RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Increased risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 Beta, Gamma, and Delta variant compared to Alpha variant in vaccinated individuals
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.11.24.21266735
DO 10.1101/2021.11.24.21266735
A1 Andeweg, Stijn P.
A1 Vennema, Harry
A1 Veldhuijzen, Irene
A1 Smorenburg, Naomi
A1 Schmitz, Dennis
A1 Zwagemaker, Florian
A1 SeqNeth Molecular surveillance group
A1 RIVM COVID-19 Molecular epidemiology group
A1 van Gageldonk-Lafeber, Arianne B.
A1 Hahné, Susan J.M.
A1 Reusken, Chantal
A1 Knol, Mirjam J.
A1 Eggink, Dirk
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/24/2021.11.24.21266735.abstract
AB The extent to which severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC) break through infection- or vaccine-induced immunity is not well understood. Here, we analyze 28,578 sequenced SARS-CoV-2 samples from individuals with known immune status obtained through national community testing in the Netherlands from March to August 2021. We find evidence for an increased risk of infection by the Beta (B.1.351), Gamma (P.1), or Delta (B.1.617.2) variants compared to the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant after vaccination. No clear differences were found between vaccines. However, the effect was larger in the first 14-59 days after complete vaccination compared to 60 days and longer. In contrast to vaccine-induced immunity, no increased risk for reinfection with Beta, Gamma or Delta variants relative to Alpha variant was found in individuals with infection-induced immunity.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS).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:The Centre for Clinical Expertise at the RIVM assessed the research proposal following the specific conditions as stated in the law for medical research involving human subjects (WMO). In their opinion the research does not fulfill one or both of these conditions and therefore conclude it is exempted for further approval by the ethical research committee. Pathogen surveillance is a legal task of the RIVM (artikel 3 Wet RIVM, article 3 Law RIVM) and is carried out under the responsibility of the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS). Article 6c (artikel 6c) of the Public Health Act (Wet Publieke Gezondheid) provides that RIVM may receive pseudonymised data for this task without individual consent of each case.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.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).YesI 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.YesData produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.