Effectiveness of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant infection, symptomatic disease, and hospitalization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of the current Sars-Cov2 vaccine regimens against Omicron infection. A secondary endpoint aims to investigate the waning effectiveness of primary vaccination against symptomatic infection and related hospitalization. Research design and methods The systematic review started on 1 December 2021 and was concluded on 1 March 2022. Random-effects frequentist meta-analyses and multiple meta-regressions were performed. Results In total, 15 studies are included in the quantitative synthesis. According to the meta-analysis results, the overall risk of Sars-Cov2 infection in vaccinated individuals is on average 31 center dot 5% lower than the infection risk in unvaccinated while vaccinated with one booster dose have a 70 center dot 4% risk reduction of Omicron infection compared to unvaccinated. In particular, one booster dose significantly decreases by 69% the risk of symptomatic Omicron infection with respect to unvaccinated. Six months after the primary vaccination, the average risk reduction declines to 22% against symptomatic infection and to 55% against hospitalization. Conclusions Primary vaccination does not provide sufficient protection against symptomatic Omicron infection. Although the effectiveness of the primary vaccination against hospitalization due to Omicron remains significantly above 50% after 3 months, it dramatically fades after 6 months

Information sources and knowledge on vaccination in a population from southern Italy: The ESCULAPIO project

Vaccine knowledge of the general population is shaped by different information sources and strongly influences vaccination attitudes and uptake. The CCM-Italian Ministry of Health ESCULAPIO project attempted to identify the role of such information sources, in order to address adequate strategies to improve information on vaccines and vaccine preventable diseases. In the present study, data on 632 adults from Southern Italy regarding information sources were collected, and their perceived and actual knowledge on vaccinations were compared and analyzed in relation to socio-demographic characteristics and information sources. The main reported reference sources were general practitioners (GPs) (42.5%) and pediatricians (33.1%), followed by mass media (24.1%) and the Internet (17.6%). A total of 45.4% reported they believed to be informed (45.4%), while those estimated to be truly informed were 43.8%. However, as showed in the multivariate logistic regression, people having the perception to be correctly informed ascribed their good knowledge to their profession in the health sector (Adj OR 2.28, CI 1.09–4.77, p < 0.05) and to friends/relatives/colleagues (AdjOR 6.25, CI 2.38–16.44, p < 0.001), while the non-informed population thought the responsibility had to be attributed to mass media (AdjOR 0.45, CI 0.22–0.92, p < 0.05). Those showing the real correct information, instead, were younger (AdjOR 1.64, CI 1.04–2.59, p < 0.05), and their main reference sources were pediatricians (AdjOR 1.63, CI 1.11–2.39, p < 0.05) and scientific magazines (Adj OR 3.39, CI 1.51–7.59, p < 0.01). Only 6% knew the “VaccinarSì” portal, developed to counter the widespred antivaccine websites in Italy. The post-survey significant increase of connections to “VaccinarSi” could be ascribed to the counselling performed during questionnaire administration. Strategies to improve information about vaccination should be addressed to fortifying healthcare workers knowledge in order to make them public health opinion leaders. General population should be provided with correct indications on trustworthy websites on vaccines to contrast false information supplied by anti-vaccinists on their own websites or social networks pages and on the mass media

Estimated effectiveness of a primary cycle of protein recombinant vaccine nvx-cov2373 against COVID-19

Importance: Protein recombinant vaccine NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) against COVID-19 was authorized for its use in adults in late 2021, but evidence on its estimated effectiveness in a general population is lacking. Objective: To estimate vaccine effectiveness of a primary cycle with NVX-CoV2373 against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. Design, setting, and participants: Retrospective cohort study linking data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system in Italy during a period of Omicron predominance. All adults starting a primary vaccination with NVX-CoV2373 between February 28 and September 4, 2022, were included, with follow-up ending on September 25, 2022. Data were analyzed in February 2023. Exposures: Partial (1 dose only) vaccination and full vaccination (2 doses) with NVX-CoV-2373. Main outcomes and measures: Notified SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. Poisson regression models were used to estimate effectiveness against both outcomes. Adjusted estimated vaccine effectiveness was calculated as (1 - incidence rate ratio) × 100. Results: The study included 20 903 individuals who started the primary cycle during the study period. Median (IQR) age of participants was 52 (39-61) years, 10 794 (51.6%) were female, and 20 592 participants (98.5%) had no factors associated with risk for severe COVID-19. Adjusted estimated vaccine effectiveness against notified SARS-CoV-2 infection in those partially vaccinated with NVX-CoV2373 was 23% (95% CI, 13%-33%) and was 31% (95% CI, 22%-39%) in those fully vaccinated. Estimated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 31% (95% CI, 16%-44%) in those partially vaccinated and 50% (95% CI, 40%-58%) in those fully vaccinated. Estimated effectiveness during the first 4 months after completion of the primary cycle decreased against SARS-CoV-2 infection but remained stable against symptomatic COVID-19. Conclusions and relevance: This cohort study found that, in an Omicron-dominant period, protein recombinant vaccine NVX-CoV2373 was associated with protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. The use of this vaccine could remain an important element in reducing the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Protection against severe COVID-19 after second booster dose of adapted bivalent (original/Omicron BA.4-5) mRNA vaccine in persons ≥ 60 years, by time since infection, Italy, 12 September to 11 December 2022

