Receipt of BNT162b2 KP.2 Vaccine and COVID-19 CVS MinuteClinic Visits in US Adults
==================================================================================
* Abby E. Rudolph
* Farid L. Khan
* Xiaowu Sun
* Laura L. Lupton
* Laura A. Puzniak
* Luis Jodar
* John M. McLaughlin
## Abstract
Using a test-negative design, we modeled the association between receipt of BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine and symptomatic COVID-19 among adults testing for SARS-CoV-2 at walk-in clinics in a large US retail pharmacy chain (9/5/2024–12/8/2024). At a median of 37 days post-vaccination, those who received BNT162b2 KP.2 were 48% less likely to test positive.
On June 27, 2024, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended an updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccine for all persons aged ≥6 months, regardless of prior vaccination history [1]. The US Food and Drug Administration approved KP.2-adapted mRNA COVID-19 vaccines for those aged ≥12 years on August 22, 2024, however, data describing the protection afforded by these vaccines is lacking. We estimated the association between receipt of BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine (Pfizer) and symptomatic COVID-19 among adults testing for SARS-CoV-2 at walk-in clinics in a large US retail pharmacy chain.
## Methods
Using a test-negative case-control design, the odds of receiving a BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine was compared between COVID-19 cases and test-negative controls. We included CVS MinuteClinic patients who tested for SARS-CoV-2 between September 5, 2024 (≥14 days after approval of KP.2 vaccines) and December 8, 2024. Eligible patients had (1) a valid SARS-CoV-2 test result, (2) ≥1 reported COVID-19 symptom, (3) no positive SARS-CoV-2 test within the past 90 days, and (4) COVID-19 vaccination status available for the 2024-2025 season. We excluded patients who (1) tested at CVS drive-thru locations, (2) had received a 2024–2025 COVID-19 vaccine other than BNT162b2, and (3) had >1 SARS-CoV-2 test during the study period (**Supplemental Figure 1**). To be considered vaccinated, the vaccine had to be received ≥14 days prior to SARS-CoV-2 testing. Rapid antigen testing was used for all patients. Cases were defined as those with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results; controls had negative test results. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated from generalized estimating equations (GEE) logistic regression models that clustered on patient’s State of residence and adjusted for calendar month of testing and other potentially confounding demographic and clinical characteristics (**Supplemental Methods**). Analyses were performed using SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute). This study was granted a waiver for informed consent by the Sterling Institutional Review Board (IRB no. 12702).
## Results
Of 109,929 CVS MinuteClinic visits in patients aged ≥18 years, 23,884 (21.7%) met inclusion criteria (**Supplemental Figure 1**). Median age was 37 years (2,215 [9.3%] were ≥65 years old), 8,446 (35.4%) were male, and 8,038 (33.7%) had at least one chronic medical condition.
Overall, 3,439 (14.4%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results and 795 (3.3%) were vaccinated. 71 of 3,439 cases (2.1%) and 724 of 20,445 controls (3.5%) received BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine (**Supplemental Table 1**). Among those vaccinated, median (interquartile range) days since receipt of BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine was 37 (25–57).
Compared with adults who did not receive a KP.2-adapted vaccine, the overall adjusted OR for those who received BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41□0.65) for a COVID-19– related MinuteClinic visit, and was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.28□0.59), 0.45 (95% CI, 0.25□0.80), and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.58□0.98) for those aged 18-49, 50-64, and ≥65 years, respectively (*P* for interaction with age group=.05) (**Table 1**).
