Abstract
Background Intrinsic durability of immune responses elicited by COVID-19 vaccines will drive vaccine effectiveness long-term across settings and may differ by vaccine type. We aimed here to determine durability of protection of three COVID-19 vaccines BNT162b2, mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S following primary vaccination against breakthrough infections, hospitalisations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions in the United States (US).
Methods Using national claims and laboratory data covering 168 million lives, we conducted a matched case-control study with fully vaccinated individuals between January 1 and September 7, 2021. Odds ratios (OR) for developing outcomes in months two through six following primary vaccination were estimated relative to the first month after primary vaccination for each vaccine separately. Results compare each vaccine to itself and are not directly comparative. Odds ratios were translated into vaccine effectiveness (VE) using assumptions about event rates in an unvaccinated cohort.
Findings Relative to its baseline, stable protection was observed for the single-shot Ad26.COV2.S against infections and severe disease. Relative to their baseline protection waned overtime against infections for BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 and against hospitalisations for BNT162b2. No waning of baseline protection was observed at any time for ICU admissions for all three vaccines. Calculated baseline VE was consistent with the published literature.
Interpretation While the starting protection level provided by the primary series may differ by vaccine type and mechanism of action, this study demonstrated by comparing each vaccine to its own baseline protection that the three vaccines in three separate populations may have different durability profiles. Further investigation is required to fully characterize the durability profile of the three vaccines. Moreover, as the COVID-19 pandemic continues, and as more countries and populations implement a standard of care consisting of three doses of the mRNA vaccines or two doses of Ad26.COV2.S, further investigation is critical to understand the level of protection and the durability of response over longer periods, novel variants and in response to homologous and heterologous boosting.
Competing Interest Statement
All authors with the exception of Dr. Schneeweiss are employees of Janssen R&D the manufacturer of Ad26.COV2.S.
Dr. Schneeweiss is participating in investigator-initiated grants to the Brigham and Womens Hospital from Boehringer Ingelheim unrelated to the topic of this study. He is a consultant to Aetion Inc. which has multiple research collaborations with Janssen R&D.
Funding Statement
This work was funded by Janssen Research & Development.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The collection and analysis of these data did not qualify as human subjects research under the Common Rule and were not subject to institutional review board assessment. The New England institutional review board approved this exemption (no.1-9757-1). Upon reasonable request, researchers may get access to the data and analytics infrastructure for prespecified collaborative analyses.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Revised the language throughout manuscript to make clear the study design and limitations.
Data Availability
Upon reasonable request, researchers may get access to the data and analytics infrastructure for prespecified collaborative analyses.
