Dataset Information

Estimating vaccine efficacy over time after a randomized study is unblinded.

ABSTRACT: The COVID-19 pandemic due to the novel coronavirus SARS CoV-2 has inspired remarkable breakthroughs in the development of vaccines against the virus and the launch of several phase 3 vaccine trials in Summer 2020 to evaluate vaccine efficacy (VE). Trials of vaccine candidates using mRNA delivery systems developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have shown substantial VEs of 94-95%, leading the US Food and Drug Administration to issue Emergency Use Authorizations and subsequent widespread administration of the vaccines. As the trials continue, a key issue is the possibility that VE may wane over time. Ethical considerations dictate that trial participants be unblinded and those randomized to placebo be offered study vaccine, leading to trial protocol amendments specifying unblinding strategies. Crossover of placebo subjects to vaccine complicates inference on waning of VE. We focus on the particular features of the Moderna trial and propose a statistical framework based on a potential outcomes formulation within which we develop methods for inference on potential waning of VE over time and estimation of VE at any postvaccination time. The framework clarifies assumptions made regarding individual- and population-level phenomena and acknowledges the possibility that subjects who are more or less likely to become infected may be crossed over to vaccine differentially over time. The principles of the framework can be adapted straightforwardly to other trials.

SUBMITTER: Tsiatis AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8444907 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To compare adalimumab versus etanercept in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to test the hypothesis that adalimumab was not inferior to etanercept in terms of drug continuation by a margin of 15% after 52 weeks of treatment.Pragmatic, randomised, parallel group, multicentre, unblinded and non-inferiority trial. Randomisation stratified by baseline use of methotrexate.125 adults with active RA despite treatment with two disease-modifying drugs (DMARDs), including methotrexate randomised (1?:?1) to adalimumab 40 mg alternate weeks or etanercept 50 mg weekly, added to existing medication.The primary outcome was proportion of patients continuing treatment after 52 weeks. Secondary outcomes included: disease activity score using 28 joints (DAS28), treatment satisfaction (TSQM V.2), health status (Euroqol-5D), drug toxicity and persistence with therapy after 2 years.Persistence with therapy was 65% for adalimumab versus 56.7% for etanercept (one-sided 95% CI for proportion still taking adalimumab minus proportion on etanercept ?-7.9%); demonstrating non-inferiority at the 15% margin. After 2 years these figures were: adalimumab 58.3% and etanecept 43.3% (CI ?-1.7%). The proportion of good, moderate and non-responders based on DAS28-C reactive protein, after 52 weeks, were 26.3%, 33.3% and 40.4%, respectively, for adalimumab versus 16.7%, 31.7% and 51.7%, respectively, for etanercept (p=0.158). Baseline median EQ-5D scores improved from 0.52 to 0.69 for adalimumab and from 0.52 to 0.64 for etanercept (p=0.046) after 52 weeks. Global satisfaction, effectiveness, side effects and convenience scores based on the TSQM were similar for both drugs. Fourteen serious adverse events occurred including two deaths from myocardial infarction, one patient with ovarian cancer and one with acute myeloid leukaemia.Clinicians choosing a first tumour necrosis factor inhibitor for active RA, despite trying two DMARDs including methotrexate, may choose either adalimumab or etanercept in the knowledge that these drugs are similarly effective.EU Clinical Trials Register 2006-006275-21/GB.

