Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 Vaccines in Qatar.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Abu-Raddad LJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8796790 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 are more than 90% effective against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). However, their comparative effectiveness for a range of outcomes across diverse populations is unknown.MethodsWe emulated a target trial using the electronic health records of U.S. veterans who received a first dose of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine between January 4 and May 14, 2021, during a period marked by predominance of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant. We matched recipients of each vaccine in a 1:1 ratio according to their risk factors. Outcomes included documented severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, symptomatic Covid-19, hospitalization for Covid-19, admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for Covid-19, and death from Covid-19. We estimated risks using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. To assess the influence of the B.1.617.2 (delta) variant, we emulated a second target trial that involved veterans vaccinated between July 1 and September 20, 2021.ResultsEach vaccine group included 219,842 persons. Over 24 weeks of follow-up in a period marked by alpha-variant predominance, the estimated risk of documented infection was 5.75 events per 1000 persons (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.39 to 6.23) in the BNT162b2 group and 4.52 events per 1000 persons (95% CI, 4.17 to 4.84) in the mRNA-1273 group. The excess number of events per 1000 persons for BNT162b2 as compared with mRNA-1273 was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.81) for documented infection, 0.44 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.70) for symptomatic Covid-19, 0.55 (95% CI, 0.36 to 0.83) for hospitalization for Covid-19, 0.10 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.26) for ICU admission for Covid-19, and 0.02 (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.12) for death from Covid-19. The corresponding excess risk (BNT162b2 vs. mRNA-1273) of documented infection over 12 weeks of follow-up in a period marked by delta-variant predominance was 6.54 events per 1000 persons (95% CI, -2.58 to 11.82).ConclusionsThe 24-week risk of Covid-19 outcomes was low after vaccination with mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2, although risks were lower with mRNA-1273 than with BNT162b2. This pattern was consistent across periods marked by alpha- and delta-variant predominance. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs and others.).
| S-EPMC8693691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding immunogenicity and effectiveness of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines is critical to guide rational use.MethodsWe compared the immunogenicity of mRNA-1273, BNT-162b2, and Ad26.COV2.S in healthy ambulatory adults. We performed an inverse-variance meta-analysis of population-level effectiveness from public health reports in > 40 million individuals.ResultsA single dose of either mRNA vaccine yielded comparable antibody and neutralization titers to convalescent individuals. Ad26.COV2.S yielded lower antibody concentrations and frequently undetectable neutralization titers. Bulk and cytotoxic T-cell responses were higher in mRNA1273 and BNT162b2 than Ad26.COV2.S recipients. Regardless of vaccine, <50% of vaccinees demonstrated CD8+ T-cell responses. Antibody concentrations and neutralization titers increased comparably after the first dose of either vaccine, and further in recipients of a second dose. Prior infection was associated with high antibody concentrations and neutralization even after a single dose and regardless of vaccine. Neutralization of Beta, Gamma, and Delta strains were poorer regardless of vaccine. In meta-analysis, relative to mRNA1273 the effectiveness of BNT162b2 was lower against infection and hospitalization, and Ad26COV2.S was lower against infection, hospitalization, and death.ConclusionsVariation in the immunogenicity correlates with variable effectiveness of the 3 vaccines deployed in the United States.
| S-EPMC8689763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines are the main vaccines that have been used for mass vaccination in Japan. Information on adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines in the Japanese population is limited.MethodsWe conducted an online survey on self-reported adverse reactions in individuals who had received two doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine. The incidence of adverse events after each dose of vaccine was investigated. Propensity score matching was used to compare the incidence of adverse reactions after the second dose of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines.ResultsAfter the first and second doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine, and the first and second doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, 890, 853, 6401, and 3965 individuals, respectively, provided complete responses. Systemic reactions, including fever, fatigue, headache, muscle/joint pain, and nausea were significantly more common in females, individuals aged <50 years, and after the second dose. The incidence of injection site pain did not differ significantly according to the dose. The incidence of delayed injection site reactions after the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine was 3.9% and 0.8% among females and males, respectively, and 10.6% among females aged 40-69 years. Local and systemic reactions after the second dose, including fever, fatigue, headache, muscle/joint pain, nausea, and skin rash were more common in individuals who had received the mRNA-1273 vaccine.ConclusionsAdverse reactions were more frequently reported in females, younger individuals, and after the mRNA-1273 vaccine.
| S-EPMC8747950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several cases of herpes zoster (HZ) following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) have been reported, and the first epidemiological evidence suggests an increased risk. We used the worldwide pharmacovigilance database VigiBase to describe HZ cases following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. We performed disproportionality analyses (case/non-case statistical approach) to assess the relative risk of HZ reporting in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients compared to influenza vaccine recipients and according to patient age. To 30 June 2021, of 716 928 reports with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, we found 7728 HZ cases. When compared to influenza vaccines, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with a significantly higher reporting of HZ (reporting odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.8-2.1). Furthermore, we found a reduced risk of reporting HZ among under 40-year-old persons compared to older persons (reporting odds ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.36-0.41). Mild and infrequent HZ reactions may occur shortly after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, at higher frequency than reported with influenza vaccination, especially in patients over 40 years old. Further analyses are needed to confirm this risk.
