Christian Holm Hansen1, Nikolaj Ulrik Friis2, Peter Bager3, Marc Stegger4, Jannik Fonager5, Anders Fomsgaard5, Mie Agermose Gram2, Lasse Engbo Christiansen6, Steen Ethelberg7, Rebecca Legarth8, Tyra Grove Krause8, Henrik Ullum8, Palle Valentiner-Branth2. 1. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; Medical Reseasrch Council International Statistics and Epidemiology Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 2. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. Electronic address: pbg@ssi.dk. 4. Department of Bacteria, Parasites, and Fungi, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Virus and Microbiological Special Diagnostics, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. Department of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Public Health, Global Health Section, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 8. Division of Infectious Disease Preparedness, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estimates of immunity and severity for the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariant BA.5 are important to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global spread despite vaccination. We estimated natural and vaccine immunity and severity of BA.5 relative to BA.2 in Denmark, a country with high mRNA-vaccination coverage and free-of-charge RT-PCR testing. METHODS: This nation-wide population-based study in Denmark included residents aged 18 years or older who had taken an RT-PCR test between 10 April and 30 June, 2022 (ie, the outcome period), and who the national COVID-19 surveillance system identified as having information since February 2020 on RT-PCR tests, whole-genome sequencing, vaccinations, and hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test and COVID-19 as the main diagnosis. First, we used a case-control design, in which cases were people infected with BA.5 or BA.2 during the outcome period and controls were people who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outcome period. We calculated the protection provided by a previous PCR-confirmed omicron infection against BA.5 and BA.2 infection and hospitalisation among triple-vaccinated individuals. Second, we compared vaccination status in people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2 and estimated relative vaccine protection against each subvariant. Third, we compared rates of hospitalisation for COVID-19 among people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2. We estimated effects using logistic regression with adjustment for sex, age, region, PCR-test date, comorbidity and, as appropriate, vaccination and previous infection status. FINDINGS: A total of 210 (2·4%) of 8678 of BA.5 cases, 192 (0·7%) of 29 292 of BA.2 cases, and 33 972 (19·0%) of 178 669 PCR-negative controls previously had an omicron infection, which was estimated in the adjusted analyses to offer 92·7% (95% CI 91·6-93·7) protection against BA.5 infection and 97·1% (96·6-97·5) protection against BA.2 infection. We found similarly high amounts of protection against hospitalisation owing to infection with BA.5 (96·4% [95% CI 74·2-99·5]) and BA.2 (91·2% [76·3-96·7]). Vaccine coverage (three mRNA doses vs none) was 9307 (94·2%) of 9878 among BA.5 cases and 30 581 (94·8%) of 32 272 among BA.2 cases, although in the adjusted analysis, there was a trend towards slightly higher vaccination coverage among BA.5 cases than BA.2 cases (OR 1·18 [95% CI 0·99-1·42]; p=0·064), possibly suggesting marginally poorer vaccine protection against BA.5. The rate of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was higher among the BA.5 cases (210 [1·9%] of 11 314) than among the BA.2 cases (514 [1·4%] of 36 805), with an OR of 1·34 (95% CI 1·14-1·57) and an adjusted OR of 1·69 (95% CI 1·22-2·33), despite low and stable COVID-19 hospitalisation numbers during the study period. INTERPRETATION: The study provides evidence that a previous omicron infection in triple-vaccinated individuals provides high amounts of protection against BA.5 and BA.2 infections. However, protection estimates greater than 90% might be too high if individuals with a previous infection were more likely than those without one to come forward for a test for reasons other than suspicion of COVID-19. Our analysis also showed that vaccine protection against BA.5 infection was similar to, or slightly weaker than, protection against BA.2 infection. Finally, there was evidence that BA.5 infections were associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with BA.2 infections. FUNDING: There was no funding source for this study.
BACKGROUND: Estimates of immunity and severity for the SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariant BA.5 are important to assess the public health impact associated with its rapid global spread despite vaccination. We estimated natural and vaccine immunity and severity of BA.5 relative to BA.2 in Denmark, a country with high mRNA-vaccination coverage and free-of-charge RT-PCR testing. METHODS: This nation-wide population-based study in Denmark included residents aged 18 years or older who had taken an RT-PCR test between 10 April and 30 June, 2022 (ie, the outcome period), and who the national COVID-19 surveillance system identified as having information since February 2020 on RT-PCR tests, whole-genome sequencing, vaccinations, and hospitalisation with a positive RT-PCR test and COVID-19 as the main diagnosis. First, we used a case-control design, in which cases were people infected with BA.5 or BA.2 during the outcome period and controls were people who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection during the outcome period. We calculated the protection provided by a previous PCR-confirmed omicron infection against BA.5 and BA.2 infection and hospitalisation among triple-vaccinated individuals. Second, we compared vaccination status in people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2 and estimated relative vaccine protection against each subvariant. Third, we compared rates of hospitalisation for COVID-19 among people infected with BA.5 versus BA.2. We estimated effects using logistic regression with adjustment for sex, age, region, PCR-test date, comorbidity and, as appropriate, vaccination and previous infection status. FINDINGS: A total of 210 (2·4%) of 8678 of BA.5 cases, 192 (0·7%) of 29 292 of BA.2 cases, and 33 972 (19·0%) of 178 669 PCR-negative controls previously had an omicron infection, which was estimated in the adjusted analyses to offer 92·7% (95% CI 91·6-93·7) protection against BA.5 infection and 97·1% (96·6-97·5) protection against BA.2 infection. We found similarly high amounts of protection against hospitalisation owing to infection with BA.5 (96·4% [95% CI 74·2-99·5]) and BA.2 (91·2% [76·3-96·7]). Vaccine coverage (three mRNA doses vs none) was 9307 (94·2%) of 9878 among BA.5 cases and 30 581 (94·8%) of 32 272 among BA.2 cases, although in the adjusted analysis, there was a trend towards slightly higher vaccination coverage among BA.5 cases than BA.2 cases (OR 1·18 [95% CI 0·99-1·42]; p=0·064), possibly suggesting marginally poorer vaccine protection against BA.5. The rate of hospitalisation due to COVID-19 was higher among the BA.5 cases (210 [1·9%] of 11 314) than among the BA.2 cases (514 [1·4%] of 36 805), with an OR of 1·34 (95% CI 1·14-1·57) and an adjusted OR of 1·69 (95% CI 1·22-2·33), despite low and stable COVID-19 hospitalisation numbers during the study period. INTERPRETATION: The study provides evidence that a previous omicron infection in triple-vaccinated individuals provides high amounts of protection against BA.5 and BA.2 infections. However, protection estimates greater than 90% might be too high if individuals with a previous infection were more likely than those without one to come forward for a test for reasons other than suspicion of COVID-19. Our analysis also showed that vaccine protection against BA.5 infection was similar to, or slightly weaker than, protection against BA.2 infection. Finally, there was evidence that BA.5 infections were associated with an increased risk of hospitalisation compared with BA.2 infections. FUNDING: There was no funding source for this study.
