PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Liu, Yang
AU  - Pearson, Carl AB
AU  - Sandmann, Frank G
AU  - Barnard, Rosanna C
AU  - Kim, Jong-Hoon
AU  - ,
AU  - Flasche, Stefan
AU  - Jit, Mark
AU  - Abbas, Kaja
TI  - Dosing interval strategies for two-dose COVID-19 vaccination in 13 low- and middle-income countries of Europe: health impact modelling and benefit-risk analysis
AID  - 10.1101/2021.11.27.21266930
DP  - 2021 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2021.11.27.21266930
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/28/2021.11.27.21266930.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/28/2021.11.27.21266930.full
AB  - Background In settings where the COVID-19 vaccine supply is constrained, extending the intervals between the first and second doses of the COVID-19 vaccine could let more people receive their first doses earlier. Our aim is to estimate the health impact of COVID-19 vaccination alongside benefit-risk assessment of different dosing intervals for low- and middle-income countries of Europe.Methods We fitted a dynamic transmission model to country-level daily reported COVID-19 mortality in 13 low- and middle-income countries in the World Health Organization European Region (Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Georgia, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Serbia, North Macedonia, Turkey, and Ukraine). A vaccine product with characteristics similar to the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 (AZD1222) vaccine was used in the base case scenario and was complemented by sensitivity analyses around efficacies related to other COVID-19 vaccines. Both fixed dosing intervals at 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 weeks and dose-specific intervals that prioritise specific doses for certain age groups were tested. Optimal intervals minimise COVID-19 mortality between March 2021 and December 2022. We incorporated the emergence of variants of concern into the model, and also conducted a benefit-risk assessment to quantify the trade-off between health benefits versus adverse events following immunisation.Findings In 12 of the 13 countries, optimal strategies are those that prioritise the first doses among older adults (60+ years) or adults (20-59 years). These strategies lead to dosing intervals longer than six months. In comparison, a four-week fixed dosing interval may incur 10.2% [range: 4.0% - 22.5%; n = 13 (countries)] more deaths. There is generally a negative association between dosing interval and COVID-19 mortality within the range we investigated. Assuming a shorter first dose waning duration of 120 days, as opposed to 360 days in the base case, led to shorter optimal dosing intervals of 8-12 weeks. Benefit-risk ratios were the highest for fixed dosing intervals of 8-12 weeks.Interpretation We infer that longer dosing intervals of over six months, which are substantially longer than the current label recommendation for most vaccine products, could reduce COVID-19 mortality in low- and middle-income countries of WHO/Europe. Certain vaccine features, such as fast waning of first doses, significantly shorten the optimal dosing intervals.Funding World Health OrganizationCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementWe thank the following agencies for their support: World Health Organization (202683881, 202604060), Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-009125, INV-003174, OPP1184344), European Commission (101003688), Medical Research Council (MC_PC_19065), National Institute of Health Research (200929), Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (UK)/Wellcome Trust (221303/Z/20/Z), Wellcome Trust (208812/Z/17/Z). FGS and MJ were supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Modelling and Health Economics, a partnership between Public Health England (PHE), Imperial College London, and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM; grant code NIHR200908). MJ was supported by the NIHR HPRU in Immunisation at LSHTM in partnership with PHE (grant reference code NIHR200929).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI 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.YesThis study has only used publicly available data sources, which have been clearly referenced in text.