Safety and Immunogenicity of a Booster Vaccination by CoronaVac or BNT162b2 in Previously Two-Dose Inactivated Virus Vaccinated Individuals with Negative Neutralizing Antibody

Lai, Kristi Tsz-Wan; Loong, Emilie Yuen-Ting Lai Wan; Fung, Terry Ling-Hiu; Luk, Luke Wing-Pan; Lau, Chor-Chiu; Zee, Jonpaul Sze-Tsing; S.K., Edmond; Tang, Bone Siu-Fai

doi:10.3390/vaccines10040556

Cited by 12 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the 121 studies under full-text review, 98 studies were excluded. Eventually, 23 studies (including 13 published articles and 10 preprints) were included in this meta-analysis based on the inclusion criteria [ 14 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ]. The literature retrieval flow chart is shown in Figure 1 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Deng

Liu

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As vaccine resources were distributed unevenly worldwide, sometimes there might have been shortages or delays in vaccine supply; therefore, considering the use of heterogeneous booster doses for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) might be an alternative strategy. Therefore, we aimed to review the data available to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of heterologous booster doses with homologous booster doses for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines. We searched relevant studies up to 27 April 2022. Random-effects inverse variance models were used to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of COVID-19 outcomes and odds ratio (OR) and its CI of safety events. The Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale and Cochrane Collaboration’s tool were used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 23 studies involving 1,726,506 inoculation cases of homologous booster dose and 5,343,580 inoculation cases of heterologous booster dose was included. The VE of heterologous booster for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (VEheterologous = 96.10%, VEhomologous = 84.00%), symptomatic COVID-19 (VEheterologous = 56.80%, VEhomologous = 17.30%), and COVID-19-related hospital admissions (VEheterologous = 97.40%, VEhomologous = 93.20%) was higher than homologous booster. Compared with homologous booster group, there was a higher risk of fever (OR = 1.930, 95% CI, 1.199–3.107), myalgia (OR = 1.825, 95% CI, 1.079–3.089), and malaise or fatigue (OR = 1.745, 95% CI, 1.047–2.906) within 7 days after boosting, and a higher risk of malaise or fatigue (OR = 4.140, 95% CI, 1.729–9.916) within 28 days after boosting in heterologous booster group. Compared with homologous booster group, geometric mean neutralizing titers (GMTs) of neutralizing antibody for different SARS-CoV-2 variants and response rate of antibody and gama interferon were higher in heterologous booster group. Our findings suggested that both homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster doses had great effectiveness, immunogenicity, and acceptable safety, and a heterologous booster dose was more effective, which would help make appropriate public health decisions and reduce public hesitancy in vaccination.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Risk of bias assessment of the included RCTs [ 14 , 24 , 26 , 27 , 30 , 31 , 35 , 37 , 40 , 41 , 45 ]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Deng

Liu

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to a local serological study, T cell response was shown to be higher in two-dose-BNT162b2 recipients when compared to those who received two doses of CoronaVac [ 41 ]. Among those who received CoronaVac as the first two doses, more heterologous (BNT162b2) booster recipients developed positive T cell response than homologous booster recipients [ 42 ]. In contrast to these immunological findings, we did not demonstrate a significant difference between the risk of COVID-related mortality or complications, among those who completed three doses of CoronaVac versus BNT162b2.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against mortality and severe complications after SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection: a case–control study

Yan

Wan

et al. 2022

Emerging Microbes & Infections

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data regarding protection against mortality and severe complications after Omicron BA.2 infection with CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccines remains limited. We conducted a case–control study to evaluate the risk of severe complications and mortality following 1–3 doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 using electronic health records database. Cases were adults with their first COVID-19-related mortality or severe complications between 1 January and 31 March 2022, matched with up-to 10 controls by age, sex, index date, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications by type and number of doses was estimated using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities and medications. Vaccine effectiveness (95% CI) against COVID-19-related mortality after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 90.7% (88.6–92.3) and 74.8% (72.5–76.9) in those aged ≥65, 87.6% (81.4–91.8) and 80.7% (72.8–86.3) in those aged 50–64, 86.6% (71.0–93.8) and 82.7% (56.5–93.1) in those aged 18–50. Vaccine effectiveness against severe complications after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 82.1% (74.6–87.3) and 58.9% (50.3–66.1) in those aged ≥65, 83.0% (69.6–90.5) and 67.1% (47.1–79.6) in those aged 50–64, 78.3% (60.8–88.0) and 77.8% (49.6–90.2) in those aged 18–50. Further risk reduction with the third dose was observed especially in those aged ≥65 years, with vaccine effectiveness of 98.0% (96.5–98.9) for BNT162b2 and 95.5% (93.7–96.8) for CoronaVac against mortality, 90.8% (83.4–94.9) and 88.0% (80.8–92.5) against severe complications. Both CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccination were effective against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and risks decreased further with the third dose.

show abstract

“…Using an interferon-gamma release assay, BNT126b2 booster was also found to induce a better T-cell response. [34] Our current study has provided real world data on enhanced protection against Omicron with heterologous boosting after 2 doses of CoronaVac. We showed that 3-dose vaccination significantly reduced the chance of COVID-19 and according to regression analysis, the effect mainly came from BNT162b2 booster.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Healthcare Worker Infection Rate and Outcome during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Outbreak in Hong Kong

Zee¹,

Kwok²,

Kee³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Immune escape is observed with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (Pango lineage B.1.1.529), the predominant circulating strain worldwide. Booster dose was shown to restore immunity against Omicron infection, however, real world data comparing mRNA (BNT162b2; Comirnaty) and inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac; Sinovac) homologous and heterologous boosting is lacking. A retrospective study was performed to compare the rate and outcome of COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCWs) with various vaccination regime during a territory-wide Omicron outbreak in Hong Kong. During the study period 1 Feb – 31 Mar 2022, 3167 HCWs were recruited, 871 HCWs reported 746 and 183 episodes of significant household and non-household close contact. 737 HCWs acquired COVID-19 which were all clinically mild. Time dependent Cox regression showed that, comparing with 2-dose vaccination, 3-dose vaccination reduced infection risk by 31.7% and 89.3% in household contact and non-household close contact respectively. Using 2-dose BNT162b2 as reference, 2-dose CoronaVac recipient had significantly higher risk of being infected (HR 1.69 P<0.0001). Three-dose BNT162b2 (HR 0.4778 P<0.0001) and 2-dose CoronaVac + BNT162b2 booster (HR 0.4862 P=0.0157) were associated with lower risk of infection. Three-dose CoronaVac and 2-dose BNT162b2 + CoronaVac booster were not significantly different from 2-dose BNT162b2. The mean time to achieve negative RT-PCR or E gene cycle threshold 31 or above was not affected by age, number of vaccine dose taken, vaccine type and timing of the last dose. In summary, we have demonstrated lower risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs given BNT162b2 as booster after 2 doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac.

show abstract

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Booster Vaccination by CoronaVac or BNT162b2 in Previously Two-Dose Inactivated Virus Vaccinated Individuals with Negative Neutralizing Antibody

Cited by 12 publications

References 21 publications

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against mortality and severe complications after SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection: a case–control study

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Healthcare Worker Infection Rate and Outcome during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Variant Outbreak in Hong Kong

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About