Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35952702›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2022

Vaccine effectiveness of two-dose BNT162b2 against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland over time: a test-negative case-control study.

Pilar T V Florentino, Tristan Millington, Thiago Cerqueira-Silva, Chris Robertson, Vinicius de Araújo Oliveira, Juracy B S Júnior, Flávia J O Alves, Gerson O Penna, Srinivasa Vital Katikireddi, Viviane S Boaventura and 13 more

Open access · hybridAbstract 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 38 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.

Pilar T V FlorentinoCentre of Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (CIDACS), Gonçalo Moniz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil; Biomedical Science Institute, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. Electronic address: pilar.veras@fiocruz.br.
Tristan MillingtonUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Thiago Cerqueira-SilvaLIB and LEITV Laboratories, Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil; Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
Chris RobertsonPublic Health Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Vinicius de Araújo OliveiraCentre of Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (CIDACS), Gonçalo Moniz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil.
Juracy B S JúniorInstitute of Collective Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
Flávia J O AlvesCentre of Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (CIDACS), Gonçalo Moniz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil.
Gerson O PennaTropical Medicine Centre, University of Brasília, Fiocruz School of Government Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
Srinivasa Vital KatikireddiMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Viviane S BoaventuraLIB and LEITV Laboratories, Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil; Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Brazil.
Guilherme L WerneckDepartment of Epidemiology, Social Medicine Institute, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Institute of Collective Health Studies, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Neil PearceFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Colin McCowanSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
Christopher SullivanPublic Health Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Utkarsh AgrawalSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
Zoe GrangePublic Health Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Lewis D RitchieAcademic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.
Colin R SimpsonSchool of Health, Wellington Faculty of Health, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.
Aziz SheikhUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Mauricio L BarretoCentre of Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (CIDACS), Gonçalo Moniz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil.
Igor RudanUsher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Manoel Barral-NettoCentre of Data and Knowledge Integration for Health (CIDACS), Gonçalo Moniz Institute, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil; LIB and LEITV Laboratories, Instituto Gonçalo Moniz, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, Salvador, Brazil.
Enny S PaixãoFaculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Knowledge Integration (United Kingdom) · GBPublic Health Scotland · GBUniversidade Federal da Bahia · BRUniversity of Edinburgh · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of St Andrews · GBFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit · GBUniversidade de Brasília · BRUniversidade de São Paulo · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversity of Aberdeen · GBVictoria University of Wellington · NZ

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SCAF/15/02Chief Scientist Office SPHSU17Medical Research Council MC_PC_19004Medical Research Council MC_PC_19075Medical Research Council MC_PC_20058Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/2Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 213589/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known about vaccine effectiveness over time among adolescents, especially against the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) variant. This study assessed the associations between time since two-dose vaccination with BNT162b2 and the occurrence of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland.

methodsWe did test-negative, case-control studies in adolescents aged 12-17 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil and Scotland. We linked records of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antigen tests to national vaccination and clinical records. We excluded tests from individuals who did not have symptoms, were vaccinated before the start of the national vaccination programme, received vaccines other than BNT162b2 or a SARS-CoV-2 booster dose of any kind, or had an interval between their first and second dose of fewer than 21 days. Additionally, we excluded negative SARS-CoV-2 tests recorded within 14 days of a previous negative test, negative tests recorded within 7 days after a positive test, any test done within 90 days after a positive test, and tests with missing sex and location information. Cases (SARS-CoV-2 test-positive adolescents) and controls (test-negative adolescents) were drawn from a sample of individuals in whom tests were collected within 10 days of symptom onset. We estimated the adjusted odds ratio and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 for both countries and against severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) for Brazil across fortnightly periods.

findingsWe analysed 503 776 tests from 2 948 538 adolescents in Brazil between Sept 2, 2021, and April 19, 2022, and 127 168 tests from 404 673 adolescents in Scotland between Aug 6, 2021, and April 19, 2022. Vaccine effectiveness peaked at 14-27 days after the second dose in both countries during both waves, and was significantly lower against symptomatic infection during the omicron-dominant period in Brazil (64·7% [95% CI 63·0-66·3]) and in Scotland (82·6% [80·6-84·5]), than it was in the delta-dominant period (80·7% [95% CI 77·8-83·3] in Brazil and 92·8% [85·7-96·4] in Scotland). Vaccine efficacy started to decline from 27 days after the second dose for both countries, reducing to 5·9% (95% CI 2·2-9·4) in Brazil and 50·6% (42·7-57·4) in Scotland at 98 days or more during the omicron-dominant period. In Brazil, protection against severe disease remained above 80% from 28 days after the second dose and was 82·7% (95% CI 68·8-90·4) at 98 days or more after receiving the second dose.

interpretationWe found waning vaccine protection of BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19 infection among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland from 27 days after the second dose. However, protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes remained high at 98 days or more after the second dose in the omicron-dominant period. Booster doses for adolescents need to be considered.

fundingUK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Health Data Research UK BREATHE Hub, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem programme, Brazilian National Research Council, and Wellcome Trust. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdolescentBNT162 VaccineBrazilCase-Control StudiesHumansSARS-CoV-2Vaccine EfficacyBNT162 Vaccine

Identifiers

PMID35952702
PMCPMC9359673
OpenAlexW4291282982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.