ArticleBMC medicine2024
How effective is the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 transmission and infection? A national programme analysis in Monaco, July 2021 to September 2022.
Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive SARS-CoV-2 screening tests: a national prospective analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Trial
- Induction of mucosal immune responses against SARS-CoV-2: a heterologous intramuscular mRNA-LNP prime/pulmonary recombinant subunit pull vaccination strategy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Multifunctional Polymer-Modified P-CaOPolymers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe quantified SARS-CoV-2 dynamics in different community settings and the direct and indirect effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in Monaco for different variants of concern (VOC).
methodsBetween July 2021 and September 2022, we prospectively investigated 20,443 contacts from 6320 index cases using data from the Monaco COVID-19 Public Health Programme. We calculated secondary attack rates (SARs) in households (n = 13,877), schools (n = 2508) and occupational (n = 6499) settings. We used binomial regression with a complementary log-log link function to measure adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and vaccine effectiveness (aVE) for index cases to infect contacts and contacts to be infected in households.
resultsIn households, the SAR was 55% (95% CI 54-57) and 50% (48-51) among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts, respectively. The SAR was 32% (28-36) and 12% (10-13) in workplaces, and 7% (6-9) and 6% (3-10) in schools, among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts respectively. In household, the aHR was lower in contacts than in index cases (aHR 0.68 [0.55-0.83] and 0.93 [0.74-1.1] for delta; aHR 0.73 [0.66-0.81] and 0.89 [0.80-0.99] for omicron BA.1&2, respectively). Vaccination had no significant effect on either direct or indirect aVE for omicron BA.4&5. The direct aVE in contacts was 32% (17, 45) and 27% (19, 34), and for index cases the indirect aVE was 7% (- 17, 26) and 11% (1, 20) for delta and omicron BA.1&2, respectively. The greatest aVE was in contacts with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and a single vaccine dose during the omicron BA.1&2 period (45% [27, 59]), while the lowest were found in contacts with either three vaccine doses (aVE - 24% [- 63, 6]) or one single dose and a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aVE - 36% [- 198, 38]) during the omicron BA.4&5 period.
conclusionsProtection conferred by the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against transmission and infection was low for delta and omicron BA.1&2, regardless of the number of vaccine doses and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no significant vaccine effect for omicron BA.4&5. Health authorities carrying out vaccination campaigns should bear in mind that the current generation of COVID-19 vaccines may not represent an effective tool in protecting individuals from either transmitting or acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.