Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34838183›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2022

Effectiveness of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 infection during the delta (B.1.617.2) variant surge in India: a test-negative, case-control study and a mechanistic study of post-vaccination immune responses.

Ramachandran Thiruvengadam, Amit Awasthi, Guruprasad Medigeshi, Sankar Bhattacharya, Shailendra Mani, Sridhar Sivasubbu, Tripti Shrivastava, Sweety Samal, Deepika Rathna Murugesan, Bapu Koundinya Desiraju and 24 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

34 authors.

Ramachandran ThiruvengadamTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Amit AwasthiTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Guruprasad MedigeshiTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Sankar BhattacharyaTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Shailendra ManiTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Sridhar SivasubbuCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research-Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi, India.
Tripti ShrivastavaTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Sweety SamalTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Deepika Rathna MurugesanTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Bapu Koundinya DesirajuTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Pallavi KshetrapalTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Rajesh PandeyCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research-Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi, India.
Vinod ScariaCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research-Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi, India.
Praveen Kumar MalikESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad, India.
Juhi TanejaESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad, India.
Akshay BinaykeTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Tarini VohraTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Aymaan ZaheerTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Deepak RathoreTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Naseem Ahmad KhanTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Heena ShamanTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Shubbir AhmedTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Rajesh KumarTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Suprit DeshpandeTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Chandru SubramaniRegional Centre for Biotechnology, Faridabad, India.
Nitya WadhwaTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Nimesh GuptaNational Institute of Immunology, Delhi, India.
Anil K PandeyESIC Medical College and Hospital, Faridabad, India.
Jayanta BhattacharyaTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India; International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, New Delhi, India.
Anurag AgrawalCouncil of Scientific and Industrial Research-Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology, New Delhi, India.
Sudhanshu VratiRegional Centre for Biotechnology, Faridabad, India.
Shinjini BhatnagarTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Pramod Kumar GargTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India. Electronic address: pgarg@thsti.res.in.
Department of Biotechnology India Consortium for COVID-19 research

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOCs) have threatened COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, predominantly against the delta (B.1.617.2) variant, in addition to the cellular immune response to vaccination.

methodsWe did a test-negative, case-control study at two medical research centres in Faridabad, India. All individuals who had a positive RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 infection between April 1, 2021, and May 31, 2021, were included as cases and individuals who had a negative RT-PCR test were included as controls after matching with cases on calendar week of RT-PCR test. The primary outcome was effectiveness of complete vaccination with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. The secondary outcomes were effectiveness of a single dose against SARS-CoV-2 infection and effectiveness of a single dose and complete vaccination against moderate-to-severe disease among infected individuals. Additionally, we tested in-vitro live-virus neutralisation and T-cell immune responses to the spike protein of the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and VOCs among healthy (anti-nucleocapsid antibody negative) recipients of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine.

findingsOf 2379 cases of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, 85 (3·6%) were fully vaccinated compared with 168 (8·5%) of 1981 controls (adjusted OR [aOR] 0·37 [95% CI 0·28-0·48]), giving a vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection of 63·1% (95% CI 51·5-72·1). 157 (6·4%) of 2451 of cases and 181 (9·1%) of 1994) controls had received a single dose of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (aOR 0·54 [95% CI 0·42-0·68]), thus vaccine effectiveness of a single dose against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 46·2% (95% CI 31·6-57·7). One of 84 cases with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 was fully vaccinated compared with 84 of 2295 cases with mild COVID-19 (aOR 0·19 [95% CI 0·01-0·90]), giving a vaccine effectiveness of complete vaccination against moderate-to-severe disease of 81·5% (95% CI 9·9-99·0). The effectiveness of a single dose against moderate-to-severe disease was 79·2% (95% CI 46·1-94·0); four of 87 individuals with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 had received a single dose compared with 153 of 2364 participants with mild disease (aOR 0·20 [95% CI 0·06-0·54]). Among 49 healthy, fully vaccinated individuals, neutralising antibody responses were lower against the alpha (B.1.1.7; geometric mean titre 244·7 [95% CI 151·8-394·4]), beta (B.1.351; 97·6 [61·2-155·8]), kappa (B.1.617.1; 112·8 [72·7-175·0]), and delta (88·4 [61·2-127·8]) variants than against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 (599·4 [376·9-953·2]). However, the antigen-specific CD4 and CD8 T-cell responses were conserved against both the delta variant and wild-type SARS-CoV-2.

interpretationThe ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine remained effective against moderate-to-severe COVID-19, even during a surge that was dominated by the highly transmissible delta variant of SARS-CoV-2. Spike-specific T-cell responses were maintained against the delta variant. Such cellular immune protection might compensate for waning humoral immunity.

fundingDepartment of Biotechnology India, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research India, and Fondation Botnar.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2Antibody FormationCase-Control StudiesChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansVaccinationChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34838183
PMCPMC8616567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.