View this table:
[Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2025/01/17/2025.01.15.24319342/T1)
Table 1. Adjusted Odds of COVID-19-related CVS MinuteClinic Visit for Adults who Received vs. Did Not Receive a KP.2 Vaccine of any Kind, by Age Group (N=22,501)a
## Discussion
During the early part of the 2024-2025 respiratory virus season, US adults ≥18 years old who received a BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine were 48% less likely to have a COVID-19-related CVS MinuteClinic visit—suggesting that receipt of a well-matched COVID-19 vaccine provides meaningful protection against milder medically-attended outcomes. This reduction in risk appeared lower among individuals ≥65 years old compared to younger age groups, which is consistent with previous reports [2] and may reflect increased susceptibility, reduced immune responses, or both among older adults [3, 4]. Study limitations include the exclusive use of SARS-CoV-2 antigen tests in CVS MinuteClinics, which may have more limited sensitivity compared to than polymerase chain reaction tests, the potential for unmeasured confounding, and potential misclassification of vaccination status, which was primarily reported by the patient or provider. Additionally, 75% of patients did not have COVID-19 vaccination status available and were excluded from our analysis, which could have led to selection bias, however, these patients were not appreciably different than those with COVID-19 vaccination status reported (**Supplemental Table 2**). Our findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccines can still play an important public health role in preventing cases of mild illness during the respiratory virus season, which, given the sheer number of mild cases each year, could have meaningful impacts on healthcare resource utilization, workforce productivity, and absenteeism. Future analyses are needed to assess the durability of protection against this endpoint and against more severe illness.
## Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
## Author Affiliations
CVS Health, Woonsocket, Rhode Island, USA (Sun, Lupton); Pfizer Inc, Collegeville, Pennsylvania (Rudolph, Khan, Puzniak, Jodar, McLaughlin)
## Author Contributions
Dr. Sun had full access to all study data and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
*Concept and Design:* Rudolph, Khan, Puzniak, McLaughlin
*Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data:* Sun, Rudolph, Khan, Puzniak, McLaughlin.
*Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content:* All authors.
*Statistical analysis:* Sun.
*Obtained funding:* Lupton, Jodar, McLaughlin.
*Administrative, technical, or material support:* Sun, Lupton, Rudolph, Khan, Puzniak.
*Supervision:* Sun, Rudolph, Puzniak, McLaughlin.
## Conflict of Interest Disclosures
Dr. Sun and Dr. Lupton reported being employees and stockholders in CVS Health during the conduct of this study. Dr. Rudolph, Mr. Khan, Dr. Puzniak, Dr. Jodar, and Dr. McLaughlin reported being employees and stockholders in Pfizer during the conduct of this study
## Funding/Support
This study was sponsored by Pfizer.
## Role of the Funder/Sponsor
The study design was developed by Pfizer and approved by CVS. CVS collected and analyzed the data. Pfizer did not participate in the collection or analysis of data. CVS and Pfizer participated in the interpretation of data, in the writing of the report, and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.
## Additional Contributions
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Jennifer Onwumeh-Okwundu, MD, who is an employee of Pfizer, Inc., and did not receive compensation beyond her salary, for her administrative support of this project.
## Supplementary Appendix
### Supplemental Methods
### Supplemental Methods
CVS is the largest retail pharmacy in the United States with >9000 locations. CVS began administering SARS-CoV-2 tests in the Fall of 2020. Specimens are collected through swabbing of the anterior nasal cavity. Patients were excluded if (1) they received a BNT162b2 KP.2 (Pfizer 2024–2025 formulation) vaccine <14 days prior to the test date, (2) they received a 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccine other than BNT162b2, or (3) the patient or provider reported “prefer not to answer” for COVID-19 vaccination status (and had no other evidence of receipt of a BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine from pharmacy or health insurance records). COVID-19 vaccine history was based on patient- or provider-reported data and was supplemented with CVS pharmacy or Aetna health insurance records when available. A patient was considered vaccinated if any record of a BNT162b2 KP.2 vaccine was identified from any source. If a discrepancy in date of vaccination was found between the patient- or provider-reported data and pharmacy or health insurance records, the latter were used to identify the date of vaccination.
