Real-World Effectiveness of a Third Dose of mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 on Inpatient and Medically Attended COVID-19 among Immunocompromised Adults in the United States

Tianyu Sun, Linwei Li, Katherine Mues, Mihaela Georgieva, Brenna Kirk, James Mansi, Nicolas Van de Velde, Ekkehard Beck
{"title":"Real-World Effectiveness of a Third Dose of mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 on Inpatient and Medically Attended COVID-19 among Immunocompromised Adults in the United States","authors":"Tianyu Sun, Linwei Li, Katherine Mues, Mihaela Georgieva, Brenna Kirk, James Mansi, Nicolas Van de Velde, Ekkehard Beck","doi":"10.1101/2024.01.30.24302015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent data have shown elevated infection rates in several subpopulations at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19, including immunocompromised (IC) individuals. Previous research suggests that IC persons have reduced risks of hospitalization and medically-attended COVID-19 with 2 doses of mRNA-1273 (SpikeVax; Moderna) compared to two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty; Pfizer/BioNTech). The main objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare real-world effectiveness of third doses of mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 at multiple time points on occurrence of COVID-19 hospitalization and medically-attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the US. The HealthVerity (HV) medical and pharmacy claims database, which contains data from >330 million patients, was the data source. Both subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted in addition to the core comparisons noted. In propensity score-adjusted analyses, receiving mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 as third dose was associated with 32% (relative risk [RR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.89) , 29% (0.71; 0.57-0.86), and 23% (0.77; 0.62-0.93) lower risk of COVID-19 hospitalization after 90, 180, and 270 days, respectively. Corresponding reductions in medically-attended COVID-19 were 8% (0.92; 0.86-0.98), 6% (0.94; 0.90-0.98), and 2% (0.98; 0.94-1.02), respectively. Our findings suggest a third dose of mRNA-1273 is more effective than a third dose of BNT162b2 in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization and breakthrough medically-attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the US.","PeriodicalId":501072,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.30.24302015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent data have shown elevated infection rates in several subpopulations at risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19, including immunocompromised (IC) individuals. Previous research suggests that IC persons have reduced risks of hospitalization and medically-attended COVID-19 with 2 doses of mRNA-1273 (SpikeVax; Moderna) compared to two doses of BNT162b2 (Comirnaty; Pfizer/BioNTech). The main objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare real-world effectiveness of third doses of mRNA-1273 versus BNT162b2 at multiple time points on occurrence of COVID-19 hospitalization and medically-attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the US. The HealthVerity (HV) medical and pharmacy claims database, which contains data from >330 million patients, was the data source. Both subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted in addition to the core comparisons noted. In propensity score-adjusted analyses, receiving mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 as third dose was associated with 32% (relative risk [RR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.89) , 29% (0.71; 0.57-0.86), and 23% (0.77; 0.62-0.93) lower risk of COVID-19 hospitalization after 90, 180, and 270 days, respectively. Corresponding reductions in medically-attended COVID-19 were 8% (0.92; 0.86-0.98), 6% (0.94; 0.90-0.98), and 2% (0.98; 0.94-1.02), respectively. Our findings suggest a third dose of mRNA-1273 is more effective than a third dose of BNT162b2 in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization and breakthrough medically-attended COVID-19 among IC adults in the US.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
mRNA-1273 第三剂量与 BNT162b2 第三剂量对美国免疫力低下的成人住院病人和就医者 COVID-19 的实际疗效对比
最近的数据显示,包括免疫力低下者(IC)在内的一些有感染 SARS-CoV-2 和 COVID-19 风险的亚人群的感染率升高。以前的研究表明,与使用两剂 BNT162b2(Comirnaty;辉瑞/BioNTech)相比,IC 患者使用两剂 mRNA-1273 (SpikeVax;Moderna)可降低住院和就医 COVID-19 的风险。这项回顾性队列研究的主要目的是比较第三剂 mRNA-1273 与 BNT162b2 在多个时间点对美国 IC 成人 COVID-19 住院率和就诊率的实际效果。数据来源是HealthVerity(HV)医疗和药房索赔数据库,该数据库包含3.3亿患者的数据。除上述核心比较外,还进行了亚组分析和敏感性分析。在倾向评分调整分析中,接受 mRNA-1273 与 BNT162b2 作为第三剂分别与 90 天、180 天和 270 天后 COVID-19 住院风险降低 32%(相对风险 [RR] 0.68;95% 置信区间 [CI] 0.51-0.89)、29%(0.71;0.57-0.86)和 23%(0.77;0.62-0.93)有关。相应地,COVID-19医疗就诊率分别降低了8% (0.92; 0.86-0.98)、6% (0.94; 0.90-0.98)和2% (0.98; 0.94-1.02)。我们的研究结果表明,在美国的 IC 成人中,在预防 COVID-19 住院治疗和突破药物治疗的 COVID-19 方面,第三剂 mRNA-1273 比第三剂 BNT162b2 更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Co-developing a comprehensive disease policy model with stakeholders: the case of malaria during pregnancy How does participation in coal-to-gas policy and availability of natural gas pipelines affect residents' well-being? Causally-informative analyses of the effect of job displacement on all-cause and specific-cause mortality from the 1990s Finnish recession until 2020: A population registry study Privacy Protection of Sexually Transmitted Infections Information from Chinese Electronic Medical Records Quantifying the health impact of crop breeding: Revisiting the Disability-Adjusted Life Years Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1