Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac COVID-19 Vaccination Against Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Infection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 in Hong Kong

Tsang, Nicole Ngai Yung; So, Hau Chi; Cowling, Benjamin J.; Leung, Gabriel M.; Ip, Dennis Kai Ming

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4200539

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The NOS scores indicated that all the studies included in the analysis demonstrated moderate to high methodological quality. Among them, 17 studies ( 10 , 17–19 , 23–26 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 34 , 35 , 38 , 43 , 45 ) were rated as high quality, while 16 studies ( 11 , 12 , 20–22 , 27 , 30 , 31 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 39–42 , 44 ) were considered to be of medium quality ( Supplementary Table 2 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regardless of vaccination type, 14 studies ( 20 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 34 , 37–41 , 43–45 ) investigated VE of incomplete vaccination (1-dose) compared to non-vaccination individuals, revealing an overall RR of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.82, I 2 = 75%, p < 0.01; Figure 3 ; VE: 23, 95% CI: 18 to 27%; Table 1 ). And a total of 32 studies ( 10–12 , 17–41 , 43–45 ) explored complete vaccination (2-dose), yielding an overall RR of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.45 to 0.56, I 2 = 93%, p < 0.01; Figure 3 ; VE: 50, 95% CI: 44 to 55%; Table 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We subsequently conducted subgroup analyses within the complete vaccination group, focusing on distinct outcome measures. Nine studies ( 12 , 20 , 21 , 26 , 29 , 31 , 34 , 39 , 45 ) made mild COVID-19 as the outcome, presenting an overall RR of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.65, I 2 = 90%, p < 0.01; Figure 4 ; VE: 41, 95% CI:35 to 47%; Table 1 ). Meanwhile, complete vaccination could decrease the risks of Omicron associated severe COVID-19 with RR of 0.29 (95% CI: 0.21 to 0.40, I 2 = 92%, p < 0.01; Figure 4 ; VE: 71, 95% CI: 60 to 79%; Table 1 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effect of COVID-19 vaccine to the Omicron variant in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lu,

Zeng,

Yao

et al. 2024

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOmicron (B.1.1.529), a variant of SARS-CoV-2, has emerged as a dominant strain in COVID-19 pandemic. This development has raised concerns about the effectiveness of vaccination to Omicron, particularly in the context of children and adolescents. Our study evaluated the efficacy of different COVID-19 vaccination regimens in children and adolescents during the Omicron epidemic phase.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase electronic databases for studies published through March 2023 on the association between COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adolescents at the Omicron variant period. The effectiveness outcomes included mild COVID-19 and severe COVID-19. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023390481).ResultsA total of 33 studies involving 16,532,536 children were included in the analysis. First, in children and adolescents aged 0–19 years, the overall VE of the COVID-19 vaccine is 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40 to 50%). Subgroup analysis of VE during Omicron epidemic phase for different dosage regimens demonstrated that the VE was 50% (95% CI: 44 to 55%) for the 2-dose vaccination and 61% (95% CI: 45 to 73%) for the booster vaccination. Upon further analysis of different effectiveness outcomes during the 2-dose vaccination showed that the VE was 41% (95% CI: 35 to 47%) against mild COVID-19 and 71% (95% CI: 60 to 79%) against severe COVID-19. In addition, VE exhibited a gradual decrease over time, with the significant decline in the efficacy of Omicron for infection before and after 90 days following the 2-dose vaccination, registering 54% (95% CI: 48 to 59%) and 34% (95% CI: 21 to 56%), respectively.ConclusionDuring the Omicron variant epidemic, the vaccine provided protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adolescents aged 0–19 years. Two doses of vaccination can provide effective protection severe COVID-19, with booster vaccination additionally enhancing VE.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of COVID-19 vaccine to the Omicron variant in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lu,

Zeng,

Yao

et al. 2024

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Risk reduction of hospital admission and severe disease induced by immunological protection conferred by both, disease and vaccination, is stronger and more persistent than protection against reinfections, which is lower and wanes rapidly, within months [ 85 , 86 ]. In fact, antibody protection was shown to be short-lived, making booster doses required to resume acceptable levels of circulating neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) [ 87 ]. However, the developed vaccines, mostly based on the mRNA or adenoviral vector technology, may induce protection by promoting the expansion of cellular in addition to humoral immunity.…”

Section: Diagnostic Tools Antibiotics Antivirals Monoclonal Antibodie...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Have Diagnostics, Therapies, and Vaccines Made the Difference in the Pandemic Evolution of COVID-19 in Comparison with “Spanish Flu”?

