Real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines: a literature review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To estimate the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) against concerned outcomes in real-world settings.Methods
Studies reporting COVID-19 VE from August 6, 2020 to October 6, 2021 were included. The summary VE (with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI)) against disease related to COVID-19 was estimated. The results were presented in forest plots. Predefined subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were also performed.Results
A total of 51 records were included in this meta-analysis. In fully vaccinated populations, the VE against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, COVID-19-related hospitalization, admission to the intensive care unit, and death was 89.1% (95% CI 85.6-92.6%), 97.2% (95% CI 96.1-98.3%), 97.4% (95% CI 96.0-98.8%), and 99.0% (95% CI 98.5-99.6%), respectively. The VE against infection in the general population aged ≥16 years, the elderly, and healthcare workers was 86.1% (95% CI 77.8-94.4%), 83.8% (95% CI 77.1-90.6%), and 95.3% (95% CI 92.0-98.6%), respectively. For those fully vaccinated against infection, the observed effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 91.2% and of the Moderna vaccine was 98.1%, while the effectiveness of the CoronaVac vaccine was found to be 65.7%.Conclusions
The COVID-19 vaccines are highly protective against SARS-CoV-2-related diseases in real-world settings.
SUBMITTER: Zheng C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8595975 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Knowing vaccine effectiveness (VE) against variants of concern (VOCs) in the real-world setting is essential for public health decision-making. A systematic landscape of the VE against a series of clinical outcomes caused by the VOCs in the real-world setting is needed. We systematically searched for studies that evaluated VE against VOCs in the real-world setting and collected individual data. We identified 113 studies meeting the eligibility criteria. We found full vaccination provided strong protection against each clinical outcome with summary VE ranging from 86.8% to 96.0% Alpha, moderate protection against infection caused by Beta, Gamma and Delta with summary VE ranging from 70.9% to 72.8%, strong protection against severe disease caused by Delta with summary VE ranging from 84.9% to 90.3%, limited protection with summary VE of 23.5% (95% CI, 17.0-29.5) against infection and moderate protection with summary VE ranging from 56.5% to 82.4% against severe diseases caused by Omicron. Booster vaccination can provide a substantial improvement in protection against Delta and Omicron, but not as much as the Delta. The meta-regression analysis showed that the VE against the Omicron wanned over time, and the VE against hospitalization declined relatively slowly, compared to against infection. Those findings supported the need for public health measures, increasing booster vaccination coverage in response to current and new infectious waves driven by variants and developing broadly protective vaccines to confront virus evolution.
| S-EPMC9542696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWe aimed to assess the short-term effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among immunocompromised patients to prevent laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 infection.MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio [DOR] (95% CI) for COVID-19 infection between immunocompromised patients and healthy people or those with stable chronic medical conditions. VE was estimated as 100% x (1-DOR). We also investigated the rates of developing anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG between the 2 groups.ResultsTwenty studies evaluating COVID-19 vaccine response, and four studies evaluating VE were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled DOR for symptomatic COVID-19 infection in immunocompromised patients was 0.296 (95% CI: 0.108-0.811) with an estimated VE of 70.4% (95% CI: 18.9%- 89.2%). When stratified by diagnosis, IgG antibody levels were much higher in the control group compared to immunocompromised patients with solid organ transplant (pOR 232.3; 95% Cl: 66.98-806.03), malignant diseases (pOR 42.0, 95% Cl: 11.68-151.03), and inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pOR 19.06; 95% Cl: 5.00-72.62).ConclusionsWe found COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were effective against symptomatic COVID-19 among the immunocompromised patients but had lower VE compared to the controls. Further research is needed to understand the discordance between antibody production and protection against symptomatic COVID-19 infection.
| S-EPMC8720049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real-world data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines against the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) is limited. This systematic review aimed to investigate the real-world effectiveness and durability of protection conferred by primary course and booster vaccines against confirmed Omicron infection, and severe outcomes. We systematically searched literature up to 1 August 2022. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model to estimate the pooled vaccine effectiveness (VE). Overall, 28 studies were included representing 11 million individuals. The pooled VE against Omicron infection was 20.4% (95%CI: 12.1-28.7%) and 23.4% (95%CI: 13.5-33.3%) against symptomatic infection with variation based on vaccine type and age groups. VE sharply declined from 28.1% (95%CI: 19.1-37.1%) at three months to 3.9% (95%CI: -24.8-32.7%) at six months. Similar trends were observed for symptomatic Omicron infection. A booster dose restored protection against Omicron infection up to 51.1% (95%CI: 43.8-58.3%) and 57.3% (95%CI: 54.0-60.5%) against symptomatic infection within three months; however, this waned to 32.8% (95%CI: 16.8-48.7%) within six months. VE against severe Omicron infection following the primary course was 63.6% (95%CI: 57.5-69.7%) at three months, decreased to 49% (95%CI: 35.7-63.4%) within six months, and increased to 86% after the first or second booster dose.