| S-EPMC9111438 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInformation is limited regarding the effectiveness of the two-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) in preventing infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and in attenuating coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) when administered in real-world conditions.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study involving 3975 health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers. From December 14, 2020, to April 10, 2021, the participants completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing by providing mid-turbinate nasal swabs for qualitative and quantitative reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) analysis. The formula for calculating vaccine effectiveness was 100% × (1 - hazard ratio for SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated participants), with adjustments for the propensity to be vaccinated, study site, occupation, and local viral circulation.ResultsSARS-CoV-2 was detected in 204 participants (5%), of whom 5 were fully vaccinated (≥14 days after dose 2), 11 partially vaccinated (≥14 days after dose 1 and <14 days after dose 2), and 156 unvaccinated; the 32 participants with indeterminate vaccination status (<14 days after dose 1) were excluded. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76 to 97) with full vaccination and 81% (95% CI, 64 to 90) with partial vaccination. Among participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection, the mean viral RNA load was 40% lower (95% CI, 16 to 57) in partially or fully vaccinated participants than in unvaccinated participants. In addition, the risk of febrile symptoms was 58% lower (relative risk, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.98) and the duration of illness was shorter, with 2.3 fewer days spent sick in bed (95% CI, 0.8 to 3.7).ConclusionsAuthorized mRNA vaccines were highly effective among working-age adults in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection when administered in real-world conditions, and the vaccines attenuated the viral RNA load, risk of febrile symptoms, and duration of illness among those who had breakthrough infection despite vaccination. (Funded by the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.).
| S-EPMC8262622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesHealthcare workers (HCWs) at increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were among the primary targets for vaccine campaigns. We aimed to estimate the protective efficacy of the first three COVID-19 vaccines available in Western Europe.MethodsWe merged two prospective databases that systematically recorded, in our institution: (a) HCWs positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal samples, and (b) HCWs who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. We excluded HCWs with SARS-CoV-2 infection during the 6 months prior to the study. HCWs were categorized as non-vaccinated if they received no vaccine and until the first injection +13 days, partially vaccinated from the first injection +14 days to the second injection +13 days, and fully vaccinated thereafter.ResultsOf the 8165 HCWs employed in our institution, 360 (4.4%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR during the study period (4th January to 17th May 2021). Incidence was 9.1% (8.2-10.0) in non-vaccinated HCWs, 1.2% (0.7-1.9) after one dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 1.4% (0.6-2.3) and 0.5% (0.1-1.0) after one and two doses of mRNA BNT162b2, 0.7% (0.1-1.9) and 0% after one and two doses of mRNA-1273 (p < 0.0001). Vaccine effectiveness (Cox model) was estimated at, respectively, 86.2% (76.5-91.0), 38.2% (6.3-59.2), and 49.2% (19.1-68.1) 14 days after the first dose for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, mRNA-1273, and mRNA-BNT162b2, and 100% (ND) and 94.6% (61.0-99.2) 14 days after the second dose for mRNA-1273 and mRNA-BNT162b2.ConclusionsIn this real-world study, the observed effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in HCWs was in line with the efficacy reported in pivotal randomized trials.
| S-EPMC8275842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Studies examining antibody responses by vaccine brand are lacking and may be informative for optimizing vaccine selection, dosage, and regimens. The purpose of this study is to assess IgG antibody responses following immunization with BNT162b2 (30 μg mRNA) and mRNA-1273 (100 μg mRNA) vaccines. A cohort of clinicians at a nonprofit organization is being assessed clinically and serologically following immunization with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. IgG responses were measured at the Remington Laboratory by an IgG assay against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-receptor binding domain. Mixed-effect linear (MEL) regression modeling was used to examine whether the SARS-CoV-2 IgG level differed by vaccine brand, dosage, or number of days since vaccination. Among 532 SARS-CoV-2 seronegative participants, 530 (99.6%) seroconverted with either vaccine. After adjustments for age and gender, MEL regression modeling revealed that the average IgG antibody level increased after the second dose compared to the first dose (P < 0.001). Overall, titers peaked at week 6 for both vaccines. Titers were significantly higher for the mRNA-1273 vaccine on days 14 to 20 (P < 0.05), 42 to 48 (P < 0.01), 70 to 76 (P < 0.05), and 77 to 83 (P < 0.05) and higher for the BNT162b2 vaccine on days 28 to 34 (P < 0.001). In two participants taking immunosuppressive drugs, the SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody response remained negative. mRNA-1273 elicited higher IgG antibody responses than BNT162b2, possibly due to the higher S-protein delivery. Prospective clinical and serological follow-up of defined cohorts such as this may prove useful in determining antibody protection and whether differences in antibody kinetics between the vaccines have manufacturing relevance and clinical significance. IMPORTANCE SARS-CoV-2 vaccines using the mRNA platform have become one of the most powerful tools to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. mRNA vaccines enable human cells to produce and present the virus spike protein to their immune system, leading to protection from severe illness. Two mRNA vaccines have been widely implemented, mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech). We found that, following the second dose, spike protein antibodies were higher with mRNA-1273 than with BNT162b2. This is biologically plausible, since mRNA-1273 delivers a larger amount of mRNA (100 μg mRNA) than BNT162b2 (30 μg mRNA), which is translated into spike protein. This difference may need to be urgently translated into changes in the manufacturing process and dose regimens of these vaccines.
