olds.

Mie Agermose Gram and colleagues estimate vaccine effectiveness against infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha, Delta or Omicron variant in Denmark.     

Transmission and containment of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant of concern in Guangzhou,China: A population-based study

BackgroundThe first community transmission of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Delta variant of concern (VOC) in Guangzhou, China occurred between May and June 2021. Herein, we describe the epidemiological characteristics of this outbreak and evaluate the implemented containment measures against this outbreak.Methodology/Principal findingsGuangzhou Center for Disease Control and Prevention provided the data on SARS-CoV-2 infections reported between 21 May and 24 June 2021. We estimated the incubation period distribution by fitting a gamma distribution to the data, while the serial interval distribution was estimated by fitting a normal distribution. The instantaneous effective reproductive number (R_t) was estimated to reflect the transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2. Clinical severity was compared for cases with different vaccination statuses using an ordinal regression model after controlling for age. Of the reported local cases, 7/153 (4.6%) were asymptomatic. The median incubation period was 6.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.42–6.71) days and the means of serial intervals decreased from 5.19 (95% CI: 4.29–6.11) to 3.78 (95% CI: 2.74–4.81) days. The incubation period increased with age (P<0.001). A hierarchical prevention and control strategy against COVID-19 was implemented in Guangzhou, with R_t decreasing from 6.83 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 3.98–10.44) for the 7-day time window ending on 27 May 2021 to below 1 for the time window ending on 8 June and thereafter. Individuals with partial or full vaccination schedules with BBIBP-CorV or CoronaVac accounted for 15.3% of the COVID-19 cases. Clinical symptoms were milder in partially or fully vaccinated cases than in unvaccinated cases (odds ratio [OR] = 0.26 [95% CI: 0.07–0.94]).Conclusions/SignificanceThe hierarchical prevention and control strategy against COVID-19 in Guangzhou was timely and effective. Authorised inactivated vaccines are likely to contribute to reducing the probability of developing severe disease. Our findings have important implications for the containment of COVID-19.     

Estimated impact of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine allocation strategies in sub-Saharan Africa: A modelling study

BackgroundThe RTS,S/AS01 vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection completed phase III trials in 2014 and demonstrated efficacy against clinical malaria of approximately 36% over 4 years for a 4-dose schedule in children aged 5–17 months. Pilot vaccine implementation has recently begun in 3 African countries. If the pilots demonstrate both a positive health impact and resolve remaining safety concerns, wider roll-out could be recommended from 2021 onwards. Vaccine demand may, however, outstrip initial supply. We sought to identify where vaccine introduction should be prioritised to maximise public health impact under a range of supply constraints using mathematical modelling.Methods and findingsUsing a mathematical model of P. falciparum malaria transmission and RTS,S vaccine impact, we estimated the clinical cases and deaths averted in children aged 0–5 years in sub-Saharan Africa under 2 scenarios for vaccine coverage (100% and realistic) and 2 scenarios for other interventions (current coverage and World Health Organization [WHO] Global Technical Strategy targets). We used a prioritisation algorithm to identify potential allocative efficiency gains from prioritising vaccine allocation among countries or administrative units to maximise cases or deaths averted. If malaria burden at introduction is similar to current levels—assuming realistic vaccine coverage and country-level prioritisation in areas with parasite prevalence >10%—we estimate that 4.3 million malaria cases (95% credible interval [CrI] 2.8–6.8 million) and 22,000 deaths (95% CrI 11,000–35,000) in children younger than 5 years could be averted annually at a dose constraint of 30 million. This decreases to 3.0 million cases (95% CrI 2.0–4.7 million) and 14,000 deaths (95% CrI 7,000–23,000) at a dose constraint of 20 million, and increases to 6.6 million cases (95% CrI 4.2–10.8 million) and 38,000 deaths (95% CrI 18,000–61,000) at a dose constraint of 60 million. At 100% vaccine coverage, these impact estimates increase to 5.2 million cases (95% CrI 3.5–8.2 million) and 27,000 deaths (95% CrI 14,000–43,000), 3.9 million cases (95% CrI 2.7–6.0 million) and 19,000 deaths (95% CrI 10,000–30,000), and 10.0 million cases (95% CrI 6.7–15.7 million) and 51,000 deaths (95% CrI 25,000–82,000), respectively. Under realistic vaccine coverage, if the vaccine is prioritised sub-nationally, 5.3 million cases (95% CrI 3.5–8.2 million) and 24,000 deaths (95% CrI 12,000–38,000) could be averted at a dose constraint of 30 million. Furthermore, sub-national prioritisation would allow introduction in almost double the number of countries compared to national prioritisation (21 versus 11). If vaccine introduction is prioritised in the 3 pilot countries (Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi), health impact would be reduced, but this effect becomes less substantial (change of <5%) if 50 million or more doses are available. We did not account for within-country variation in vaccine coverage, and the optimisation was based on a single outcome measure, therefore this study should be used to understand overall trends rather than guide country-specific allocation.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the impact of constraints in vaccine supply on the public health impact of the RTS,S malaria vaccine could be reduced by introducing the vaccine at the sub-national level and prioritising countries with the highest malaria incidence.