| S-EPMC9965204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, promoted vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 are being given out globally. However, the occurrence of numerous COVID-19 variants has hindered the goal of rapid mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic by effective mass vaccinations. The real-word effectiveness of the current vaccines against COVID-19 variants has not been assessed by published reviews. Therefore, our study evaluated the overall effectiveness of current vaccines and the differences between the various vaccines and variants.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, medRxiv, bioRxiv, and arXiv were searched to screen the eligible studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Egger test were applied to estimate the quality of the literature and any publication bias, respectively. The pooled incident rates of different variants after vaccination were estimated by single-arm analysis. Meanwhile, the pooled efficacies of various vaccines against variants were evaluated by two-arm analysis using odds ratios (ORs) and vaccine effectiveness (VE).ResultsA total of 6,118 studies were identified initially and 44 articles were included. We found that the overall incidence of variants post first/second vaccine were 0.07 and 0.03, respectively. The VE of the incidence of variants post first vaccine between the vaccine and the placebo or unvaccinated population was 40% and post second vaccine was 96%, respectively. The sub-single-arm analysis showed a low prevalence rate of COVID-19 variants after specific vaccination with the pooled incidence below 0.10 in most subgroups. Meanwhile, the sub-two-arm analysis indicated that most current vaccines had a good or moderate preventive effect on certain variants considering that the VE in these subgroups was between 66 and 95%, which was broadly in line with the results of the sub-single-arm analysis.ConclusionOur meta-analysis shows that the current vaccines that are used globally could prevent COVID-19 infection and restrict the spread of variants to a great extent. We would also support maximizing vaccine uptake with two doses, as the effectiveness of which was more marked compared with one dose. Although the mRNA vaccine was the most effective against variants according to our study, specific vaccines should be taken into account based on the local dominant prevalence of variants.
| S-EPMC9160927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Currently, people all over the world have been affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Fighting against COVID-19 is the top priority for all the countries and nations. The development of a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine is considered the optimal way of ending the pandemic. Three hundred and 44 vaccines were in development, with 149 undergoing clinical research and 35 authorized for emergency use as to March 15 of 2022. Many studies have shown the effective role of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections as well as serious and fatal COVID-19 cases. However, tough challenges have arisen regarding COVID-19 vaccines, including long-term immunity, emerging COVID-19 variants, and vaccine inequalities. A systematic review was performed of recent COVID-19 vaccine studies, with a focus on vaccine type, efficacy and effectiveness, and protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants, breakthrough infections, safety, deployment and vaccine strategies used in the real-world. Ultimately, there is a need to establish a unified evaluation standard of vaccine effectiveness, monitor vaccine safety and effectiveness, along with the virological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants; and determine the most useful booster schedule. These aspects must be coordinated to ensure timely responses to beneficial or detrimental situations. In the future, global efforts should be directed toward effective and immediate vaccine allocations, improving vaccine coverage, SARS-CoV-2 new variants tracking, and vaccine booster development.
| S-EPMC9274757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were found to be highly effective in phase 3 clinical trials. However, these trials have not reported data regarding the subgroup of liver disease or excluded patients with liver disease. The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among liver cirrhosis (LC) patients is unclear. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to include all the relevant studies that compared the outcomes of LC patients who received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines vs. unvaccinated patients. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. Four studies with 51,834 LC patients (20,689 patients received at least one dose vs 31,145 were unvaccinated) were included. COVID-19-related complications, including hospitalization (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91, P = 0.004), mortality (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.55, P = 0.0001), and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11-0.77, P = 0.01), were significantly lower in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients reduced COVID-19-related mortality, intubation, and hospitalization. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is highly effective in LC. Further prospective studies, preferably randomized controlled trials, are necessary to validate our findings and determine which vaccine is superior in patients with LC.
| S-EPMC9980592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs of 31 December 2022, there were over 6.6 million coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths and over 651 million cases across 200 countries worldwide. Despite the increase in vaccinations and booster shots, COVID-19 cases and deaths continue to remain high. While the effectiveness of these vaccines has already been established by different manufacturers, the fact remains that these vaccines were created quickly for global emergency use, tested under controlled clinical conditions from voluntary subjects and age groups whose general characteristics may differ from the actual general population.AimTo conduct a systematic review to determine the real-world effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in the elderly during the predominance of Delta and Omicron variants in preventing COVID-19 related infection, hospital, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and intubation, and death.MethodsA combination of Medical Subject Headings and non-Medical Subject Headings was carried out to identify all relevant research articles that meets the inclusion and exclusion criteria from PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases, as well as qualified research studies from pre-print servers using medRxiv and Research Square, published from January 1, 2021 - December 31, 2022.ResultsAs per the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines were evaluated from an estimated total study population of 26,535,692 using infection, hospital, ICU admission and intubation, and death as outcome measures from studies published between 2021 and 2022, conducted in New York, Finland, Canada, Costa Rica, Qatar, Greece, and Brazil. The risk of bias was evaluated using risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. While clinical trial data on Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines demonstrated 94% vaccine effectiveness in the elderly, the results in this study showed that vaccine effectiveness in real-world settings is marginally lower against infection (40%-89%), hospitalization (92%), ICU admission and intubation (98%-85%), and death (77%-87%) with an indication of diminished effectiveness of vaccine over time. Furthermore, 2 doses of mRNA vaccines are inadequate and only provides interim protection.ConclusionBecause of the natural diminishing effectiveness of the vaccine, the need for booster dose to restore its efficacy is vital. From a research perspective, the use of highly heterogeneous outcome measures inhibits the comparison, contrast, and integration of the results which makes data pooling across different studies problematic. While pharmaceutical intervention like vaccination is important to fight an epidemic, utilizing common outcome measurements or carrying out studies with minimal heterogeneity in outcome measurements, is equally crucial to better understand and respond to an international health crisis.
