Back

Comparative effectiveness of mRNA-1273 versus protein-based NVX-CoV2705 vaccination on COVID-19-related outcomes among US insured adults during 2024--2025: a retrospective matched cohort study

Wilson, A.; Beck, E.; Hensler, H.; Vicic, N.; Joshi, K.; Patry, E.; Li, L.; Wang, J.; Clarke, C.

2026-04-04 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.04.02.26350067 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: COVID vaccination with periodically updated compositions remains important as SARS-CoV-2 continues to circulate, cause disease, and evolve. Available COVID-19 vaccines in the 2024-2025 season differed by platform, including mRNA-1273, an mRNA-based vaccine, and NVX-CoV2705, a recombinant protein-based vaccine and antigen composition (KP.2-targeted and JN.1-targeted, respectively). There is limited head-to-head real-world evidence comparing the effectiveness of these different approaches to prevention of severe outcomes with COVID-19. We compared mRNA-1273 with protein-based NVX-CoV2705 in insured US adults vaccinated during the 2024-2025 season. Methods: We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study in a large US claims database. Adults aged 18 years or older who received mRNA-1273 or NVX-CoV2705 between Aug 31, 2024 and Feb 28, 2025 were eligible. Recipients were exactly matched 2:1 on key demographic and clinical factors and then weighted with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights. Outcomes were medically-attended COVID-19 and hospitalization with COVID-19 from day 7 after vaccination through up to 180 days of follow-up. We calculated comparative vaccine effectiveness (cVE) as 100 x (1-- hazard ratio). Results: Of 858,138 eligible mRNA-1273 recipients and 34,667 eligible NVX-CoV2705 recipients, 69,140 and 34,570, respectively, entered the matched cohort. Median (Q1, Q3) follow-up was 180 (163, 180) days for mRNA-1273 and 180 (162,180) for NVX-CoV2705. Medically attended COVID-19 occurred in 706 (1.02%) mRNA-1273 recipients and 512 (1.48%) NVX-CoV2705 recipients; adjusted cVE (95% CI) was 31.7% (23.4%, 39.1%). Hospitalization with COVID-19 occurred in 61 (0.09%) and 49 (0.14%) recipients, respectively; adjusted cVE (95% CI) was 40.7% (13.5%, 59.4%). In the 47,754 mRNA-1273 recipients matched to 23,877 NVX-CoV2705 recipients aged [≥]65, adjusted cVE (95% CI) was 25.7% (15.4%, 34.8%) against medically-attended COVID-19 and 41.7% (14.3%, 60.4%) against hospitalization with COVID-19. Conclusions: In this insured US adult population, mRNA-1273 demonstrated greater effectiveness against medically attended COVID-19 and hospitalization with COVID-19 than the protein-based NVX-CoV2705. These findings highlight the potential public-health importance of considering vaccine platform and variant selection when planning for upcoming seasons.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.2%
2
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.4%
3
Vaccine
189 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
12.2%
4
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
5
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
71 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
Annals of Internal Medicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
7
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 41%
3.5%
9
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 43%
3.0%
10
Vaccines
196 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
11
Nature Medicine
117 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.5%
12
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
13
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.6%
14
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.3%
15
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
16
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
17
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.2%
18
New England Journal of Medicine
50 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
19
Journal of Medical Economics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
20
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
21
The Lancet
16 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
22
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
23
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
24
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
25
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Canadian Medical Association Journal
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
27
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%