Search

Aims: Concern about the cardiovascular safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines among individuals with cardiovascular disease (CVD) may lead to vaccine hesitancy. We sought to assess the association between two COVID-19 vaccines, BNT162b2 and CoronaVac, and the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in individuals with established CVD., Methods and Results: We identified individuals with a history of CVD before 23 February 2021 and a diagnosis of MACE between 23 February 2021 and 31 January 2022 in Hong Kong. MACE was defined as a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and cardiovascular death. Electronic health records from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority were linked to vaccination records from the Department of Health. A self-controlled case-series method was used to evaluate the risk of MACE for 0-13 and 14-27 days after two doses of COVID-19 vaccine. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) to compare the risk of MACE between each risk period and the baseline period. A total of 229 235 individuals with CVD were identified, of which 1764 were vaccinated and had a diagnosis of MACE during the observation period (BNT162b2 = 662; CoronaVac = 1102). For BNT162b2, IRRs were 0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-1.02] for the first dose and 0.87 (95% CI 0.50-1.52) for the second dose during the 0-13 days risk period, 0.40 (95% CI 0.18-0.93) for the first dose and 1.13 (95% CI 0.70-1.84) for the second dose during the 14-27 days risk period. For CoronaVac, the IRRs were 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.75) for the first dose and, 0.73 (95% CI 0.46-1.16) for the second dose during the 0-13 days risk period, 0.54 (95% CI 0.33-0.90) for the first dose and 0.83 (95% CI 0.54-1.29) for the second dose during the 14-27 days risk period. Consistent results were found in subgroup analyses for different sexes, age groups and different underlying cardiovascular conditions., Conclusion: Our findings showed no evidence of an increased risk of MACE after vaccination with BNT162b2 or CoronaVac in patients with CVD. Future research is required to monitor the risk after the third dose of each vaccine., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background and Aim: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may increase the risk of COVID‐19 among non‐vaccinated subjects via various mechanisms, including gut dysbiosis. We aimed to investigate whether PPIs also affect the clinical outcomes of COVID‐19 among vaccine recipients. Methods: This was a territory‐wide cohort study of 3 272 286 vaccine recipients (aged ≥ 18 years) of ≥ 2 doses of either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac. Exclusion criteria included prior gastrointestinal surgery, immunocompromised status, and prior COVID‐19. The primary outcome was COVID‐19, and secondary outcomes included COVID‐19‐related hospitalization and severe infection (composite of intensive care unit admission, ventilatory support, and/or death). Covariates include age, sex, the Charlson Comorbidity Index, comorbidities, and concomitant medication use. Subjects were followed from index date (first dose of vaccination) until outcome occurrence, death, additional dose of vaccination, or March 31, 2022. Exposure was pre‐vaccination PPI use (any prescription within 90 days before the index date). Propensity score (PS) matching and a Poisson regression model were used to estimate the adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) of outcomes with PPI use. Results: Among 439 154 PS‐matched two‐dose vaccine recipients (mean age: 65.3 years; male: 45.7%) with a median follow‐up of 6.8 months (interquartile range: 2.6–7.9), PPI exposure was associated with a higher risk of COVID‐19 (aIRR: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.05–1.10), hospitalization (aIRR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.08–1.33), and severe infection (aIRR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.24–1.98). Among 188 360 PS‐matched three‐dose vaccine recipients (mean age: 62.5 years; male: 49.0%; median follow‐up: 9.1 months [interquartile range: 8.0–10.9]), PPIs were associated with higher infection risk (aIRR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.08–1.15) but not other outcomes. Conclusions: Although PPI use was associated with a higher COVID‐19 risk, severe infection was limited to two‐dose but not three‐dose vaccine recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antibiotics may increase the risk of COVID-19 among non-vaccinated subjects via probable gut dysbiosis. We aimed to investigate whether antibiotics also affect the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Methods: This was a territory-wide cohort study of 3,821,302 COVID-19 vaccine recipients (aged ≥ 18 years) with ≥2 doses of either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac. Exclusion criteria included prior COVID-19, prior gastrointestinal surgery, and immunocompromised status. The primary outcome was COVID-19 infection and secondary outcomes included COVID-19-related hospitalization and severe infection (composite of intensive care unit admission, ventilatory support, and/or death). Exposure was pre-vaccination antibiotic use (within 180 days of first vaccine dose). Covariates included age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and concomitant medication use. Subjects were followed from the index date (first dose vaccination) until outcome occurrence, death, an additional dose of vaccination, or 15 November 2022. Propensity score (PS) matching and a Poisson regression model were used to estimate the adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) of outcomes with antibiotic use. Results: Among 342,338 PS matched three-dose vaccine recipients (mean age: 57.4 years; male: 45.1%) with a median follow-up of 13.6 months (IQR: 9.2–16.3), antibiotics were associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 infection (aIRR: 1.16;95% CI: 1.14–1.19), hospitalization (aIRR: 1.75;95% CI: 1.65–1.86), and severe infection (aIRR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.21–2.11). Notably, antibiotic use was associated with a higher risk of severe infection and death among CoronaVac recipients (aIRR: 1.62 95% CI: 1.18–2.22 and aIRR: 2.70, 95% CI: 1.54–4.73 for the two secondary outcomes, respectively), but not BNT162b2 recipients. Conclusions: Pre-vaccination use of antibiotics was associated with a higher risk of COVID-19 infection, hospitalization, and severe disease outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background With accruing case reports on de novo or relapsing glomerular diseases (GD) following different severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines, we evaluated the risk of GD following BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines. Methods A modified self-controlled case series analysis was conducted using anonymized, territory-wide SARS-CoV-2 vaccination records in Hong Kong. All Hong Kong residents aged 18 years or above with outcomes of interest were included. Outcomes of interest were GD, proteinuria or hematuria within 42 days following each dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Incidence per 100 000 doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines administered was calculated, and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were estimated using conditional Poisson regression with seasonality adjustment. Results Between 23 February 2021 and 31 March 2022, 4062 patients had an incident diagnosis of GD, proteinuria or hematuria, with 2873 of them being vaccinated during the observation period. The incidences of the composite events 1–41 days after vaccination were 3.7 (95% CI 3.1–4.4) per 100 000 doses of BNT162b2 administered, and 6.5 (95% CI 5.7–7.5) per 100 000 doses CoronaVac administered. There was no significant increase in the risks of composite events following the first (BNT162b2: IRR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56–1.03; CoronaVac: IRR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.72–1.19), second (BNT162b2: IRR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.72–1.17; CoronaVac: IRR = 0.88. 95% CI 0.68–1.14) or third (BNT162b2: IRR = 0.39. 95% CI 0.15–1.03; CoronaVac: IRR = 1.18. 95% CI 0.53–2.63) dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Conclusions There was no evidence of increased risks of de novo or relapsing GD with either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The World Health Organization has defined a list of adverse events of special interest (AESI) for safety surveillance of vaccines. AESI have not been adequately assessed following COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer contributing to vaccine hesitancy in this population. We aimed to evaluate the association between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccines and the risk of AESI in adults with active cancer or a history of cancer. Patients and methods: We conducted a territory-wide cohort study using electronic health records managed by the Hong Kong Hospital Authority and vaccination records provided by the Department of Health. Patients with a cancer diagnosis between January 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021, were included and stratified into two cohorts: active cancer and history of cancer. Within each cohort, patients who received two doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac were 1:1 matched to unvaccinated patients using the propensity score. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for AESI 28 days after the second vaccine dose. Results: A total of 74,878 patients with cancer were included (vaccinated: 25,789 [34%]; unvaccinated: 49,089 [66%]). Among patients with active cancer, the incidence of AESI was 0.31 and 1.02 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.13 and 0.88 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Among patients with history of cancer, the incidence was 0.55 and 0.89 per 10,000 person-days with BNT162b2 versus unvaccinated patients and 0.42 and 0.93 per 10,000 person-days with CoronaVac versus unvaccinated patients. Neither vaccine was associated with a higher risk of AESI for patients with active cancer (BNT162b2: HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08–1.09; CoronaVac: 0.14, 95% CI 0.02–1.18) or patients with history of cancer (BNT162b2: 0.62, 95% CI 0.30–1.28; CoronaVac: 0.45, 95% CI 0.21–1.00). Conclusions: In this territory-wide cohort study of patients with cancer, the incidence of AESI following vaccination with two doses of either BNT162b2 or CoronaVac vaccines was low. The findings of this study can reassure clinicians and patients with cancer about the overall safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in patients with cancer, which could increase the COVID-19 vaccination rate in this vulnerable group of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• This is the first study to explore BNT162b2/CoronaVac's effectiveness in individuals with mental disorders against Omicron. • The booster dose significantly reduced COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality in individuals with mental disorders. • The risk reduction magnitude with BNT162b2 was generally higher than CoronaVac, but the gap narrowed after the third dose. • Individuals with mental disorders should be prioritised in future vaccination programmes of bivalent COVID-19 vaccines. Concerns have been raised regarding potential weaker vaccine immunogenicity with higher immune suppression for individuals with pre-existing mental disorders. Yet, data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccinations among this vulnerable population are limited. A case-control study was conducted to investigate the risks of COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality among individuals with mental disorders following one to three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations in Hong Kong. Data were extracted from electronic health records, vaccination and COVID-19 confirmed case records. Conditional logistic regression was applied with adjustment for comorbidities and medication history. Subgroup analyses were performed with stratification: by age (< 65 and ≥ 65) and mental disorders diagnosis (depression, schizophrenia, anxiety disorder, and bipolar disorder). Two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac significantly reduced COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality. Further protection for both outcomes was provided after three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac. The vaccine effectiveness magnitude of BNT162b2 was generally higher than CoronaVac, but the difference diminished after the third dose. Individuals with mental disorders should be prioritised in future mass vaccination programmes of booster doses or bivalent COVID-19 vaccines. Targeted strategies should be developed to resolve the reasons behind vaccine hesitancy among this population and increase their awareness on the benefits of vaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]