Alexandra Hogan and colleagues explore strategies to optimize vaccine allocation for maximum public health benefit in the face of potential supply constraints.     

Investigating associations between COVID-19 mortality and population-level health and socioeconomic indicators in the United States: A modeling study

BackgroundWith the availability of multiple Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and the predicted shortages in supply for the near future, it is necessary to allocate vaccines in a manner that minimizes severe outcomes, particularly deaths. To date, vaccination strategies in the United States have focused on individual characteristics such as age and occupation. Here, we assess the utility of population-level health and socioeconomic indicators as additional criteria for geographical allocation of vaccines.Methods and findingsCounty-level estimates of 14 indicators associated with COVID-19 mortality were extracted from public data sources. Effect estimates of the individual indicators were calculated with univariate models. Presence of spatial autocorrelation was established using Moran’s I statistic. Spatial simultaneous autoregressive (SAR) models that account for spatial autocorrelation in response and predictors were used to assess (i) the proportion of variance in county-level COVID-19 mortality that can explained by identified health/socioeconomic indicators (R²); and (ii) effect estimates of each predictor.Adjusting for case rates, the selected indicators individually explain 24%–29% of the variability in mortality. Prevalence of chronic kidney disease and proportion of population residing in nursing homes have the highest R². Mortality is estimated to increase by 43 per thousand residents (95% CI: 37–49; p < 0.001) with a 1% increase in the prevalence of chronic kidney disease and by 39 deaths per thousand (95% CI: 34–44; p < 0.001) with 1% increase in population living in nursing homes. SAR models using multiple health/socioeconomic indicators explain 43% of the variability in COVID-19 mortality in US counties, adjusting for case rates. R² was found to be not sensitive to the choice of SAR model form. Study limitations include the use of mortality rates that are not age standardized, a spatial adjacency matrix that does not capture human flows among counties, and insufficient accounting for interaction among predictors.ConclusionsSignificant spatial autocorrelation exists in COVID-19 mortality in the US, and population health/socioeconomic indicators account for a considerable variability in county-level mortality. In the context of vaccine rollout in the US and globally, national and subnational estimates of burden of disease could inform optimal geographical allocation of vaccines.

Sasikiran Kandula and Jeffrey Shaman study population health and COVID-19 mortality in the United States.     

Disparities in distribution of COVID-19 vaccines across US counties: A geographic information system–based cross-sectional study

BackgroundThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has repeatedly called for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine equity. The objective our study was to measure equity in the early distribution of COVID-19 vaccines to healthcare facilities across the US. Specifically, we tested whether the likelihood of a healthcare facility administering COVID-19 vaccines in May 2021 differed by county-level racial composition and degree of urbanicity.Methods and findingsThe outcome was whether an eligible vaccination facility actually administered COVID-19 vaccines as of May 2021, and was defined by spatially matching locations of eligible and actual COVID-19 vaccine administration locations. The outcome was regressed against county-level measures for racial/ethnic composition, urbanicity, income, social vulnerability index, COVID-19 mortality, 2020 election results, and availability of nontraditional vaccination locations using generalized estimating equations.Across the US, 61.4% of eligible healthcare facilities and 76.0% of eligible pharmacies provided COVID-19 vaccinations as of May 2021. Facilities in counties with >42.2% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., > 95th county percentile of Black race composition) were less likely to serve as COVID-19 vaccine administration locations compared to facilities in counties with <12.5% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., lower than US average), with OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.98, p = 0.030. Location of a facility in a rural county (OR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.90, p < 0.001, versus metropolitan county) or in a county in the top quintile of COVID-19 mortality (OR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.93, p = 0.001, versus bottom 4 quintiles) was associated with decreased odds of serving as a COVID-19 vaccine administration location.There was a significant interaction of urbanicity and racial/ethnic composition: In metropolitan counties, facilities in counties with >42.2% non-Hispanic Black population (i.e., >95th county percentile of Black race composition) had 32% (95% CI 14% to 47%, p = 0.001) lower odds of serving as COVID administration facility compared to facilities in counties with below US average Black population. This association between Black composition and odds of a facility serving as vaccine administration facility was not observed in rural or suburban counties. In rural counties, facilities in counties with above US average Hispanic population had 26% (95% CI 11% to 38%, p = 0.002) lower odds of serving as vaccine administration facility compared to facilities in counties with below US average Hispanic population. This association between Hispanic ethnicity and odds of a facility serving as vaccine administration facility was not observed in metropolitan or suburban counties.Our analyses did not include nontraditional vaccination sites and are based on data as of May 2021, thus they represent the early distribution of COVID-19 vaccines. Our results based on this cross-sectional analysis may not be generalizable to later phases of the COVID-19 vaccine distribution process.ConclusionsHealthcare facilities in counties with higher Black composition, in rural areas, and in hardest-hit communities were less likely to serve as COVID-19 vaccine administration locations in May 2021. The lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations among minority populations and rural areas has been attributed to vaccine hesitancy; however, decreased access to vaccination sites may be an additional overlooked barrier.

Inmaculada Hernandez and colleagues investigate the disparities in early-phase distribution of COVID-19 Vaccines across U.S. Counties.     

Postmarketing active surveillance of myocarditis and pericarditis following vaccination with COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in persons aged 12 to 39 years in Italy: A multi-database,self-controlled case series study

BackgroundMyocarditis and pericarditis following the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mRNA vaccines administration have been reported, but their frequency is still uncertain in the younger population. This study investigated the association between Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA vaccines, BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273 and myocarditis/pericarditis in the population of vaccinated persons aged 12 to 39 years in Italy.Methods and findingsWe conducted a self-controlled case series study (SCCS) using national data on COVID-19 vaccination linked to emergency care/hospital discharge databases. The outcome was the first diagnosis of myocarditis/pericarditis between 27 December 2020 and 30 September 2021. Exposure risk period (0 to 21 days from the vaccination day, subdivided in 3 equal intervals) for first and second dose was compared with baseline period. The SCCS model, adapted to event-dependent exposures, was fitted using unbiased estimating equations to estimate relative incidences (RIs) and excess of cases (EC) per 100,000 vaccinated by dose, age, sex, and vaccine product. Calendar period was included as time-varying confounder in the model. During the study period 2,861,809 persons aged 12 to 39 years received mRNA vaccines (2,405,759 BNT162b2; 456,050 mRNA-1273); 441 participants developed myocarditis/pericarditis (346 BNT162b2; 95 mRNA-1273). Within the 21-day risk interval, 114 myocarditis/pericarditis events occurred, the RI was 1.99 (1.30 to 3.05) after second dose of BNT162b2 and 2.22 (1.00 to 4.91) and 2.63 (1.21 to 5.71) after first and second dose of mRNA-1273. During the [0 to 7) days risk period, an increased risk of myocarditis/pericarditis was observed after first dose of mRNA-1273, with RI of 6.55 (2.73 to 15.72), and after second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, with RIs of 3.39 (2.02 to 5.68) and 7.59 (3.26 to 17.65). The number of EC for second dose of mRNA-1273 was 5.5 per 100,000 vaccinated (3.0 to 7.9). The highest risk was observed in males, at [0 to 7) days after first and second dose of mRNA-1273 with RI of 12.28 (4.09 to 36.83) and RI of 11.91 (3.88 to 36.53); the number of EC after the second dose of mRNA-1273 was 8.8 (4.9 to 12.9). Among those aged 12 to 17 years, the RI was of 5.74 (1.52 to 21.72) after second dose of BNT162b2; for this age group, the number of events was insufficient for estimating RIs after mRNA-1273. Among those aged 18 to 29 years, the RIs were 7.58 (2.62 to 21.94) after first dose of mRNA-1273 and 4.02 (1.81 to 8.91) and 9.58 (3.32 to 27.58) after second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273; the numbers of EC were 3.4 (1.1 to 6.0) and 8.6 (4.4 to 12.6) after first and second dose of mRNA-1273. The main study limitations were that the outcome was not validated through review of clinical records, and there was an absence of information on the length of hospitalization and, thus, the severity of the outcome.ConclusionsThis population-based study of about 3 millions of residents in Italy suggested that mRNA vaccines were associated with myocarditis/pericarditis in the population younger than 40 years. According to our results, increased risk of myocarditis/pericarditis was associated with the second dose of BNT162b2 and both doses of mRNA-1273. The highest risks were observed in males of 12 to 39 years and in males and females 18 to 29 years vaccinated with mRNA-1273. The public health implication of these findings should be considered in the light of the proven mRNA vaccine effectiveness in preventing serious COVID-19 disease and death.