Authors: Heba N Altarawneh; Hiam Chemaitelly; Mohammad R Hasan; Houssein H Ayoub; Suelen Qassim; Sawsan AlMukdad; Peter Coyle; Hadi M Yassine; Hebah A Al-Khatib; Fatiha M Benslimane; Zaina Al-Kanaani; Einas Al-Kuwari; Andrew Jeremijenko; Anvar H Kaleeckal; Ali N Latif; Riyazuddin M Shaik; Hanan F Abdul-Rahim; Gheyath K Nasrallah; Mohamed G Al-Kuwari; Adeel A Butt; Hamad E Al-Romaihi; Mohamed H Al-Thani; Abdullatif Al-Khal; Roberto Bertollini; Patrick Tang; Laith J Abu-Raddad Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2022-02-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mary-Ann Davies; Reshma Kassanjee; Petro Rousseau; Erna Morden; Leigh Johnson; Wesley Solomon; Nei-Yuan Hsiao; Hannah Hussey; Graeme Meintjes; Masudah Paleker; Theuns Jacobs; Peter Raubenheimer; Alexa Heekes; Pierre Dane; Jamy-Lee Bam; Mariette Smith; Wolfgang Preiser; David Pienaar; Marc Mendelson; Jonathan Naude; Neshaad Schrueder; Ayanda Mnguni; Sue Le Roux; Kathleen Murie; Hans Prozesky; Hassan Mahomed; Liezel Rossouw; Sean Wasserman; Deborah Maughan; Linda Boloko; Barry Smith; Jantjie Taljaard; Greg Symons; Ntobeko A B Ntusi; Arifa Parker; Nicole Wolter; Waasila Jassat; Cheryl Cohen; Richard Lessells; Robert J Wilkinson; Juanita Arendse; Saadiq Kariem; Melvin Moodley; Milani Wolmarans; Keith Cloete; Andrew Boulle Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Hiam Chemaitelly; Houssein H Ayoub; Peter Coyle; Patrick Tang; Hadi M Yassine; Hebah A Al-Khatib; Maria K Smatti; Mohammad R Hasan; Zaina Al-Kanaani; Einas Al-Kuwari; Andrew Jeremijenko; Anvar Hassan Kaleeckal; Ali Nizar Latif; Riyazuddin Mohammad Shaik; Hanan F Abdul-Rahim; Gheyath K Nasrallah; Mohamed Ghaith Al-Kuwari; Adeel A Butt; Hamad Eid Al-Romaihi; Mohamed H Al-Thani; Abdullatif Al-Khal; Roberto Bertollini; Laith J Abu-Raddad Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-08-09 Impact factor: 17.694
Authors: Houriiyah Tegally; Monika Moir; Josie Everatt; Marta Giovanetti; Cathrine Scheepers; Eduan Wilkinson; Kathleen Subramoney; Zinhle Makatini; Sikhulile Moyo; Daniel G Amoako; Cheryl Baxter; Christian L Althaus; Ugochukwu J Anyaneji; Dikeledi Kekana; Raquel Viana; Jennifer Giandhari; Richard J Lessells; Tongai Maponga; Dorcas Maruapula; Wonderful Choga; Mogomotsi Matshaba; Mpaphi B Mbulawa; Nokukhanya Msomi; Yeshnee Naidoo; Sureshnee Pillay; Tomasz Janusz Sanko; James E San; Lesley Scott; Lavanya Singh; Nonkululeko A Magini; Pamela Smith-Lawrence; Wendy Stevens; Graeme Dor; Derek Tshiabuila; Nicole Wolter; Wolfgang Preiser; Florette K Treurnicht; Marietjie Venter; Georginah Chiloane; Caitlyn McIntyre; Aine O'Toole; Christopher Ruis; Thomas P Peacock; Cornelius Roemer; Sergei L Kosakovsky Pond; Carolyn Williamson; Oliver G Pybus; Jinal N Bhiman; Allison Glass; Darren P Martin; Ben Jackson; Andrew Rambaut; Oluwakemi Laguda-Akingba; Simani Gaseitsiwe; Anne von Gottberg; Tulio de Oliveira Journal: Nat Med Date: 2022-06-27 Impact factor: 87.241