### Data Sources
Data used in study analyses include (1) CVS MinuteClinic data collected as part of routine SARS-CoV-2 testing, including SARS-CoV-2 test date and result; (2) patient- or provider-reported data from the questionnaire, including demographics (age [continuous], gender [male, female, or other], race [Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, White or Caucasian, other/unknown/refuse to answer], Ethnicity [Hispanic or Latino, not Hispanic or Latino, Other/unknown/patient refused]), date and manufacturer of most recent COVID-19 vaccination received, symptoms reported [chills, congestion or runny nose, cough, diarrhea, fatigue, fever, headache, muscle pain, recent loss of taste or smell, shortness of breath, sore throat, vomiting], comorbidities [chronic lung disease, cirrhosis of the liver, current/former smoker, diabetes, heart conditions, high blood pressure, immunocompromised, kidney failure or end stage renal disease, overweight/obese], currently pregnant [yes, no, not applicable, unknown], insurance status [Commercial, Medicare, Medicaid, other, uninsured], and whether the patient had recent close contact with someone diagnosed with or presumed to have COVID-19 [yes/no], was a healthcare worker [yes, no, unknown], or was a resident in a special setting where the risk of COVID-19 transmission may be high (i.e., long-term care, correctional and detention facilities; homeless shelters; assisted-living facilities and group homes) [no, yes, unknown]); (3) patient zip code linked variables: US Census region (Midwest, Northeast, South, or West) and area deprivation index (ADI; continuous); (4) CVS vaccine administration data for patients receiving COVID-19 vaccination through CVS (to assess consistency and plausibility self-reported vaccination history); and (5) Aetna health records to further validate receipt of a 2024–2025 COVID-19 vaccine. All variables were considered for inclusion in the adjusted model, but were excluded if they did not retain statistical significance (*P* < .05) after adjusting for other covariates, or change the odds ratio estimate by ≥10%.1
[Supplemental Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2025/01/17/2025.01.15.24319342/F1)
Supplemental Figure 1. Attrition Flow Chart
View this table:
[Supplemental Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2025/01/17/2025.01.15.24319342/T2)
Supplemental Table 1. Study Population Characteristics (N=23,884)
View this table:
[Supplemental Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2025/01/17/2025.01.15.24319342/T3)
Supplemental Table 2. Characteristics of patients who did and did not self-report COVID-19 vaccination status for the 2024-2025 season
* Received January 15, 2025.
* Revision received January 15, 2025.
* Accepted January 17, 2025.
* © 2025, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International), CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
## References
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC Recommends Updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 and Flu Vaccines for Fall/Winter Virus Season. Available at: [https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/s-t0627-vaccine-recommendations.html](https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/s-t0627-vaccine-recommendations.html). Accessed August 21, 2024.
2. Rudolph AE, Khan FL, Shah A, et al. Effectiveness of BNT162b2 BA. 4/5 bivalent mRNA vaccine against symptomatic COVID-19 among immunocompetent individuals testing at a large US retail pharmacy. The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2024; 229(3): 648–59.
[PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=37925630&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2025%2F01%2F17%2F2025.01.15.24319342.atom)
3. Allen JC, Toapanta FR, Chen W, Tennant SM. Understanding immunosenescence and its impact on vaccination of older adults. Vaccine 2020; 38(52): 8264–72.
[CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.vaccine.2020.11.002&link_type=DOI)
[PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=33229108&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2025%2F01%2F17%2F2025.01.15.24319342.atom)
4. Crooke SN, Ovsyannikova IG, Poland GA, Kennedy RB. Immunosenescence and human vaccine immune responses. Immun Ageing 2019; 16: 1–16.
[PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=30679937&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2025%2F01%2F17%2F2025.01.15.24319342.atom)
1. 1.Mickey RM, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol. Jan 1989;129(1):125–37. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115101
[CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115101&link_type=DOI)
[PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2910056&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2025%2F01%2F17%2F2025.01.15.24319342.atom)
[Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1989R639600014&link_type=ISI)