Summary
Background Large outbreaks of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant have occurred in countries with high coverage of inactivated Covid-19 vaccines, raising urgent questions about effectiveness of these vaccines against disease and hospitalization with Omicron.
Methods We conducted a nationwide, test-negative, case-control study of adults who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection. We evaluated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 and severe Covid-19 (hospital admission or deaths) for the primary series of CoronaVac and homologous and heterologous (BNT162b2) booster doses.
Findings Between September 6, 2021, and March 10, 2022, a total of 1,339,986 cases were matched to 1,339,986 test-negative controls. In the period of Omicron predominance, vaccine effectiveness ≥180 days after the second CoronaVac dose was 8·1% (95% CI, 7·0 to 9·1) and 57·0% (95% CI, 53·5 to 60·2) against symptomatic and severe Covid-19, respectively. Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease was 15·0% (95% CI, 12·0 to 18·0) and 56·8% (95% CI, 56·3 to 57·4) in the period 8-59 days after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. During the same interval, vaccine effectiveness against severe Covid-19 was 71·3% (95% CI, 60·3 to 79·2) and 85·5% (95% CI, 83·3 to 87·0) after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. Whereas waning of vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic Covid-19 was observed ≥90 days after a homologous and heterologous booster, waning against severe Covid-19 was only observed after a homologous booster.
Interpretation A homologous CoronaVac booster dose provided limited additional protection, while a BNT162b2 booster dose afforded sustained protection against severe disease for at least three months.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
nn
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:
This study was approved by the ethical committee for research of Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul (CAAE: 43289221.5.0000.0021).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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
Data sharing: Deidentified databases as well as the R codes will be deposited in the repository https://github.com/juliocroda/VebraCOVID-19
