Hagit Kopel, Van Hung Nguyen, Alina Bogdanov, Isabelle Winer, Catherine Boileau, Thierry Ducruet, Ni Zeng, Jessamine P Winer-Jones, Daina B Esposito, Mary Bausch-Jurken, Ekkehard Beck, Machaon Bonafede, James A Mansi
{"title":"在美国,二价(Original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5)mRNA COVID-19 疫苗 mRNA-1273.222 和 BNT162b2 在有基础疾病的成人中的效果比较。","authors":"Hagit Kopel, Van Hung Nguyen, Alina Bogdanov, Isabelle Winer, Catherine Boileau, Thierry Ducruet, Ni Zeng, Jessamine P Winer-Jones, Daina B Esposito, Mary Bausch-Jurken, Ekkehard Beck, Machaon Bonafede, James A Mansi","doi":"10.3390/vaccines12101107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>This retrospective cohort study evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of two bivalent (original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) vaccines mRNA-1273.222 versus the BNT162b2 Bivalent in preventing COVID-19-related outcomes in adults with underlying medical conditions associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a linked electronic health record/claims dataset, US adults (≥18 years) with ≥1 underlying medical condition of interest who received either the bivalent vaccine between 31 August 2022 and 28 February 2023 were identified. The inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for cohort differences. Cohorts were followed up for COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient encounters until 31 May 2023. Hazard ratios and rVEs were estimated using Cox regression. Subgroup analyses were performed on individuals with pre-specified comorbid conditions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>757,572 mRNA-1273.222 and 1,204,975 BNT162b2 Bivalent recipients were identified. The adjusted rVE over a median follow-up of 198 days was 10.9% (6.2%-15.2%) against COVID-19-related hospitalization and 3.2% (1.7%-4.7%) against COVID-19-related outpatient encounters. rVE estimates for COVID-19 hospitalizations among subgroups with comorbid conditions were as follows: diabetes 15.1% (8.7%-21.0%), cerebro- and cardiovascular disease 14.7% (9.0%-20.1%), chronic lung disease 11.9% (5.1%-18.2%), immunocompromised 15.0% (7.2%-22.2%), chronic kidney disease 8.4% (0.5%-15.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, among adults with underlying medical conditions, mRNA-1273.222 was more effective than BNT162b2 Bivalent, especially in preventing COVID-19-related hospitalizations.</p>","PeriodicalId":23634,"journal":{"name":"Vaccines","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11511346/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effectiveness of the Bivalent (Original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines mRNA-1273.222 and BNT162b2 Bivalent in Adults with Underlying Medical Conditions in the United States.\",\"authors\":\"Hagit Kopel, Van Hung Nguyen, Alina Bogdanov, Isabelle Winer, Catherine Boileau, Thierry Ducruet, Ni Zeng, Jessamine P Winer-Jones, Daina B Esposito, Mary Bausch-Jurken, Ekkehard Beck, Machaon Bonafede, James A Mansi\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/vaccines12101107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>This retrospective cohort study evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of two bivalent (original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) vaccines mRNA-1273.222 versus the BNT162b2 Bivalent in preventing COVID-19-related outcomes in adults with underlying medical conditions associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a linked electronic health record/claims dataset, US adults (≥18 years) with ≥1 underlying medical condition of interest who received either the bivalent vaccine between 31 August 2022 and 28 February 2023 were identified. The inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for cohort differences. Cohorts were followed up for COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient encounters until 31 May 2023. Hazard ratios and rVEs were estimated using Cox regression. Subgroup analyses were performed on individuals with pre-specified comorbid conditions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>757,572 mRNA-1273.222 and 1,204,975 BNT162b2 Bivalent recipients were identified. The adjusted rVE over a median follow-up of 198 days was 10.9% (6.2%-15.2%) against COVID-19-related hospitalization and 3.2% (1.7%-4.7%) against COVID-19-related outpatient encounters. rVE estimates for COVID-19 hospitalizations among subgroups with comorbid conditions were as follows: diabetes 15.1% (8.7%-21.0%), cerebro- and cardiovascular disease 14.7% (9.0%-20.1%), chronic lung disease 11.9% (5.1%-18.2%), immunocompromised 15.0% (7.2%-22.2%), chronic kidney disease 8.4% (0.5%-15.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, among adults with underlying medical conditions, mRNA-1273.222 was more effective than BNT162b2 Bivalent, especially in preventing COVID-19-related hospitalizations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vaccines\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11511346/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vaccines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12101107\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines12101107","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Effectiveness of the Bivalent (Original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines mRNA-1273.222 and BNT162b2 Bivalent in Adults with Underlying Medical Conditions in the United States.
Background/objectives: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of two bivalent (original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) vaccines mRNA-1273.222 versus the BNT162b2 Bivalent in preventing COVID-19-related outcomes in adults with underlying medical conditions associated with increased risk for severe COVID-19.
Methods: In a linked electronic health record/claims dataset, US adults (≥18 years) with ≥1 underlying medical condition of interest who received either the bivalent vaccine between 31 August 2022 and 28 February 2023 were identified. The inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for cohort differences. Cohorts were followed up for COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient encounters until 31 May 2023. Hazard ratios and rVEs were estimated using Cox regression. Subgroup analyses were performed on individuals with pre-specified comorbid conditions.
Results: 757,572 mRNA-1273.222 and 1,204,975 BNT162b2 Bivalent recipients were identified. The adjusted rVE over a median follow-up of 198 days was 10.9% (6.2%-15.2%) against COVID-19-related hospitalization and 3.2% (1.7%-4.7%) against COVID-19-related outpatient encounters. rVE estimates for COVID-19 hospitalizations among subgroups with comorbid conditions were as follows: diabetes 15.1% (8.7%-21.0%), cerebro- and cardiovascular disease 14.7% (9.0%-20.1%), chronic lung disease 11.9% (5.1%-18.2%), immunocompromised 15.0% (7.2%-22.2%), chronic kidney disease 8.4% (0.5%-15.7%).
Conclusions: Overall, among adults with underlying medical conditions, mRNA-1273.222 was more effective than BNT162b2 Bivalent, especially in preventing COVID-19-related hospitalizations.
VaccinesPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1853
审稿时长
18.06 days
期刊介绍:
Vaccines (ISSN 2076-393X) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal focused on laboratory and clinical vaccine research, utilization and immunization. Vaccines publishes high quality reviews, regular research papers, communications and case reports.