| S-EPMC10421623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real-world effectiveness studies are important for monitoring performance of COVID-19 vaccination programmes and informing COVID-19 prevention and control policies. We aimed to synthesise methodological approaches used in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness studies, in order to evaluate which approaches are most appropriate to implement in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). For this rapid systematic review, we searched PubMed and Scopus for articles published from inception to July 7, 2021, without language restrictions. We included any type of peer-reviewed observational study measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness, for any population. We excluded randomised control trials and modelling studies. All data used in the analysis were extracted from included papers. We used a standardised data extraction form, modified from STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). Study quality was assessed using the REal Life EVidence AssessmeNt Tool (RELEVANT) tool. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021264658. Our search identified 3,327 studies, of which 42 were eligible for analysis. Most studies (97.5%) were conducted in high-income countries and the majority assessed mRNA vaccines (78% mRNA only, 17% mRNA and viral vector, 2.5% viral vector, 2.5% inactivated vaccine). Thirty-five of the studies (83%) used a cohort study design. Across studies, short follow-up time and limited assessment and mitigation of potential confounders, including previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and healthcare seeking behaviour, were major limitations. This review summarises methodological approaches for evaluating real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and highlights the lack of such studies in LMICs, as well as the importance of context-specific vaccine effectiveness data. Further research in LMICs will refine guidance for conducting real-world COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness studies in resource-constrained settings.
| S-EPMC8752025 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of COVID-19 due to high levels of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Thus, effective vaccines are needed. We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on COVID-19 short-term vaccine effectiveness among HCWs.MethodsWe searched PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from December 2019 to June 11, 2021, for studies evaluating vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs. To meta-analyze the extracted data, we calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for COVID-19 between vaccinated and unvaccinated HCWs. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100% × (1 - DOR). We also performed a stratified analysis for vaccine effectiveness by vaccination status: 1 dose and 2 doses of the vaccine.ResultsWe included 13 studies, including 173,742 HCWs evaluated for vaccine effectiveness in the meta-analysis. The vast majority (99.9%) of HCWs were vaccinated with the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The pooled DOR for symptomatic COVID-19 among vaccinated HCWs was 0.072 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.028-0.184) with an estimated vaccine effectiveness of 92.8% (95% CI, 81.6%-97.2%). In stratified analyses, the estimated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 among HCWs who had received 1 dose of vaccine was 82.1% (95% CI, 46.1%-94.1%) and the vaccine effectiveness among HCWs who had received 2 doses was 93.5% (95% CI, 82.5%-97.6%).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are highly effective against symptomatic COVID-19, even with 1 dose. More observational studies are needed to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness of other COVID-19 vaccines, COVID-19 breakthrough after vaccination, and vaccine efficacy against new variants.
| S-EPMC9495770 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The real-world effectiveness of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in Japan remains unclear. This case-control study evaluated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of two doses of mRNA vaccine, BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, against the delta (B.1.617.2) variant in the Japanese general population in the period June-September 2021. Individuals in close contact with COVID-19 patients were tested using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). A self-administered questionnaire evaluated vaccination status, demographic data, underlying medical conditions, lifestyle, personal protective health behaviors, and living environment. Two vaccine doses were reported by 11.6% of cases (n = 389) and 35.2% of controls (n = 179). Compared with controls, cases were younger and had a lower proportion who always performed handwashing for ≥20 s, a higher proportion of alcohol consumers, and a lower proportion of individuals living in single-family homes or with commuting family members. After adjusting for these confounding factors and day of PCR testing by multivariate logistic regression analysis, the VE in the period June-July (delta variant proportion 45%) was 92% and 79% in the period August-September (delta variant proportion 89%). The adjusted VE for homestay, hotel-based isolation and quarantine, and hospitalization was 78%, 77%, and 97%, respectively. Despite declining slightly, VE against hospitalization remained robust for ~3 months after the second dose. Vaccination policymaking will require longer-term monitoring of VE against new variants.
| S-EPMC9145554 | biostudies-literature