Marco Massari and colleagues investigate the association between myocarditis/pericarditis and COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in individuals aged 12-39 years in Italy.     

COVID-19–associated mucormycosis: Evidence-based critical review of an emerging infection burden during the pandemic’s second wave in India

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), during the second wave in early 2021, has caused devastating chaos in India. As daily infection rates rise alarmingly, the number of severe cases has increased dramatically. The country has encountered health infrastructure inadequacy and excessive demand for hospital beds, drugs, vaccines, and oxygen. Adding more burden to such a challenging situation, mucormycosis, an invasive fungal infection, has seen a sudden surge in patients with COVID-19. The rhino-orbital-cerebral form is the most common type observed. In particular, approximately three-fourths of them had diabetes as predisposing comorbidity and received corticosteroids to treat COVID-19. Possible mechanisms may involve immune and inflammatory processes. Diabetes, when coupled with COVID-19–induced systemic immune change, tends to cause decreased immunity and an increased risk of secondary infections. Since comprehensive data on this fatal opportunistic infection are evolving against the backdrop of a major pandemic, prevention strategies primarily involve managing comorbid conditions in high-risk groups. The recommended treatment strategies primarily included surgical debridement and antifungal therapy using Amphotericin B and selected azoles. Several India-centric clinical guidelines have emerged to rightly diagnose the infection, characterise the clinical presentation, understand the pathogenesis involved, and track the disease course. Code Mucor is the most comprehensive one, which proposes a simple but reliable staging system for the rhino-orbital-cerebral form. A staging system has recently been proposed, and a dedicated registry has been started. In this critical review, we extensively analyse recent evidence and guidance on COVID-19–associated mucormycosis in India.     

Adverse effects following anti–COVID-19 vaccination with mRNA-based BNT162b2 are alleviated by altering the route of administration and correlate with baseline enrichment of T and NK cell genes

Ensuring high vaccination and even booster vaccination coverage is critical in preventing severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Among the various COVID-19 vaccines currently in use, the mRNA vaccines have shown remarkable effectiveness. However, systemic adverse events (AEs), such as postvaccination fatigue, are prevalent following mRNA vaccination, and the underpinnings of which are not understood. Herein, we found that higher baseline expression of genes related to T and NK cell exhaustion and suppression were positively correlated with the development of moderately severe fatigue after Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 vaccination; increased expression of genes associated with T and NK cell exhaustion and suppression reacted to vaccination were associated with greater levels of innate immune activation at 1 day postvaccination. We further found, in a mouse model, that altering the route of vaccination from intramuscular (i.m.) to subcutaneous (s.c.) could lessen the pro-inflammatory response and correspondingly the extent of systemic AEs; the humoral immune response to BNT162b2 vaccination was not compromised. Instead, it is possible that the s.c. route could improve cytotoxic CD8 T-cell responses to BNT162b2 vaccination. Our findings thus provide a glimpse of the molecular basis of postvaccination fatigue from mRNA vaccination and suggest a readily translatable solution to minimize systemic AEs.

