Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36924786›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Infectious diseases2023

Protective immunity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccines against medically attended symptomatic omicron BA.4, BA.5, and XBB reinfections in Singapore: a national cohort study.

Celine Y Tan, Calvin J Chiew, Deanette Pang, Vernon J Lee, Benjamin Ong, David Chien Lye, Kelvin Bryan Tan

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Infectious diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Broad neutralizing antibody response of a monomeric spike-based SARS-CoV-2 bivalent vaccine against diverse variants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Celine Y TanPublic Health Group, Ministry of Health, Singapore. Electronic address: celine_ys_tan@moh.gov.sg.
Calvin J ChiewPublic Health Group, Ministry of Health, Singapore; National Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore.
Deanette PangCrisis Strategy and Operations Group, Ministry of Health, Singapore.
Vernon J LeePublic Health Group, Ministry of Health, Singapore; Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Benjamin OngDMS Office, Ministry of Health, Singapore; Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
David Chien LyeNational Centre for Infectious Diseases, Singapore; Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore; Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; Department of Infectious Diseases, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore.
Kelvin Bryan TanCrisis Strategy and Operations Group, Ministry of Health, Singapore; Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Ministry of Health · SGNational University of Singapore · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite a large proportion of the population having been vaccinated and infected, Singapore had SARS-CoV-2 waves driven by the BA.5 and XBB sublineages of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant. Data on the protective immunity against medically attended, symptomatic reinfections with omicron BA.4, BA.5, and XBB conferred by previous SARS-CoV-2 infections and vaccinations are scarce. We therefore aimed to derive information from Singapore's experience as one of the first countries with an XBB-driven wave.

methodsFor this retrospective national cohort study, we used information from official databases of the Ministry of Health of Singapore to assess hybrid immunity (obtained from previous infection and vaccination) against medically attended, symptomatic BA.4 and BA.5 reinfections from Oct 1, 2022, to Nov 1, 2022, and medically attended, symptomatic XBB reinfections from Oct 18, 2022, to Nov 1, 2022, among Singapore citizens and permanent residents aged at least 18 years. All individuals with acute respiratory symptoms who presented at any health-care facility in Singapore between the stated dates were tested for SARS-CoV-2. Individuals were grouped into SARS-CoV-2-naive, pre-omicron, omicron BA.1, and omicron BA.2 groups according to their previous infection status. Data were also stratified by time from first infection to analyse the waning of immunity. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were measured by generalised linear Poisson regressions, with SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals as the reference group, and protective immunity was calculated as one minus the risk ratio multiplied by 100.

findings2 456 791 individuals were included in the study, contributing 53·1 million person-days of observation for the SARS-CoV-2-naive group, 3·4 million person-days for the pre-omicron group, 6·6 million person-days for the BA.1 group, and 13·7 million person-days for the BA.2 group between Oct 1, 2022, and Nov 1, 2022. Compared with SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals, first infections with pre-omicron variants did not confer protection against reinfection with BA.4 or BA.5 (IRR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73-1·05] for pre-omicron infection with booster vaccination) or XBB (IRR 1·29 [1·23-1·35] for pre-omicron infection with booster vaccination). Previous BA.2 infection with booster provided the greatest protection against reinfection, but this was lower against reinfection with XBB (protective immunity 51%; 95% CI 49-53) than against reinfection with BA.4 or BA.5 (78%; 74-82). Protection conferred by previous BA.2 infection against XBB reinfection waned faster over time from first infection (from 74% [72-75] at 3-6 months to 49% [47-52] at 7-8 months) than protection against BA.4 or BA.5 reinfection (from 87% [82-90] at 3-6 months to 74% [66-80] at 7-8 months).

interpretationProtection against XBB reinfection conferred by a previous omicron infection with vaccination was lower and waned faster than protection against BA.4 or BA.5 reinfection, which is indicative of the greater immune evasiveness of the XBB sublineage. Although severe COVID-19 is uncommon, populations remain vulnerable to future reinfection waves from emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants despite high rates of vaccination and infection, as reflected by substantially higher reinfection rates during Singapore's XBB wave than during the previous BA.5-driven wave. Policy makers could consider emerging public health interventions, such as omicron-adapted bivalent vaccines, to maintain population immunity against COVID-19.

fundingNone.

Indexed as

COVID-19VaccinesAdolescentAdultCohort StudiesHumansReinfectionRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2SingaporeVaccines

Identifiers

PMID36924786
PMCPMC10306341
OpenAlexW4324030606

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.