Abstract
The Omicron sub-lineages BA.4 and BA.5 were first detected in England in April 2022. A case surge followed despite England having recently experienced waves with BA.1 and BA.2. This study used a whole population test-negative case-control study design to estimate the effectiveness of the vaccines currently in use as part of the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme against hospitalisation following infection with BA.4 and BA.5 as compared to BA.2 during a period of co-circulation. Incremental VE was estimated in those vaccinated with either a third or fourth dose as compared to individuals with waned immunity who had received their second dose at least 25 weeks prior. Vaccination status was included as an independent variable and effectiveness was defined as 1-odds of vaccination in cases/odds of vaccination in controls. During the study period, there were 32,845 eligible tests from hospitalised individuals. Of these, 25,862 were negative (controls), 3,432 were BA.2, 273 were BA.4, 947 were BA.5 and 2,331 were either BA.4 or BA.5 cases. There was no evidence of reduced VE against hospitalisation for BA.4 or BA.5 as compared to BA.2. The incremental VE was 56.8% (95% C.I.; 24.0-75.4%), 59.9% (95% C.I.; 45.6-70.5%) and 52.4% (95% C.I.; 43.2-60.1%) for BA.4, BA.5 and BA.2, respectively, at 2 to 14 weeks after a third or fourth dose. VE against hospitalisation with BA.4/5 or BA.2 was slightly higher for the mRNA-1273 booster than the BNT162b2 booster at all time-points investigated, but confidence intervals overlapped. These data provide reassuring evidence of the protection conferred by the current vaccines against severe disease with BA.4 and BA.5.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
None
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:
PHE Research Ethics and Governance Group Statement: Surveillance of COVID-19 testing and vaccination is undertaken under Regulation 3 of The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002 to collect confidential patient information (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/1438/regulation/3/made) under Sections 3(i) (a) to (c), 3(i)(d) (i) and (ii) and 3(3). The study protocol was subject to an internal review by the PHE Research Ethics and Governance Group and was found to be fully compliant with all regulatory requirements. As no regulatory issues were identified, and ethical review is not a requirement for this type of work, it was decided that a full ethical review would not be necessary. All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
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
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript. Data cannot be made publicly available for ethical and legal reasons, i.e. public availability would compromise patient confidentiality as data tables list single counts of individuals rather than aggregated data