Systemic adverse events, such as post-vaccination fatigue, are prevalent consequences of mRNA vaccination; why is this? This study shows that higher baseline expression of T and NK cell genes increases susceptibility to fatigue after mRNA vaccination, and that altering the route of vaccination may reduce the incidence of mRNA vaccine-associated systemic adverse events.     

Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines in Chinese college students

Background: Vaccination is an important preventative measure against the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. To implement vaccination and immunization programs effectively, it is essential to investigate public attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. This study examined the attitudes of Chinese college students toward COVID-19 vaccines and their associated factors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in college students nationwide from December 27, 2020 to January 18, 2021. Attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines and acceptance of future vaccination programs were assessed. Results: Totally, 2,881 college students participated in this survey; of them, 76.3% (95% CI: 74.8% - 77.9%) were willing to accept a COVID-19 vaccine in the future. Multiple logistic analysis revealed that students living in urban (OR=1.409, 95% CI: 1.152 - 1.724, p=0.001) and those studying health-related courses (OR=1.581, 95% CI: 1.291 - 1.935, p<0.001) were more likely to have a positive attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines. In addition, those who were worried about being infected with COVID-19 (very much vs no, OR=1.690, 95% CI: 1.212-2.356, p=0.002), heard previously about COVID-19 vaccines (OR=1.659, 95% CI: 1.268-2.170, p<0.001), believed that vaccines are safe (Yes vs No, OR=3.570, 95% CI: 1.825-6.980), thought that vaccines can protect people from being infected with COVID-19 (Yes vs No, OR=1.957, 95% CI: 1.286-2.979, p=0.002), and had encouraged their family and friends to have a vaccine (Yes vs No, OR=17.745, 95% CI: 12.271-25.660, p<0.001) had higher acceptance of COVID-19 vaccination. Conclusions: A high rate of acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines was found among Chinese college students. However, vaccine uptake may be reduced by concerns about vaccine safety and efficacy. Alleviating these concerns and enhancing public confidence in vaccines are crucial for future immunization programs against the COVID-19 pandemic.     

COVID-19 vaccination in Sindh Province,Pakistan: A modelling study of health impact and cost-effectiveness

BackgroundMultiple Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines appear to be safe and efficacious, but only high-income countries have the resources to procure sufficient vaccine doses for most of their eligible populations. The World Health Organization has published guidelines for vaccine prioritisation, but most vaccine impact projections have focused on high-income countries, and few incorporate economic considerations. To address this evidence gap, we projected the health and economic impact of different vaccination scenarios in Sindh Province, Pakistan (population: 48 million).Methods and findingsWe fitted a compartmental transmission model to COVID-19 cases and deaths in Sindh from 30 April to 15 September 2020. We then projected cases, deaths, and hospitalisation outcomes over 10 years under different vaccine scenarios. Finally, we combined these projections with a detailed economic model to estimate incremental costs (from healthcare and partial societal perspectives), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each scenario.We project that 1 year of vaccine distribution, at delivery rates consistent with COVAX projections, using an infection-blocking vaccine at $3/dose with 70% efficacy and 2.5-year duration of protection is likely to avert around 0.9 (95% credible interval (CrI): 0.9, 1.0) million cases, 10.1 (95% CrI: 10.1, 10.3) thousand deaths, and 70.1 (95% CrI: 69.9, 70.6) thousand DALYs, with an ICER of $27.9 per DALY averted from the health system perspective. Under a broad range of alternative scenarios, we find that initially prioritising the older (65+) population generally prevents more deaths. However, unprioritised distribution has almost the same cost-effectiveness when considering all outcomes, and both prioritised and unprioritised programmes can be cost-effective for low per-dose costs. High vaccine prices ($10/dose), however, may not be cost-effective, depending on the specifics of vaccine performance, distribution programme, and future pandemic trends.The principal drivers of the health outcomes are the fitted values for the overall transmission scaling parameter and disease natural history parameters from other studies, particularly age-specific probabilities of infection and symptomatic disease, as well as social contact rates. Other parameters are investigated in sensitivity analyses.This study is limited by model approximations, available data, and future uncertainty. Because the model is a single-population compartmental model, detailed impacts of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as household isolation cannot be practically represented or evaluated in combination with vaccine programmes. Similarly, the model cannot consider prioritising groups like healthcare or other essential workers. The model is only fitted to the reported case and death data, which are incomplete and not disaggregated by, e.g., age. Finally, because the future impact and implementation cost of NPIs are uncertain, how these would interact with vaccination remains an open question.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination can have a considerable health impact and is likely to be cost-effective if more optimistic vaccine scenarios apply. Preventing severe disease is an important contributor to this impact. However, the advantage of prioritising older, high-risk populations is smaller in generally younger populations. This reduction is especially true in populations with more past transmission, and if the vaccine is likely to further impede transmission rather than just disease. Those conditions are typical of many low- and middle-income countries.

