Abstract
Background Little is known about the relative influence of demographic, behavioural, and vaccine-related factors on risk of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. We aimed to identify risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection after primary and booster vaccinations.
Methods We undertook a prospective population-based study in UK adults (≥16 years) vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, including data from Jan 12, 2021, to Feb 21, 2022. We modelled risk of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection separately for participants who had completed a primary course of vaccination (two-dose or, in the immunosuppressed, three-dose course of either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [ChAdOx1] or BNT1262b2) and for those who had additionally received a booster dose (BNT1262b2 or mRNA-1273). Cox regression models were used to explore associations between sociodemographic, behavioural, clinical, pharmacological, and nutritional factors and breakthrough infection, defined as a self-reported positive result on a lateral flow or reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) test for SARS-CoV-2. Models were further adjusted for weekly SARS-CoV-2 incidence at the local (lower tier local authority) level.
Findings 14,713 participants were included in the post-primary analysis and 10,665 in the post-booster analysis, with a median follow-up of 203 days (IQR 195–216) in the post-primary cohort and 85 days (66–103) in the post-booster cohort. 1051 (7.1%) participants in the post-primary cohort and 1009 (9.4%) participants in the post-booster cohort reported a breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection. A primary course of ChAdOx1 (vs BNT182b2) was associated with higher risk of infection, both in the post-primary cohort (adjusted hazard ratio 1.63, 95% CI 1.41–1.88) and in the post-booster cohort after boosting with mRNA-1273 (1.29 [1.03–1.61] vs BNT162b2 primary plus BNT162b2 booster). A lower risk of breakthrough infection was associated with older age (post-primary: 0.96 [0.96–0.97] per year; post-booster: 0.97 [0.96–0.98]), whereas a higher risk of breakthrough infection was associated with lower levels of education (post-primary: 1.66 [1.35–2.06] for primary or secondary vs postgraduate; post-booster: 1.36 [1.08–1.71]) and at least three weekly visits to indoor public places (post-primary: 1.38 [1.15–1.66] vs none; post-booster: 1.33 [1.10–1.60]).
Conclusions Vaccine type, socioeconomic status, age, and behaviours affect risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection following a primary schedule and a booster dose.
Evidence before this study We searched PubMed, medRxiv, and Google Scholar for papers published up to Feb 18, 2022, using the search terms (breakthrough OR post-vaccin*) AND (SARS-CoV-2 OR COVID) AND (disease OR infection) AND (determinant OR “risk factor” OR associat*), with no language restrictions. Existing studies on risk factors for breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated individuals have found associations with age, comorbidities, vaccine type, and previous infection; however, findings have been inconsistent across studies. Most studies have been limited to specific subgroups or have focused on severe outcomes, and very few have considered breakthrough infections after a booster dose or have adjusted for behaviours affecting exposure to other people.
Added value of this study This study is among the first to provide a detailed analysis of a wide range of risk factors for breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection, both after the primary course of vaccination and after a booster dose. Our large study size and detailed data have allowed us to investigate associations with various sociodemographic, clinical, pharmacological, and nutritional factors. Monthly follow-up data have additionally given us the opportunity to consider the effects of behaviours that may have changed across the pandemic, while adjusting for local SARS-CoV-2 incidence.
Implications of all the available evidence Our findings add to growing evidence that risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection after primary or booster vaccinations can differ to those in unvaccinated populations, with effects attenuated for previously observed risk factors such as body-mass index and Asian ethnicity. The clear difference we observed between the efficacies of ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 as the primary course of vaccination appears to have been reduced by the use of BNT162b2 boosters, but not by mNRA-1273 boosters. As more countries introduce booster vaccinations, future population-based studies with longer follow-up will be needed to investigate our findings further.
Competing Interest Statement
RAL has received grants from UKRI Medical Research Council, UKRI Economic and Social Research Council, Health Data Research UK, and Health and Care Research Wales. RAL is a member of the Welsh Government COVID-19 Technical Advisory group, in an unremunerated role. AS is a member of the Scottish Government's Standing Committee on Pandemics, the Scottish Science Advisory Council, the UK Government's New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Risk Stratification Subgroup and the Department of Health and Social Care's COVID-19 Therapeutics Modelling Group. He was a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer's COVID-19 Advisory Group and AstraZeneca's Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Taskforce. All of AS' roles are unremunerated. ARM declares receipt of funding to support vitamin D research from the following companies who manufacture or sell vitamin D supplements: Pharma Nord DSM Nutritional Products, Thornton & Ross, and Hyphens Pharma. ARM also declares support for attending meetings from the following companies who manufacture or sell vitamin D supplements: Pharma Nord and Abiogen Pharma. ARM also declares participation on the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for the Chair, DSMB, VITALITY trial (Vitamin D for Adolescents with HIV to reduce musculoskeletal morbidity and immunopathology). ARM also declares unpaid work as a Programme Committee member for the Vitamin D Workshop. ARM also declares receipt of vitamin D capsules for clinical trial use from Pharma Nord, Synergy Biologics, and Cytoplan. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
Barts Charity, Health Data Research UK.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
COVIDENCE UK was approved by Leicester South Research Ethics Committee (ref 20/EM/0117).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I 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.
Yes
Data Availability
De-identified participant data will be made available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.
