• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Lancet Reg Health Am . Effectiveness of CoronaVac among healthcare workers in the setting of high SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Manaus,

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Lancet Reg Health Am


. 2021 Jul 25;100025.
doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2021.100025. Online ahead of print.
Effectiveness of CoronaVac among healthcare workers in the setting of high SARS-CoV-2 Gamma variant transmission in Manaus, Brazil: A test-negative case-control study


Matt D T Hitchings[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Otavio T Ranzani[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Mario Sergio Scaramuzzini Torres[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Silvano Barbosa de Oliveira[SUP] 6 7 [/SUP], Maria Almiron[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Rodrigo Said[SUP] 6 [/SUP], Ryan Borg[SUP] 8 [/SUP], Wade L Schulz[SUP] 9 10 [/SUP], Roberto Dias de Oliveira[SUP] 11 [/SUP], Patricia Vieira da Silva[SUP] 12 [/SUP], Daniel Barros de Castro[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Vanderson de Souza Sampaio[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Bernardino Cláudio de Albuquerque[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Tatyana Costa Amorim Ramos[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Shadia Hussami Hauache Fraxe[SUP] 5 [/SUP], Cristiano Fernandes da Costa[SUP] 13 [/SUP], Felipe Gomes Naveca[SUP] 14 [/SUP], Andre M Siqueira[SUP] 15 [/SUP], Wildo Navegantes de Araújo[SUP] 6 7 16 [/SUP], Jason R Andrews[SUP] 17 [/SUP], Derek A T Cummings[SUP] 1 2 [/SUP], Albert I Ko[SUP] 8 18 [/SUP], Julio Croda[SUP] 8 12 19 [/SUP]



Affiliations

Abstract

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported.
Methods: We performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Findings: For the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case-control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate.
Interpretation: Evidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented.
Funding: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus; Fundação de Vigilância em Saúde do Amazonas.

Keywords: Brazil; COVID-19; CoronaVac; P.1 variant; case-control study; test-negative study.
 
Back
Top Bottom