PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Jurgens, GT AU - Lackner, K TI - Modelled Optimization of SARS-Cov-2 Vaccine Distribution: an Evaluation of Second Dose Deferral Spacing of 6, 12, and 24 weeks AID - 10.1101/2021.02.28.21252638 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.02.28.21252638 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/03/2021.02.28.21252638.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/03/03/2021.02.28.21252638.full AB - Background Multiple recent studies have shown strong first dose vaccine efficacy for both Moderna mRNA-1273 and Pfizer/BioNTech BNT 162b2, which has stimulated discussion of maximizing initial population immunity during a time of vaccine shortage by using a deferred second dose strategy for these vaccines.Methods Our model examines the size of the effect of spacing of the second dose with 6, 12, and 24 week deferred spacing regimens relative to 3 week spacing.Results Deferring the second dose from 3 weeks to 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks shows progressive benefit to population immunity for any given time period, even with significant one dose efficacy decay. The benefits are influenced by vaccine supply per capita.Conclusion The longer the second dose is deferred the larger the benefit in initial population immunity, provided one dose efficacy does not significantly wane. Monitoring one dose efficacy duration from the UK or Quebec minimizes this risk, as the gathered data will help ensure the second dose is given at an optimal time. How this information is implemented should vary depending on the population and whether the goal is to optimally protect high risk groups or to increase total population immunity as quickly as possible. Benefits to deferring the second dose are influenced by the length of deferral, one dose efficacy, and vaccine supply per capita. The time to herd immunity could be shortened by 4 weeks with the implementation of a 12 week spacing regimen or 10 weeks with a 24 week spacing regimen.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo funding was received for this research.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as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).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.YesThe datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.