In a modelling study, Carl A B Pearson and coauthors investigate the health impact and cost-effectiveness of various COVID-19 vaccination scenarios in Sindh Province, Pakistan     

Differences in mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity among patients undergoing dialysis

Background:Differences in immunogenicity between mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have not been well characterized in patients undergoing dialysis. We compared the serologic response in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna).Methods:We conducted a prospective observational cohort study at 2 academic centres in Toronto, Canada, from Feb. 2, 2021, to July 20, 2021, which included 129 and 95 patients who received the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, respectively. We measured SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike), receptor binding domain (anti-RBD) and nucleocapsid protein (anti-NP) at 6–7 and 12 weeks after the second dose of vaccine and compared those levels with the median convalescent serum antibody levels from 211 controls who were previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.Results:At 6–7 weeks after 2-dose vaccination, we found that 51 of 70 patients (73%) who received BNT162b2 and 83 of 87 (95%) who received mRNA-1273 attained convalescent levels of anti-spike antibody (p < 0.001). In those who received BNT162b2, 35 of 70 (50%) reached the convalescent level for anti-RBD compared with 69 of 87 (79%) who received mRNA-1273 (p < 0.001). At 12 weeks after the second dose, anti-spike and anti-RBD levels were significantly lower in patients who received BNT162b2 than in those who received mRNA-1273. For anti-spike, 70 of 122 patients (57.4%) who received BNT162b2 maintained the convalescent level versus 68 of 71 (96%) of those who received mRNA-1273 (p < 0.001). For anti-RBD, 47 of 122 patients (38.5%) who received BNT162b2 maintained the anti-RBD convalescent level versus 45 of 71 (63%) of those who received mRNA-1273 (p = 0.002).Interpretation:In patients undergoing hemodialysis, mRNA-1273 elicited a stronger humoral response than BNT162b2. Given the rapid decline in immunogenicity at 12 weeks in patients who received BNT162b2, a third dose is recommended in patients undergoing dialysis as a primary series, similar to recommendations for other vulnerable populations.

Patients with end-stage kidney disease who are receiving maintenance hemodialysis (HD) are at increased risk for severe COVID-19, with mortality rates ranging from 9% to 28%.^1,2 Highly effective vaccines have been developed against SARS-CoV-2, with 94.1%–95% efficacy in reducing the risk of severe COVID-19 (D614G strain) as confirmed by 2 large randomized controlled trials; however, these studies included limited numbers of patients with kidney disease.^3,4 Humoral response to vaccination appears to be heterogeneous in dialysis patients in comparison with the general population, and a review of 35 studies involving dialysis patients found that in the 1-month period after 2-dose vaccination, seroconversion rates ranged from 70% to 96%.⁵The BNT162b2 (Pfizer BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are both lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA encoding for the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein stabilized in its prefusion conformation. The BNT162b2 vaccine is administered as a 30 μg dose 21 days apart and mRNA-1273 is administered as a 100 μg dose 28 days apart.^3,4 The spike protein and its receptor-binding domain of SARS-CoV-2 are antigens that are targeted by the currently available vaccines and are used as measures of humoral response to vaccination or natural infection. An antibody response to the amount of nucleocapsid protein (NP), which is not targeted by mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, may be used as a marker of natural exposure to SARS-CoV-2.Recognition of the high morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 and reduced immunogenicity to vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients undergoing HD has resulted in the prioritization of vaccination of this population in many jurisdictions.^1,6 However, differences in immunogenicity among SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have not been well characterized in this vulnerable population. Therefore, we conducted a prospective observational study in a cohort of patients undergoing dialysis who received either the mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccine to evaluate humoral response through comparison of spike and receptor-binding domain antibodies in response to 2-dose vaccination.     

