Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 Vaccines against COVID-19 Infection: A Meta-Analysis of Test-Negative Design Studies

Abstract

Although numerous COVID-19 vaccines are effective against COVID-19 infection and variants of concern (VOC) in the real world, it is imperative to obtain evidence of the corresponding vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study estimates the real-world effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines against COVID-19 infection and determines the influence of different virus variants on VE by using test-negative design (TND) studies. We systematically searched for published articles on the efficacy of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 against COVID-19 infection. Two researchers independently selected and extracted data from eligible studies. We calculated the VE associated with different vaccine types, SARS-CoV-2 variants, and vaccination statuses, using an inverse variance random-effects model. We selected 19 eligible studies in the meta-analysis from 1651 records. For the partially vaccinated group, the VE of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 was 61% and 78% against COVID-19 infection, respectively. For the completely vaccinated group, the VE of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 was 90% and 92% against COVID-19 infection, respectively. During subgroup analyses, the overall VE of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 against the Delta variant was 53% and 71%, respectively, for the partially vaccinated group; the respective VE values were 85% and 91% for the fully vaccinated group. Irrespective of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines, the Delta variant significantly weakened vaccine protection for the partially vaccinated group, while full vaccination was highly effective against COVID-19 infection and various VOC. The mRNA-1273 vaccine is more effective against COVID-19 infection and VOC than the BNT162b2 vaccine, especially for the partially vaccinated group. Overall, the results provide recommendations for national and regional vaccine policies.

Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The vulnerable population, particularly those unvaccinated or with coexisting underlying diseases, represents an unprecedented challenge in addressing Omicron spread ( 102 ). Several studies have confirmed that COVID-19 vaccines remain an effective protective measure in interrupting Omicron transmission; simultaneously, the mRNA vaccines, notably homologous or heterologous boosters, are worthy candidates for priority consideration ( 42 , 100 , 102 – 106 ). There was limited or no data on VE against various variants, including Omicron, in the elderly population.…”

Effectiveness of first, second, and third COVID-19 vaccine doses in solid organ transplant recipients: A population-based cohort study from Canada

“…Some research suggests vaccine effectiveness might be higher with mRNA‐1273 compared to BNT162b2. 35 , 36 Sixth, we may have missed some SARS‐CoV‐2 infections that were captured using rapid antigen tests. However, this number is likely low with widespread access to PCR testing during the study period, the administration of confirmatory PCR tests at Ontario transplant centers, and PCR testing upon admission to the hospital (regardless of the reason for admission).…”

“…Fifth, we did not have the power to present vaccine effectiveness estimates by vaccine type (e.g., BNT162b2 versus mRNA‐1273) or by solid organ transplant type (e.g., lung versus kidney). Some research suggests vaccine effectiveness might be higher with mRNA‐1273 compared to BNT162b2 35,36 . Sixth, we may have missed some SARS‐CoV‐2 infections that were captured using rapid antigen tests.…”

Quantitative and Qualitative Difference in Antibody Response against Omicron and Ancestral SARS-CoV-2 after Third and Fourth Vaccination

“…Real-world data revealed for the mRNA vaccines (mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2) a very high vaccine effectiveness of more than 90% with respect to the prevention of COVID-19 [ 14 , 15 ]. Later on, data from Israel and from New York showed that there is a waning of the immunity [ 3 , 16 ].…”