Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38737773›Full record

ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2024

Effectiveness of the fourth dose of COVID-19 vaccines against severe COVID-19 among adults 40 years or older in Brazil: a population-based cohort study.

Felippe Lazar Neto, Matt D T Hitchings, Avnika B Amin, Giovanny V A de França, Margaret L Lind, Mario Sergio Scaramuzzini Torres, Daniel Henrique Tsuha, Roberto D de Oliveira, Derek A T Cummings, Natalie E Dean and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

14 authors.

Felippe Lazar NetoPulmonary Division, Heart Institute, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Matt D T HitchingsDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health & Health Professions, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Avnika B AminDepartment of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory, University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Giovanny V A de FrançaSecretaria de Vigilância em Saúde, Ministério da Saúde, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Margaret L LindDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Mario Sergio Scaramuzzini TorresMunicipal Health Secretary of Manaus, Manaus, AM, Brazil.
Daniel Henrique TsuhaFiocruz Mato Grosso do Sul, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Campo Grande, MS, Brazil.
Roberto D de OliveiraState University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Dourados, MS, Brazil.
Derek A T CummingsEmerging Pathogens Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Natalie E DeanDepartment of Biostatistics & Bioinformatics, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory, University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jason R AndrewsDivision of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Albert I KoDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Julio CrodaDepartment of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.
Otavio T RanzaniPulmonary Division, Heart Institute, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Design and Analysis of Vaccine Trials for Emerging Infectious Disease ThreatsR01AI139761 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA · PI DEAN, NATALIE EXNER · 2018 to 2022
$3.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI139761
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The emergence of COVID-19 variants with immune scape and the waning of primary vaccine schemes effectiveness have prompted many countries to indicate first and second booster COVID-19 vaccine doses to prevent severe COVID-19. However, current available evidence on second booster dose effectiveness are mostly limited to high-income countries, older adults, and mRNA-based vaccination schemes scenarios. We aimed to investigate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the fourth dose compared to three doses for severe COVID-19 outcomes in Brazil; and compare the rVE of a fourth dose with an mRNA vaccine compared to adenovirus-based product in the same settings. Methods: We performed a target emulated trial using a population-based cohort of individuals aged 40 years or older who have received a homologous primary scheme of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, or BNT162b2, and any third dose product and were eligible for the fourth dose in Brazil. The primary outcome was COVID-19 associated hospitalization or death. We built Cohort A matching individuals vaccinated with a fourth dose to individuals who received three doses to estimate the rVE of the fourth dose. We built Cohort B, a subset of Cohort A, matching mRNA-based (mRNA) to adenovirus-based fourth dose vaccinated individuals to compare their relative hazards for severe COVID-19. Findings: 46,693,484 individuals were included in Cohort A and 6,763,016 in Cohort B. 45% of them were aged between 40 and 60 years old, and 48% between 60 and 79 years old. In Cohort A, the most common previous series was a ChAdOx1 two-dose followed by BNT162b2 (44%), and a CoronaVac two-dose followed by a BNT162b2 (36%). Among those fourth dose vaccinated, 36.9% received ChAdOx1, 32.7% Ad26.COV2.S, 25.8% BNT162b2, and 4.7% CoronaVac. In Cohort B, among those who received an adenovirus fourth dose, 53.7% received ChAdOx1 and 46.3% received Ad26.COV2.S. The estimated rVE for the primary outcome of four doses compared to three doses was 44.1% (95% CI 42.3-46.0), with some waning during follow-up (rVE 7-60 days 46.8% [95% CI 44.4-49.1], rVE after 120 days 33.8% [95% CI 18.0-46.6]). Among fourth dose vaccinated individuals, mRNA-based vaccinated individuals had lower hazards for hospitalization or death compared to adenovirus-vaccinated individuals (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87). After 120 days, no difference in hazards between groups was observed (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.93-1.97). Similar findings were observed for hospitalization and death separately, except no evidence for differences between fourth dose brands for death in Cohort B. Interpretation: In a heterogeneous scenario of primary and first booster vaccination combinations, a fourth dose provided meaningful and durable protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes. Compared to adenovirus-based booster, a fourth dose wild-type mRNA vaccine was associated with immediate lower hazards of hospitalization or death unsustained after 120 days. Funding: None.

Indexed as

BoosterCOVIDEffectivenessFourthVaccine

Identifiers

PMID38737773
PMCPMC11087726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.