Effectiveness of Inactivated Influenza Vaccines in Preventing Influenza-Associated Deaths and Hospitalizations among Ontario Residents Aged ≥65 Years: Estimates with Generalized Linear Models Accounting for Healthy Vaccinee Effects

Background

Estimates of the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in older adults may be biased because of difficulties identifying and adjusting for confounders of the vaccine-outcome association. We estimated vaccine effectiveness for prevention of serious influenza complications among older persons by using methods to account for underlying differences in risk for these complications.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among Ontario residents aged ≥65 years from September 1993 through September 2008. We linked weekly vaccination, hospitalization, and death records for 1.4 million community-dwelling persons aged ≥65 years. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated by comparing ratios of outcome rates during weeks of high versus low influenza activity (defined by viral surveillance data) among vaccinated and unvaccinated subjects by using log-linear regression models that accounted for temperature and time trends with natural spline functions. Effectiveness was estimated for three influenza-associated outcomes: all-cause deaths, deaths occurring within 30 days of pneumonia/influenza hospitalizations, and pneumonia/influenza hospitalizations.

Results

During weeks when 5% of respiratory specimens tested positive for influenza A, vaccine effectiveness among persons aged ≥65 years was 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], −6%–42%) for all influenza-associated deaths, 25% (95% CI, 13%–37%) for deaths occurring within 30 days after an influenza-associated pneumonia/influenza hospitalization, and 19% (95% CI, 4%–31%) for influenza-associated pneumonia/influenza hospitalizations. Because small proportions of deaths, deaths after pneumonia/influenza hospitalizations, and pneumonia/influenza hospitalizations were associated with influenza virus circulation, we estimated that vaccination prevented 1.6%, 4.8%, and 4.1% of these outcomes, respectively.

Conclusions

By using confounding-reducing techniques with 15 years of provincial-level data including vaccination and health outcomes, we estimated that influenza vaccination prevented ∼4% of influenza-associated hospitalizations and deaths occurring after hospitalizations among older adults in Ontario.     

The Influence of Compositional and Contextual Factors on Non-Receipt of Basic Vaccines among Children of 12-23-Month Old in India: A Multilevel Analysis

Background

Children unreached by vaccination are at higher risk of poor health outcomes and India accounts for nearly a quarter of unvaccinated children worldwide. The objective of this study was to investigate compositional and contextual determinants of non-receipt of childhood vaccines in India using multilevel modelling.

Methods and Findings

We studied characteristics of unvaccinated children using the District Level Health and Facility Survey 3, a nationally representative probability sample containing 65 617 children aged 12–23 months from 34 Indian states and territories. We developed four-level Bayesian binomial regression models to examine the determinants of non-vaccination. The analysis considered two outcomes: completely unvaccinated (CUV) children who had not received any of the eight vaccine doses recommended by India’s Universal Immunization Programme, and children who had not received any dose from routine immunisation services (no RI). The no RI category includes CUV children and those who received only polio doses administered via mass campaigns. Overall, 4.83% (95% CI: 4.62–5.06) of children were CUV while 12.01% (11.68–12.35) had received no RI. Individual compositional factors strongly associated with CUV were: non-receipt of tetanus immunisation for mothers during pregnancy (OR = 3.65 [95% CrI: 3.30–4.02]), poorest household wealth index (OR = 2.44 [1.81–3.22] no maternal schooling (OR = 2.43 [1.41–4.05]) and no paternal schooling (OR = 1.83 [1.30–2.48]). In rural settings, the influence of maternal illiteracy disappeared whereas the role of household wealth index was reinforced. Factors associated with no RI were similar to those for CUV, but effect sizes for individual compositional factors were generally larger. Low maternal education was the strongest risk factor associated with no RI in all models. All multilevel models found significant variability at community, district, and state levels net of compositional factors.

Conclusion

Non-vaccination in India is strongly related to compositional characteristics and is geographically distinct. Tailored strategies are required to overcome current barriers to immunisation.