Vaccine Efficacy Against Naturally Asymptomatic Infections: A Novel Estimand for Quantifying Vaccine Effects.

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Epidemiology Pub Date : 2026-11-01 Epub Date: 2026-07-22 DOI:10.1097/EDE.0000000000002021
Elizabeth T Rogawski McQuade, Razieh Nabi, Allison Codi, Natalie Dean, Marc Lipsitch, David Benkeser
{"title":"Vaccine Efficacy Against Naturally Asymptomatic Infections: A Novel Estimand for Quantifying Vaccine Effects.","authors":"Elizabeth T Rogawski McQuade, Razieh Nabi, Allison Codi, Natalie Dean, Marc Lipsitch, David Benkeser","doi":"10.1097/EDE.0000000000002021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The naive approach to estimating the effects of a vaccine on asymptomatic infections, which compares the risk of asymptomatic infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, can be misleading because it comprises two effects: the vaccine preventing asymptomatic infections and the vaccine converting symptomatic to asymptomatic infections. When the latter effect is strong, vaccines can appear harmful with respect to asymptomatic infections. Using a causal principal stratification framework, we formalize an estimand, vaccine efficacy against naturally asymptomatic infection (VE NAI ), that describes the efficacy of a vaccine in preventing asymptomatic infections among individuals who would naturally (i.e., in the absence of vaccine) be expected to be asymptomatic. This estimand excludes vaccine effects that convert symptomatic cases to asymptomatic infections, and we demonstrate how this makes it a more natural analogue of the usual vaccine efficacy estimands against infection and symptomatic disease. We describe the assumptions under which this estimand can be identified and estimated from randomized and observational studies. We further identify and estimate bounds that do not require cross-world independence assumptions and characterize sensitivity analyses around the main assumption needed for identification. Finally, we apply these methods to a randomized trial of the coronavirus disease 2019 mRNA-1273 vaccine. In this trial, VE NAI was higher than standard estimates of efficacy against asymptomatic infections and was similar in magnitude to efficacy against any infection. Reporting VE NAI in vaccine trials in addition to other vaccine effects would improve interpretability and could broaden understanding of vaccine impact on transmission, providing insights into immunological mechanisms.</p>","PeriodicalId":11779,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"867-876"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0000000000002021","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The naive approach to estimating the effects of a vaccine on asymptomatic infections, which compares the risk of asymptomatic infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, can be misleading because it comprises two effects: the vaccine preventing asymptomatic infections and the vaccine converting symptomatic to asymptomatic infections. When the latter effect is strong, vaccines can appear harmful with respect to asymptomatic infections. Using a causal principal stratification framework, we formalize an estimand, vaccine efficacy against naturally asymptomatic infection (VE NAI ), that describes the efficacy of a vaccine in preventing asymptomatic infections among individuals who would naturally (i.e., in the absence of vaccine) be expected to be asymptomatic. This estimand excludes vaccine effects that convert symptomatic cases to asymptomatic infections, and we demonstrate how this makes it a more natural analogue of the usual vaccine efficacy estimands against infection and symptomatic disease. We describe the assumptions under which this estimand can be identified and estimated from randomized and observational studies. We further identify and estimate bounds that do not require cross-world independence assumptions and characterize sensitivity analyses around the main assumption needed for identification. Finally, we apply these methods to a randomized trial of the coronavirus disease 2019 mRNA-1273 vaccine. In this trial, VE NAI was higher than standard estimates of efficacy against asymptomatic infections and was similar in magnitude to efficacy against any infection. Reporting VE NAI in vaccine trials in addition to other vaccine effects would improve interpretability and could broaden understanding of vaccine impact on transmission, providing insights into immunological mechanisms.

疫苗对自然无症状感染的有效性:一种量化疫苗效果的新估计。
估计疫苗对无症状感染影响的幼稚方法是比较接种疫苗和未接种疫苗个体的无症状感染风险,这可能会产生误导,因为它包括两种效果:疫苗预防无症状感染和疫苗将症状转化为无症状感染。当后一种效果较强时,疫苗对于无症状感染可能显得有害。使用因果主体分层框架,我们形式化了一个估计,即疫苗对自然无症状感染的有效性(VENAI),它描述了疫苗在预防自然(即,在没有疫苗的情况下)预期无症状的个体中无症状感染的有效性。这一估计排除了将有症状病例转化为无症状感染的疫苗效应,我们证明了这如何使其成为对感染和有症状疾病的通常疫苗功效估计的更自然的类似物。我们描述了可以从随机和观察性研究中识别和估计该估计的假设。我们进一步识别和估计不需要跨世界独立性假设的边界,并围绕识别所需的主要假设表征敏感性分析。最后,我们将这些方法应用于冠状病毒病2019 mRNA-1273疫苗的随机试验。在这项试验中,VENAI对无症状感染的疗效高于标准估计,其强度与对任何感染的疗效相似。除其他疫苗效应外,在疫苗试验中报告VENAI将改善可解释性,并可扩大对疫苗对传播影响的理解,提供对免疫机制的见解。
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
Epidemiology
Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
177
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Epidemiology publishes original research from all fields of epidemiology. The journal also welcomes review articles and meta-analyses, novel hypotheses, descriptions and applications of new methods, and discussions of research theory or public health policy. We give special consideration to papers from developing countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书