Protection of COVID-19 vaccination and previous infection against Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and Delta SARS-CoV-2 infections

Background

Since November 2021 the Omicron BA.1 SARS-CoV-2 variant (Nextclade 21K, Pango lineage B.1.1.529) has rapidly spread causing high numbers of infections across Europe, due to higher transmissibility and immune escape [1]. In the Netherlands, the Omicron variant was first detected end of November 2021 [2]. Several studies indicate that Omicron variants cause less severe disease than the Delta variant, also when adjusted for infection- and vaccine-induced immunity [3-5]. However, this characteristic could be outweighed by large numbers of infections because of greater transmission resulting in increased pressure on hospital care. First, the Omicron BA.1 variant emerged; from January 2022 a new variant from Omicron, BA.2 (Nextclade 21L), started to replace Omicron BA.1.

In vitro assays have shown largely reduced neutralisation of both Omicron variants by pre-Omicron convalescent sera and by sera of vaccinated individuals [6, 7]. Only small differences in neutralisation are observed between the Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants [7, 8]. Early studies on vaccine effectiveness showed very limited protection of primary COVID-19 vaccination against Omicron infection [9]. Booster vaccination increases protection, although to a smaller extent than against Delta. Also, protection against symptomatic COVID-19 seems to wane rapidly [10]. Data from England showed no evidence for reduced vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection with BA.2 as compared to BA.1 [11]. The rate of reinfections with Omicron is larger than seen with other variants, indicating that previous infections with another variant do not provide sufficient protection against Omicron [12, 13]. The level of protection against infection induced by the combination of vaccination and previous infection is largely unknown. Vaccine effectiveness against severe disease seems to be better preserved and restored to around 90% shortly after booster vaccination [10].

The Dutch COVID-19 vaccination program started in January 2021, first targeting residents of long-term care facilities and health care workers, and then following an age-dependent roll out starting with the eldest cohorts. At the end of summer 2021, all persons of 12 years and older had had the opportunity to complete primary vaccination. At the end of January 2022 individuals aged 5-11 years became eligible for vaccination. The coverage of full primary vaccination was 86% on April 3 2022 in adults 18 years or older; for children aged 12-17 years this was 70%; for children aged 5-11 years this was 6% [14]. In November 2021, the booster vaccination campaign targeting adults started in the Netherlands. On January 9 2022, 45% of the adult population had received a booster vaccination and on April 3 2022 this was 63% [15]. Comirnaty (BNT162b2, BioNTech/Pfizer, 77% of primary vaccination doses), Spikevax (mRNA-1273, Moderna, 8%), Vaxzevria (ChAdOx1, AstraZeneca, 11%) and Janssen vaccine (4%) have been used for primary vaccination in the Netherlands [16]. Comirnaty (49% of all booster doses) and Spikevax (51%) have been used for booster vaccination.

We previously showed with a case-only design that infection- and vaccine-induced protection of the primary series was much reduced for Omicron BA.1 infection compared with Delta [13]. Here we use a test-negative design to estimate the effects of primary and booster vaccination and previous infection on the protection against infection with Omicron BA.1 compared to Delta and with Omicron BA.2 compared to BA.1, during two periods when both variant combinations circulated in the Netherlands. S-gene target failure (SGTF) was used as a proxy for Omicron BA.1 infection and non-SGTF was used as a proxy for Delta or Omicron BA.2 infection, dependent on time period. We assess the protection conferred by primary and booster vaccination, with and without previous infections, against infection with the Delta, Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 SARS-CoV-2 variants by time since vaccination or previous infection and by age group. To this end, we employed data from 671,763 community-based SARS-CoV-2 tests performed between November 22, 2021 and March 31, 2022.