Project description:BackgroundComparative effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines across patient subgroups is poorly understood and essential to precisely targeting vaccination strategies.MethodsWe used the US Department of Veterans Affairs COVID-19 Shared Data Resource to identify veterans who utilize VA health care and had no documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection before December 11, 2020. Using a test-negative case-control design (TND), we used conditional logistic regression with adjustment for covariates to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) over time for veterans who received 2 doses of mRNA vaccines or 1 dose of Ad26.Cov2.S.ResultsWe identified 4.8 million veterans with a mean age of 64 years, of whom 58% had ≥1 chronic disease. Vaccine effectiveness for symptomatic infections, hospitalizations, and ICU admission or death declined over time and varied by the type of vaccine (P < 0.01). VE estimates against symptomatic infection during months 1 and 7 for mRNA-1273 compared with BNT162b2 were 89.7% (95% CI, 84.4%-93.0%) and 57.3% (95% CI, 48.4%-64.7%) vs 81.6% (95% CI, 75.9%-85.9%) and 22.5% (95% CI, 7.2%-35.2%) for individuals age <65 years and 78.4% (95% CI, 71.1%-83.9%) and 36.2% (95% CI, 27.7%-43.6%) vs 66.3% (95% CI, 55.7%-74.4%) and -23.3% (95% CI, -40.5% to -8.2%) in subjects age ≥65 years; against hospitalization 92.0% (95% CI, 76.1%-97.3%) and 83.1% (95% CI, 66.8%-91.4%) vs 85.6% (95% CI, 72.6%-92.4%) and 57.0% (95% CI, 31.2%-73.2%) in subjects age <65 years and 66.1% (95% CI, 45.3%-79.0%) and 64.7% (95% CI, 55.2%-72.3%) vs 61.0% (95% CI, 41.3%-74.2%) and 1.7% (95% CI, -22.0% to 20.8%) in those age ≥65 years; against ICU admission or death 89.2% (95% CI, 49.5%-97.7%) and 84.4% (95% CI, 59.0%-94.1%) vs 87.6% (95% CI, 61.0%-96.1%) and 66.4% (95% CI, 7.7%-87.8%) in subjects age <65 years and 75.4% (95% CI, 51.7%-87.5%) and 73.8 (95% CI, 62.9%-81.5%) vs 67.4% (95% CI, 32.6%-84.3%) and 29.3% (95% CI, 2.3%-48.9%) in subjects age ≥65 years, respectively (P interaction < .01 for all comparisons). Similarly, mRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 in veterans with >1 chronic disease.ConclusionsmRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 in older veterans and those with chronic diseases.

Project description:BackgroundLevels of sitting among adolescents are high, especially during the school day. The acute cognitive and health consequences associated with prolonged sitting are poorly understood in adolescents. This randomized crossover design study examined the acute effects of a simulated school day with reduced sitting or usual sitting on adolescents' cognitive function and cardiometabolic biomarkers.MethodsEighteen healthy school aged adolescents were recruited from the community to the study (11 males; 7 females; mean age [SD] = 13.5 ± 0.9 years). Two protocols were developed to simulate an adolescent school day, the amount of time spent sitting was manipulated reflecting: a 'typical' day (65% of the time spent sitting with two sitting bouts sitting >20 min) and a 'reduced sitting' day (adolescents sat for 50% less time with no bouts of sitting >20 mins). The order that participants were exposed to each condition was randomized (via random number generator). Participants were not fully blinded as they could observe the difference between conditions. Energy intake and moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) were standardized for both conditions and monitored for 48 h post-condition for compensatory effects. Cognitive (working memory) and cardiometabolic outcomes (lipids, glucose, insulin, IL-6, apo-A1, apo-B, blood pressure,) were assessed pre and post for both conditions, BMI and body fat were assessed on the morning of the intervention. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models. Standardised effect sizes were calculated.ResultsCompared with the typical school day, the reduced sitting day demonstrated significant positive effects for apoB/apoA-1 ratio (adjusted difference ± SD) -0.02 ± 0.03; P = 0.03; effect size [Cohen's d] = -0.67. Findings for total cholesterol -0.19 ± 0.27; P = 0.28; d = -0.71; HDL cholesterol -0.23 ± 0.50; P = 0.12 d = -0.66; and total cholesterol/HDL ratio 0.25 ± 0.53; P = 0.25; d = 0.51 and for cognition 0.64 ± 0.15; P = 0.15; d = 0.54 were non-significant. There were no compensatory changes in participant energy expenditure or energy intake for 48 h post intervention.ConclusionReducing school day sitting time in adolescents' resulted in significant improvements in apoB/apoA-1 ratio with medium effect sizes for total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and total cholesterol/HDL ratio. Cognitive function results showed the equivalent of a 6 month improvement in effective mental-attentional capacity.Trial registrationThe trial was registered as a clinical trial with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12614001064695 ) on the 3rd of October 2014 - registered retrospectively.

Dataset Information

Estimating vaccine efficacy over time after a randomized study is unblinded.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets