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I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the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
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.