: Effectiveness against severe COVID-19 of a second booster dose of the bivalent (original/BA.4-5) mRNA vaccine 7-90 days post-administration, relative to a first booster dose of an mRNA vaccine received ≥ 120 days earlier, was ca 60% both in persons ≥ 60 years never infected and in those infected &gt; 6 months before. Relative effectiveness in those infected 4-6 months earlier indicated no significant additional protection (10%; 95% CI: -44 to 44). A second booster vaccination 6 months after the latest infection may be warranted

Relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine up to four months post administration in individuals aged 80 years or more in Italy. A retrospective matched cohort study

Several countries started a 2nd booster COVID-19 vaccination campaign targeting the elderly population, but evidence around its effectiveness is still scarce. This study aims to estimate the relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the population aged &gt;= 80 years in Italy, during predominant circulation of the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariants. We linked routine data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system. On each day between 11 April and 6 August 2022, we matched 1:1, according to several demographic and clinical characteristics, individuals who received the 2nd booster vaccine dose with individuals who received the 1st booster vaccine dose at least 120 days earlier. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) between the two groups, calculating the relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) as (1 - risk ratio)X100. Based on the analysis of 831,555 matched pairs, we found that a 2nd booster dose of mRNA vaccine, 14-118 days post administration, was moderately effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to a 1st booster dose administered at least 120 days earlier [14.3 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.2-20.2]. RVE decreased from 28.5 % (95 % CI: 24.7-32.1) in the time-interval 14-28 days to 7.6 % (95 % CI: -14.1 to 18.3) in the time-interval 56-118 days. However, RVE against severe COVID19 was higher (34.0 %, 95 % CI: 23.4-42.7), decreasing from 43.2 % (95 % CI: 30.6-54.9) to 27.2 % (95 % CI: 8.3-42.9) over the same time span. Although RVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection was much reduced 2-4 months after a 2nd booster dose, RVE against severe COVID-19 was about 30 %, even during prevalent circulation of the Omicron BA.5 subvariant. The cost-benefit of a 3rd booster dose for the elderly people who received the 2nd booster dose at least four months earlier should be carefully evaluated

Relative effectiveness of bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine in preventing severe COVID-19 in persons 60 years and above during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 and other XBB sublineages circulation, Italy, April to June 2023

During predominant circulation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 and other XBB sublineages (April-June 2023), we found that a second or third booster of Comirnaty bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine, versus a first booster received at least 120 days earlier, was effective in preventing severe COVID-19 for more than 6 months post-administration in persons 60 years and above. In view of autumn 2023 vaccination campaigns, use of bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccines might be warranted until monovalent COVID-19 vaccines targeting Omicron XBB.1 sublineages become available

Impatto della vaccinazione e della pregressa diagnosi sul rischio di infezione e di malattia severa associata a SARS-CoV-2. Un’analisi dei casi diagnosticati nel mese di ottobre 2022

In Italia, l’epidemia di infezioni da SARS-CoV-2 nel corso del 2022 è stata influenzata dalla predominanza della variante Omicron, caratterizzata da alta trasmissibilità, e dalla progressiva eliminazione di quasi tutte le misure non farmacologiche di prevenzione. La combinazione di questi due elementi ha determinato una notevole circolazione virale di SARS-CoV-2 con oltre 24,5 milioni di casi da inizio epidemia. Dato l’alto numero di persone che ha superato almeno una infezione da SARS-CoV-2 e l’alta copertura vaccinale nella popolazione è necessario stimare il ruolo protettivo dell’immunità associata sia al vaccino che all’infezione pregressa nel prevenire l’infezione e la malattia severa da COVID-19. Il presente rapporto fornisce una stima del rischio di infezione e di malattia grave, per il mese di ottobre 2022, sulla base della vaccinazione e della precedente infezione. La massima protezione contro la diagnosi di infezione da SARS-CoV-2 e la malattia severa si realizza attraverso una immunità ibrida (l’effetto combinato della vaccinazione e della pregressa infezione) mentre livelli di rischio più alto si riscontrano sempre tra le persone non vaccinate e senza una precedente diagnosi di infezione. A parità di fascia di età e di pregressa infezione, si osserva una tendenza alla riduzione del rischio di malattia severa associata alla vaccinazione, in particolare se recente

Epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 cases in non-Italian nationals notified to the Italian surveillance system

BACKGROUND: International literature suggests that disadvantaged groups are at higher risk of morbidity and mortality from SARS-CoV-2 infection due to poorer living/working conditions and barriers to healthcare access. Yet, to date, there is no evidence of this disproportionate impact on non-national individuals, including economic migrants, short-term travellers and refugees. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Italian surveillance system of all COVID-19 laboratory-confirmed cases tested positive from the beginning of the outbreak (20th of February) to the 19th of July 2020. We used multilevel negative-binomial regression models to compare the case fatality and the rate of admission to hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) between Italian and non-Italian nationals. The analysis was adjusted for differences in demographic characteristics, pre-existing comorbidities, and period of diagnosis. RESULTS: We analyzed 213 180 COVID-19 cases, including 15 974 (7.5%) non-Italian nationals. We found that, compared to Italian cases, non-Italian cases were diagnosed at a later date and were more likely to be hospitalized {[adjusted rate ratio (ARR)=1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.33-1.44]} and admitted to ICU (ARR=1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.32), with differences being more pronounced in those coming from countries with lower human development index (HDI). We also observed an increased risk of death in non-Italian cases from low-HDI countries (ARR=1.32, 95% CI: 1.01-1.75). CONCLUSIONS: A delayed diagnosis in non-Italian cases could explain their worse outcomes compared to Italian cases. Ensuring early access to diagnosis and treatment to non-Italians could facilitate the control of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and improve health outcomes in all people living in Italy, regardless of nationality