Lista

Peragallo²,

Biselli

et al. 2023

Pathogens

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1918 many countries, but not Spain, were fighting World War I. Spanish press could report about the diffusion and severity of a new infection without censorship for the first-time, so that this pandemic is commonly defined as “Spanish flu”, even though Spain was not its place of origin. “Spanish flu” was one of the deadliest pandemics in history and has been frequently compared with the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic. These pandemics share similarities, being both caused by highly variable and transmissible respiratory RNA viruses, and diversity, represented by diagnostics, therapies, and especially vaccines, which were made rapidly available for COVID-19, but not for “Spanish flu”. Most comparison studies have been carried out in the first period of COVID-19, when these resources were either not yet available or their use had not long started. Conversely, we wanted to analyze the role that the advanced diagnostics, anti-viral agents, including monoclonal antibodies, and innovative COVID-19 vaccines, may have had in the pandemic containment. Early diagnosis, therapies, and anti-COVID-19 vaccines have markedly reduced the pandemic severity and mortality, thus preventing the collapse of the public health services. However, their influence on the reduction of infections and re-infections, thus on the transition from pandemic to endemic condition, appears to be of minor relevance. The high viral variability of influenza and coronavirus may probably be contained by the development of universal vaccines, which are not easy to be obtained. The only effective weapon still remains the disease prevention, to be achieved with the reduction of promiscuity between the animal reservoirs of these zoonotic diseases and humans.

show abstract

“…These vaccines are safe and effective in the early stages of the pandemic against SARS-CoV-2 infections and their related clinical symptoms (3,4). However, the effectiveness of existing COVID-19 vaccines has waned due to the emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants (5,6), especially for the omicron variants and their sub-lineages, including BA.5.2, BF.7, BQ.1.1, XBB.1.5, and CH.1.1 (7,8). To promote the efficacy of the next generation of COVID-19 vaccines, various strategies are being extensively developed, including novel antigen design, prime/boost immunization, and induction of mucosal immunity with needlefree vaccination (oral inhalation, nasal spray, and oral capsule) (9)(10)(11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception and willingness toward various immunization routes for COVID-19 vaccines: a cross-sectional survey in China

Wang,

Cui,

et al. 2023

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo date, most vaccines, including the COVID-19 vaccine, are mainly administered by intramuscular injection, which might lead to vaccine hesitancy in some populations due to needle fear. Alternatively, needle-free immunization technology is extensively developed to improve the efficacy and acceptance of vaccination. However, there is no study to report the perception and willingness toward various immunization routes of the COVID-19 vaccine in the general population.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted nationwide using an online questionnaire. Bivariate analyses were undertaken to assess variable associations among the participants who reported a hesitancy to receive the COVID-19 booster vaccination. Multivariable logistic regression with a backward step-wise approach was used to analyze the predicted factors associated with the willingness to receive the COVID-19 booster vaccination.ResultsA total of 3,244 valid respondents were included in this survey, and 63.2% of participants thought they had a good understanding of intramuscular injection, but only 20.7, 9.2, 9.4, and 6.0% of participants had a self-perceived good understanding of inhalation vaccine, nasal spray vaccine, oral vaccine, and microneedle patch vaccine. Correspondingly, there was high acceptance for intramuscular injection (76.5%), followed by oral inhalation (64.4%) and nasal spray (43.0%). Those participants who were only willing to receive an intramuscular vaccine had less vaccine knowledge (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.65–0.94) than those who were willing to receive a needle-free vaccine (OR = 1.97; 95% CI: 1.52–2.57). Some factors were found to be associated with vaccine hesitancy toward booster COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionNeedle-free vaccination is a promising technology for the next generation of vaccines, but we found that intramuscular injection was still the most acceptable immunization route in this survey. One major reason might be that most people lack knowledge about needle-free vaccination. We should strengthen the publicity of needle-free vaccination technology, and thus improve the acceptance and coverage of vaccination in different populations.

show abstract

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac COVID-19 Vaccination Against Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Infection of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 in Hong Kong

Cited by 5 publications

References 17 publications

The effect of COVID-19 vaccine to the Omicron variant in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effect of COVID-19 vaccine to the Omicron variant in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Have Diagnostics, Therapies, and Vaccines Made the Difference in the Pandemic Evolution of COVID-19 in Comparison with “Spanish Flu”?

Perception and willingness toward various immunization routes for COVID-19 vaccines: a cross-sectional survey in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About