Temporal Heterogeneous in the Effectiveness of Inactivated CoronaVac and Sinopharm Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections in China

IF 3.5 2区农林科学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases Pub Date : 2024-10-07 DOI:10.1155/2024/9533861

Shihong Yang, Hualei Xin, Xingying Lang, Jin Hua, Xiaoman Cui, Lu Li, Chuchu Ye, Ying Qin, Yu Li, Ben Cowling, Shengjie Lai, Ke Sun, Zhongjie Li

{"title":"Temporal Heterogeneous in the Effectiveness of Inactivated CoronaVac and Sinopharm Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 Reinfections in China","authors":"Shihong Yang, Hualei Xin, Xingying Lang, Jin Hua, Xiaoman Cui, Lu Li, Chuchu Ye, Ying Qin, Yu Li, Ben Cowling, Shengjie Lai, Ke Sun, Zhongjie Li","doi":"10.1155/2024/9533861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p>We aimed to understand the temporal dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection risk and assess the impact of inactivated vaccination on the occurrence of reinfection. We investigated the reinfection risk of SARS-CoV-2 from November 1, 2022, to February 12, 2023, when China rapidly lifted the zero-COVID policy. The study subjects were those who were first infected during the zero-COVID period between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2022, in Dalian city, China. Among the 1961 previous infections, 126 (6.4%, 95% CI: 5.4, 7.5) were reinfected. The risk of reinfection increased over time since initial infection. Compared with those who did not receive or received one dose of inactivated vaccine, receiving two or three doses was associated with additional protection against reinfection among individuals who were infected with pre-Omicron more than a year earlier, with the OR ranged from 0.33 (95% CI: 0.03, 1.83) to 0.91 (95% CI: 0.22, 3.27). In contrast, no protective effect from two or three doses of vaccines against reinfection was observed among those who were first infected with Omicron variants within a year. Primary or booster vaccination contributed to limited protection against reinfection or symptomatic reinfection among individuals infected with Omicron SARS-CoV-2 within a year. However, a booster dose after 1 year of natural infection may provide additional protection against reinfection.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":234,"journal":{"name":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/9533861","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transboundary and Emerging Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/9533861","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to understand the temporal dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection risk and assess the impact of inactivated vaccination on the occurrence of reinfection. We investigated the reinfection risk of SARS-CoV-2 from November 1, 2022, to February 12, 2023, when China rapidly lifted the zero-COVID policy. The study subjects were those who were first infected during the zero-COVID period between January 1, 2020, and October 31, 2022, in Dalian city, China. Among the 1961 previous infections, 126 (6.4%, 95% CI: 5.4, 7.5) were reinfected. The risk of reinfection increased over time since initial infection. Compared with those who did not receive or received one dose of inactivated vaccine, receiving two or three doses was associated with additional protection against reinfection among individuals who were infected with pre-Omicron more than a year earlier, with the OR ranged from 0.33 (95% CI: 0.03, 1.83) to 0.91 (95% CI: 0.22, 3.27). In contrast, no protective effect from two or three doses of vaccines against reinfection was observed among those who were first infected with Omicron variants within a year. Primary or booster vaccination contributed to limited protection against reinfection or symptomatic reinfection among individuals infected with Omicron SARS-CoV-2 within a year. However, a booster dose after 1 year of natural infection may provide additional protection against reinfection.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

科罗娜和国药集团灭活疫苗对中国 SARS-CoV-2 再感染效果的时间差异性

我们旨在了解 SARS-CoV-2 再感染风险的时间动态，并评估灭活疫苗接种对再感染发生的影响。我们调查了从 2022 年 11 月 1 日到 2023 年 2 月 12 日中国迅速取消零接种疫苗政策期间的 SARS-CoV-2 再感染风险。研究对象是在 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 10 月 31 日零感染期间在中国大连市首次感染的人群。在 1961 名既往感染者中，有 126 人（6.4%，95% CI：5.4, 7.5）再次感染。自初次感染以来，再感染的风险随着时间的推移而增加。与未接种或只接种一剂灭活疫苗的人相比，接种两剂或三剂灭活疫苗对一年前感染过前甲流疫苗的人来说具有额外的预防再感染的保护作用，OR值从0.33（95% CI：0.03，1.83）到0.91（95% CI：0.22，3.27）不等。相比之下，在一年内首次感染奥米克龙变种的人群中，接种两剂或三剂疫苗对再感染没有保护作用。在一年内感染 Omicron SARS-CoV-2 的人群中，初次接种或加强接种对再感染或有症状的再感染有有限的保护作用。不过，在自然感染一年后接种加强剂可提供额外保护，防止再次感染。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Transboundary and Emerging Diseases 农林科学-传染病学

CiteScore

8.90

自引率

9.30%

发文量

350

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： Transboundary and Emerging Diseases brings together in one place the latest research on infectious diseases considered to hold the greatest economic threat to animals and humans worldwide. The journal provides a venue for global research on their diagnosis, prevention and management, and for papers on public health, pathogenesis, epidemiology, statistical modeling, diagnostics, biosecurity issues, genomics, vaccine development and rapid communication of new outbreaks. Papers should include timely research approaches using state-of-the-art technologies. The editors encourage papers adopting a science-based approach on socio-economic and environmental factors influencing the management of the bio-security threat posed by these diseases, including risk analysis and disease spread modeling. Preference will be given to communications focusing on novel science-based approaches to controlling transboundary and emerging diseases. The following topics are generally considered out-of-scope, but decisions are made on a case-by-case basis (for example, studies on cryptic wildlife populations, and those on potential species extinctions): Pathogen discovery: a common pathogen newly recognised in a specific country, or a new pathogen or genetic sequence for which there is little context about — or insights regarding — its emergence or spread. Prevalence estimation surveys and risk factor studies based on survey (rather than longitudinal) methodology, except when such studies are unique. Surveys of knowledge, attitudes and practices are within scope. Diagnostic test development if not accompanied by robust sensitivity and specificity estimation from field studies. Studies focused only on laboratory methods in which relevance to disease emergence and spread is not obvious or can not be inferred (“pure research” type studies). Narrative literature reviews which do not generate new knowledge. Systematic and scoping reviews, and meta-analyses are within scope.