Methods

Laboratory data

Data from two large diagnostic laboratories were used, which analyse specimens from national community testing in the Netherlands and make use of the TaqPath COVID-19 RT-PCR Kit (ThermoFisher Scientific). This PCR-kit tests for three targets (S, ORF1ab and N). S-gene target failure (SGTF) in combination with a proper signal from ORF1ab and N, also referred to as S-drop-out, has proven to be a highly specific proxy for SARS-CoV-2 variants containing the 69/70 deletion in spike and therefore for Omicron BA.1 when this variant emerged [13]. With lower viral loads, the S-gene target tends to be less sensitive and therefore only positive results with a Ct value of ≤ 30 for the ORF1ab and N targets were included for further analyses. A proper signal in all three targets is a proxy for the Delta or Omicron BA.2 variant, depending on the time period, as these variants do not contain the 69/70 deletion in spike. We defined two cohorts: cohort Delta-Omicron BA.1 with test data from 22 November 2021 to 7 January 2022 and cohort Omicron BA.1-BA.2 with test data from 26 January 2022 to 31 March 2022 (Figure 1). These time periods were based on a positive predictive value (PPV) of SGTF (with WGS data as reference)[2] of >85% to discern the different variants. The SGTF-PCR testing in the two laboratories covered 20.9% of all tests done at community testing centers in the Netherlands during the study periods and cover the majority of Dutch regions.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1.

A. Number of SGTF and non-SGTF positive tests over time (n = 986,974). B. WGS typed variant found in national genome surveillance of community testing samples in the Netherlands (n = 17,907). Boxes indicate the Delta-Omicron BA.1 cohort (dashed line) and Omicron BA.1-BA.2 cohort (dot dashed line).

Results

Delta-Omicron BA.1 cohort

Previous infection, primary vaccination, or both protected well against Delta infection, with a relative reduction of 76% (95% confidence interval (CI): 73-79), 71% (95% CI: 69-73) and 92% (95% CI: 87-95, infection first estimate), respectively, at 7+ months after vaccination or previous infection (Figure 2A, Table S2). Booster vaccination increased the overall protection against Delta infection to 94% (95% CI: 94-96), or 99% (95% CI: 95-100) in persons with also a previous infection. Protection by previous infection or primary vaccination was much lower against Omicron BA.1 infection, with overall relative reductions of 13% (95% CI: 4-21) and 22% (95% CI: 18-26) after previous infection or primary vaccination, respectively. Persons who received primary vaccination and had a previous infection were better protected than after only primary vaccination or only previous infection, with an overall relative reduction of 49% (95% CI: 41-55, first infection, then primary vaccination) and 52% (95% CI: 45-59, first start primary vaccination, then infection). Recent booster vaccination increased protection against Omicron BA.1 infection to 58% (95% CI: 55-62), or 68% (95% CI: 58-75) in persons without and with previous infection, respectively, but it was remarkably lower than against Delta infection (Figure 2A, Table S2). The overall relative protection afforded by booster vaccination compared with primary vaccination was 75% (95% CI: 72-79) against Delta infection and 46% (95% CI: 42-50) against Omicron BA.1 infection (Table S3).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2.

Relative reduction in infections after previous infection, primary vaccination, booster vaccination, or combinations of previous infection and vaccination, compared with naïve status ((1-OR) * 100), by time since last event and overall in persons aged 18 and older, for cohort Delta-Omicron BA.1 (A) and cohort Omicron BA.1-BA.2 (B).

Age

In general, similar patterns were seen across age groups, with higher protection from previous infection and vaccination against Delta infection than Omicron BA.1 infection, and similar protection against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 infection (Figure 3, Table S4). However, we observed some differences between age groups. Protection conferred by previous infection against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 was significantly higher for children 0-11 and 12-17 years compared to persons aged 18-59 (Figure 3, Table S5). The effectiveness of primary vaccination against Delta infection decreased with increasing age. In contrast, protection from vaccination (alone or in combination with previous infection) against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 infection was for some of the comparisons significantly higher in those aged 60 years and older compared to 18-29 year olds (Figure 3, Table S5).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3.

Relative reduction in infections after previous infection, primary vaccination, booster vaccination, or combination of previous infection and vaccination, compared with naïve status ((1-OR) * 100), by time since last event and overall, and by age group. The columns indicate the vaccination and previous infection status and the rows display the age group in years, for cohort Delta-Omicron BA.1 (A) and cohort Omicron BA.1-BA.2 (B).