| S-EPMC8579939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) omicron variant emerged in November 2021 and consists of several mutations within the spike. We use serum from mRNA-vaccinated individuals to measure neutralization activity against omicron in a live-virus assay. At 2-4 weeks after a primary series of vaccinations, we observe a 30-fold reduction in neutralizing activity against omicron. Six months after the initial two-vaccine doses, sera from naive vaccinated subjects show no neutralizing activity against omicron. In contrast, COVID-19-recovered individuals 6 months after receiving the primary series of vaccinations show a 22-fold reduction, with the majority of the subjects retaining neutralizing antibody responses. In naive individuals following a booster shot (third dose), we observe a 14-fold reduction in neutralizing activity against omicron, and over 90% of subjects show neutralizing activity. These findings show that a third dose is required to provide robust neutralizing antibody responses against the omicron variant.
| S-EPMC8784612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundmRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are safe and effective, but increasing reports of breakthrough infections highlight the need to vigilantly monitor and compare the effectiveness of these vaccines.MethodsWe retrospectively compared protection against symptomatic infection conferred by mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 at Mayo Clinic sites from December 2020 to September 2021. We used a test-negative case-control design to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) and to compare the odds of symptomatic infection after full vaccination with mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2, while adjusting for age, sex, race, ethnicity, geography, comorbidities, and calendar time of vaccination and testing.FindingsBoth vaccines were highly effective over the study duration (VEmRNA-1273: 84.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 81.6%-86.2%; VEBNT162b2: 75.6%, 95% CI: 72.2%-78.7%), but their effectiveness was reduced during July-September (VEmRNA-1273: 75.6%, 95% CI: 70.1%-80%; VEBNT162b2: 63.5%, 95% CI: 55.8%-69.9%) as compared to December-May (VEmRNA-1273: 93.7%, 95% CI: 90.4%-95.9%; VEBNT162b2: 85.7%, 95% CI: 81.4%-88.9%). Adjusted for demographic characteristics, clinical comorbidities, time of vaccination, and time of testing, the odds of experiencing a symptomatic breakthrough infection were lower after full vaccination with mRNA-1273 than with BNT162b2 (odds ratio: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.55-0.67).ConclusionsBoth mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 strongly protect against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. It is imperative to continue monitoring and comparing available vaccines over time and with respect to emerging variants to inform public and global health decisions.FundingThis study was funded by nference.
| S-EPMC8664708 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPostmarketing evaluations have linked myocarditis to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. However, few population-based analyses have directly compared the safety of the 2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the risk of myocarditis, pericarditis, and myopericarditis between BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273.MethodsWe used data from the British Columbia COVID-19 Cohort (BCC19C), a population-based cohort study. The exposure was the second dose of an mRNA vaccine. The outcome was diagnosis of myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis during a hospitalization or an emergency department visit within 21 days of the second vaccination dose. We performed multivariable logistic regression to assess the association between vaccine product and the outcomes of interest.ResultsThe rates of myocarditis and pericarditis per million second doses were higher for mRNA-1273 (n = 31, rate 35.6; 95% CI: 24.1-50.5; and n = 20, rate 22.9; 95% CI: 14.0-35.4, respectively) than BNT162b2 (n = 28, rate 12.6; 95% CI: 8.4-18.2 and n = 21, rate 9.4; 95% CI: 5.8-14.4, respectively). mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 had significantly higher odds of myocarditis (adjusted OR [aOR]: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.67-4.62), pericarditis (aOR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.31-4.46) and myopericarditis (aOR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.76-3.93). The association between mRNA-1273 and myocarditis was stronger for men (aOR: 3.21; 95% CI: 1.77-5.83) and younger age group (18-39 years; aOR: 5.09; 95% CI: 2.68-9.66).ConclusionsMyocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is rare, but we observed a 2- to 3-fold higher odds among individuals who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2. The rate of myocarditis following mRNA-1273 receipt is highest among younger men (age 18-39 years) and does not seem to be present at older ages. Our findings may have policy implications regarding the choice of vaccine offered.
| S-EPMC9639791 | biostudies-literature