Effect of BNT162b2 antigen dosage on protection against SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection
Chemaitelly, H.; Ayoub, H.; Coyle, P. V.; Tang, P.; YASSINE, H. M.; Althani, A.; Al-Khatib, H. A.; Hasan, M. R.; Al-Kanaani, Z.; Al-Kuwari, E.; Jeremijenko, A.; Kaleeckal, A. H.; Latif, A. N.; Shaik, R. M.; Abdul-Rahim, H. F.; Nasrallah, G. K.; Al-Kuwari, M. G.; Al-Romaihi, H. E.; Butt, A. A.; Al-Thani, M. H.; Al-Khal, A.; Bertollini, R.; Abu-Raddad, L. J.
Show abstract
BackgroundCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine antigen dosage may affect protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, but direct evidence to quantify this effect is lacking. MethodsA matched, retrospective, cohort study that emulated a randomized control trial was conducted in Qatar between February 3, 2022 and November 8, 2022, to provide a head-to-head, controlled comparison of protection induced by two antigen dosages of the BNT162b2 vaccine. The study compared incidence of omicron infection in the national cohort of adolescents 12 years of age who received the two-dose primary-series of the 30-{micro}g BNT162b2 vaccine to that in the national cohort of adolescents 11 years of age who received the two-dose primary-series of the pediatric 10-{micro}g BNT162b2 vaccine. Associations were estimated using Cox proportional-hazard regression models. ResultsAmong adolescents with no record of prior infection, cumulative incidence of infection was 6.0% (95% CI: 4.9-7.3%) for the 30-{micro}g cohort and 7.2% (95% CI: 6.1-8.5%) for the 10-{micro}g cohort, 210 days after the start of follow-up. Incidence during follow-up was dominated by omicron subvariants including, consecutively, BA.1/BA.2, BA.4/BA.5, BA.2.75*, and XBB. The adjusted hazard ratio comparing incidence of infection in the 30-{micro}g cohort to the 10-{micro}g cohort was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.60-0.98). Corresponding relative effectiveness was 23.4% (95% CI: 1.6-40.4%). Relative effectiveness was -3.3% (95% CI: -68.0-27.5%) among adolescents with a record of prior infection. ConclusionsThree-fold higher BNT162b2 dosage was associated with [~]25% higher protection against infection in infection-naive adolescents of similar age. These findings may inform design of future COVID-19 vaccines and boosters for persons of different age groups.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection among children and adolescents in Qatar 99%
- Waning of BNT162b2 vaccine protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection in Qatar 99%
- Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 boosters against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) infection in Qatar 98%
Similar papers in this journal
- Real-world effectiveness of NVX-CoV2373 and BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in South Korea 96%
- Effectiveness of Covid-19 vaccines against symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections in an urgent care setting 96%
- Comparative effectiveness of four COVID-19 vaccines, BNT162b2 mRNA, mRNA-1273, ChAdOx1 nCov-19 and NVX-CoV2373 against SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) infection 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness Given Confirmed Exposure; Analysis of Household Members of COVID-19 Patients 95%
- Two-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness with mixed schedules and extended dosing intervals: test-negative design studies from British Columbia and Quebec, Canada 95%
- Immunogenicity of a third dose of BNT162b2 to ancestral SARS-CoV-2 & Omicron variant in adults who received two doses of inactivated vaccine 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Initial protection against Omicron in children and adolescents by BNT162b2 97%
- Safety and immunogenicity of a SARS-CoV-2 recombinant protein vaccine with AS03 adjuvant in healthy adults: interim findings from a phase 2, randomised, dose-finding, multi-centre study 96%
- Vaccine effectiveness of two and three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against COVID-19 in Hong Kong 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.