Discussion

We assessed the protection afforded by previous infection, and primary and booster vaccination with and without previous infection against Delta, and Omicron BA.1 and BA.2. Our analyses show a substantial reduction in protection conferred by previous SARS-CoV-2 infections and/or vaccination against the Omicron BA.1 variant, as compared to the Delta variant. Protection conferred by vaccination and previous infection was comparable between Omicron BA.1 and BA.2. Booster vaccination increased effectiveness against Omicron, but to a lesser extent than against Delta, resulting in a much lower booster vaccine effectiveness for Omicron compared with Delta. Moreover, three months after booster vaccination protection against BA.1 and BA.2 had decreased sharply.

The modest vaccine effectiveness against Omicron infection we found is comparable to estimates from other studies [10, 17-19]. Similar to our findings, others have also shown considerable waning of effectiveness of primary vaccination against both Delta and Omicron infection [10, 17, 19]. Data from the UK show an initial increase of effectiveness after booster vaccination to 50% against Omicron infection and a rapid decrease over time to 30% at 4-6 months after booster vaccination [10]. Other studies found, in line with our findings, no apparent differences in the effect of vaccination against BA.1 versus BA.2 infection [11, 20].

Our results showed loss of protection against Omicron infection conferred by previous infection with a different variant, which is in line with an observed increase in re-infection cases since the emergence of Omicron [12, 21, 22]. In the Netherlands, the percentage of new positive tests that were re-infections rose from around 3% during the Delta-dominated period to 12-13% in the first months of 2022 [23]. A preprint analyzing reinfections in Qatar found that protection of previous infection against Omicron infection was 62% [24], which was considerably lower than protection afforded by previous infection in preventing infection with Delta, but higher than the protective effect in our study, which was 45-50%. Another preprint (from the same authors) reported that protection from previous infection was similar for BA.1 and BA.2, in line with our findings [25].

In our study, the combination of both previous infection and primary vaccination provided more protection against Omicron than either of those alone. Highest levels of protection were observed in recently boosted individuals with a previous infection. Protection estimates for persons with first infection then vaccination and first vaccination then infection were quite comparable, suggesting that the sequence of vaccination and infection did not influence the level of protection. A recent study found broadly neutralizing antibodies against several variants of concern, not including Omicron, in sera from vaccinated plus infected individuals regardless of the sequence of vaccination and infection [26]. Another recent study found that the number of immunizing events (vaccinations and/or infections) correlates with the quality and breadth of the neutralizing antibody response, including against Omicron [27]. Our results are in line with these studies and indicate that reinfections and breakthrough infection during the Omicron wave could contribute to broader immunity in the population, also against future variants. Of note, in our study the previous infections in persons with vaccination after infection will likely mostly have been infections by wildtype SARS-CoV-2 or the Alpha variant (although especially in the younger population start of vaccination coincided with a Delta peak in Summer 2021), while previous infections in persons with infection after vaccination will likely have been infections by the Delta variant. This means that not only the sequence of vaccination and infection is different between these groups but most likely also the variant of infection, which makes the groups not directly comparable and the results more difficult to interpret.

We observed differences between the Delta-Omicron BA.1 and Omicron BA.1-BA.2 cohorts. Generally, the BA.1 protection estimates are higher in the second cohort. We do not have a conclusive explanation for the observed variation. However, this could be due to differences between the cohorts related to calendar period. First, the testing advice changed on 18 January 2022 (in between the cohorts), where recently infected and boostered individuals are no longer advised to seek asymptomatic testing after high-risk contact. Second, previous infections have been accrued in different time periods leading to different distributions of variants causing the previous infection. Third, in the Omicron BA.1-BA.2 cohort the SARS-CoV-2 incidence was higher as reflected in the increased positivity (Table 1). The resulting larger numbers of BA.1 positive tests included in the latter cohort allowed for more precise, and possibly more valid, estimates.

Generally, we found similar trends across age groups with higher protection from vaccination and previous infection against Delta infection than Omicron infection and similar protection against Omicron BA.1 versus BA.2 infections. Noticeably, we found better protection from previous infection in age groups <18 years compared with persons aged 19-59. As of yet, we do not have an explanation for this finding, which merits further research. Unexpectedly, we found some indication of higher protection from vaccination (with previous infection) against Omicron infection in persons aged 60 years or older compared to in younger adults. There is no clear biological explanation for this observation. Other differences between age groups could play a role, for example differences in misclassification of previous infections, in exposure, in vaccine brands used and in timing of vaccination.

Our study has some limitations. We use observational data from community testing registries to estimate protection from vaccination and previous infection and thereby we implicitly assume that unvaccinated and vaccinated persons, and persons with a previous infection are similar with respect to, for example, exposure to SARS-CoV-2, which may not be the case. Still, we think comparisons between variants within the two cohorts, and herein comparisons over time since vaccination or infection are valid. In addition, our results are comparable with results from other countries. Also testing behavior may be different between unvaccinated and vaccinated persons, and persons with a previous infection. A test-negative study has the advantage of only including individuals coming forward for testing, limiting bias from differential testing behavior. Testing behavior could also be different for Omicron vs Delta infection because of different symptomatology. A sensitivity analysis including only symptomatic persons gave similar results (Supplementary Table S2), which is reassuring, although we were not able to look at severity or duration of symptoms. Vaccination status is self-reported and may have led to some misclassification, although we do not expect a differential misclassification effect by variant. Also, individuals with a previous infection before onset of primary vaccination were given the choice to only receive one dose of a two-dose schedule to complete the primary series. This group could have been misclassified as having received a primary series while the second dose was a booster dose. In around 6% of the Dutch population having received two doses the second dose was a booster after a one-dose primary series. This misclassification may have resulted in overestimation of the VE shortly after completion of a primary series. Another source of misclassification is the use of community testing data to determine previous infection status. A relevant share of previous infections will be missing from this dataset, e.g. because of restrictive testing policy in the early months of the pandemic. For children below the age of 12, testing was not strongly encouraged for a long time, and the mild and larger share of asymptomatic disease course in this age group will further contribute to a large share of undetected infections. This misclassification will have led to an underestimation of the effect of a previous infection. Further, (non-)SGTF is not a perfect variant indicator and the predictive value is affected by changes in incidence of the different variants. Therefore, only tests were included from periods in which the PPV of SGTF (compared with WGS) to discern variants was >85% to limit misclassification. Therefore we do not expect this to meaningfully bias results.

In this study, we used data from community testing, mostly covering persons with mild infections at the time of testing. Vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 is higher than against infection, also for the Omicron variant. A UK study found vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization of 56% at 175 or more days after the second dose, and 91% shortly after the booster dose, decreasing to 80% after 70-104 days after the booster dose [10]. These estimates are lower than against severe COVID-19 by the Delta variant. However, the risk of a severe disease course after Omicron infection has been shown to be lower than after Delta infection [3-5]. This has led to lower burden on critical care than in previous waves despite immune escape by the Omicron variants.

In conclusion, we showed that primary vaccination with the current COVID-19 vaccines and pre-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infections offer low protection against Omicron infection, both for BA.1 and BA.2. Booster vaccination increases protection, although to a lesser extent than against Delta infection and with significant waning within months after the booster. This underlines the importance of timing of future booster doses for high-risk individuals when COVID-19 surges are expected. Further, the high number of infections by Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 escaping infection- or vaccine-induced immunity could contribute to broader population immunity in the months to come.

Author contributions

SPA, BdG, MJK designed the study; NvM, LA, BV, RS generated the data; SPA, BdG, DE, MJK performed analyses; SJMH, CBEMR, HEM, SvdH, MJK supervised the study; SA, BdG, CvdE, MJK wrote the manscript with input from all authors. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.