Search

BackgroundThe impact variant-specific immune evasion and waning protection have on declining coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) remains unclear. Using whole-genome sequencing (WGS), we examined the contribution these factors had on the decline that followed the introduction of the Delta variant. Furthermore, we evaluated calendar-period–based classification as a WGS alternative.MethodsWe conducted a test-negative case-control study among people tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) between 1 April and 24 August 2021. Variants were classified using WGS and calendar period.ResultsWe included 2029 cases (positive, sequenced samples) and 343 727 controls (negative tests). VE 14–89 days after second dose was significantly higher against Alpha (84.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 75.6%–90.0%) than Delta infection (68.9%; 95% CI, 58.0%–77.1%). The odds of Delta infection were significantly higher 90–149 than 14–89 days after second dose (P value = .003). Calendar-period–classified VE estimates approximated WGS-classified estimates; however, calendar-period–based classification was subject to misclassification (35% Alpha, 4% Delta).ConclusionsBoth waning protection and variant-specific immune evasion contributed to the lower effectiveness. While calendar-period–classified VE estimates mirrored WGS-classified estimates, our analysis highlights the need for WGS when variants are cocirculating and misclassification is likely.

Background The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends serial rapid antigen assay collection within congregate facilities. Although modeling and observational studies from communities and long-term care facilities have shown serial collection provides adequate sensitivity and specificity, the accuracy within correctional facilities remains unknown. Methods Using Connecticut Department of Correction data from 21 November 2020 to 15 June 2021, we estimated the accuracy of a rapid assay, BinaxNOW (Abbott), under 3 collection strategies: single test collection and serial collection of 2 and 3 tests separated by 1–4 days. The sensitivity and specificity of the first (including single), second, and third serially collected BinaxNOW tests were estimated relative to RT-PCRs collected ≤1 day of the BinaxNOW test. The accuracy metrics of the testing strategies were then estimated as the sum (sensitivity) and product (specificity) of tests in each strategy. Results Of the 13 112 residents who contributed ≥1 BinaxNOW test during the study period, 3825 contributed ≥1 RT-PCR paired BinaxNOW test. In relation to RT-PCR, the 3-rapid-antigen-test strategy had a sensitivity of 95.9% (95% CI: 93.6–97.5%) and specificity of 98.3% (95% CI: 96.7–99.1%). The sensitivities of the 2- and 1-rapid-antigen-test strategies were 88.8% and 66.8%, and the specificities were 98.5% and 99.4%, respectively. The sensitivity was higher among symptomatic residents and when RT-PCRs were collected before BinaxNOW tests. Conclusions We found serial antigen test collection resulted in high diagnostic accuracy. These findings support serial collection for outbreak investigation, screening, and when rapid detection is required (such as intakes or transfers).

Background Vaccine hesitancy is common among incarcerated populations and, despite vaccination programs, vaccine acceptance within residents remains low, especially within jails. With the goal of assessing the Connecticut DOC’s COVID-19 vaccine program within jails we examined if residents of DOC operated jails were more likely to become vaccinated following incarceration than in the community. Specifically, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among people who spent at least one night in a DOC-operated jail between February 2 and November 8, 2021, and were eligible for vaccination at the time of incarceration (intake). We compared the vaccination rates before and after incarceration using an age-adjusted survival analysis with a time-varying exposure of incarceration and an outcome of vaccination. Results During the study period, 3,716 people spent at least one night in jail and were eligible for vaccination at intake. Of these residents, 136 were vaccinated prior to incarceration, 2,265 had a recorded vaccine offer, and 479 were vaccinated while incarcerated. The age-adjusted hazard of vaccination following incarceration was significantly higher than prior to incarceration (12.5; 95% Confidence Intervals: 10.2–15.3). Conclusions We found that residents were more likely to become vaccinated in jail than in the community. Though these findings highlight the utility of vaccination programs within jails, the low level of vaccination in this population speaks to the need for additional program development within jails and the community.

Whether SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccines confer exposure-dependent (“leaky”) protection remains unknown. We examined the effect of prior infection and vaccination on infection risk among residents of Connecticut correctional facilities during periods of predominant Omicron and Delta transmission. Residents with cell, unit, and no documented exposures to SARS-CoV-2 infected residents were matched by facility and date. During the Omicron period, prior infection and vaccination reduced the infection risk of residents without a documented exposure (Hazards ratio: infection, 0.36 [0.25-0.54]; vaccination, 0.57 [0.42-0.78]) and with cellblock exposures (infection, 0.61 [0.49-0.75]; vaccination, 0.69 [0.58-0.83]) but not with cell exposures (infection, 0.89 [0.58-1.35]; vaccination, 0.96 [0.64-1.46]). Associations were similar during the Delta period and when analyses were restricted to residents who underwent testing. These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination may be leaky, highlighting the potential benefits of pairing vaccination with non-pharmaceutical interventions in densely crowded settings.

BackgroundThe decline in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) is well established, however the impact of variant-specific immune evasion and waning protection remains unclear. Here, we use whole-genome-sequencing (WGS) to tease apart the contribution of these factors on the decline observed following the introduction of the Delta variant. Further, we evaluate the utility of calendar-period-based variant classification as an alternative to WGS.MethodsWe conducted a test-negative-case-control study among people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in the Yale New Haven Health System between April 1 and August 24, 2021. Variant classification was performed using WGS and secondarily by calendar-period. We estimated VE as one minus the ratio comparing the odds of infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated people.ResultsOverall, 2,029 cases (RT-PCR positive, sequenced samples) and 343,985 controls (negative RT-PCRs) were included. VE 14-89 days after 2nd dose was significantly higher against WGS-classified Alpha infection (84.4%, 95% confidence interval: 75.6-90.0%) than Delta infection (68.9%, CI: 58.0-77.1%, p-value: 0.013). The odds of WGS-classified Delta infection were significantly higher 90-149 than 14-89 days after 2nd dose (Odds ratio: 1.6, CI: 1.2-2.3). While estimates of VE against calendar-period-classified infections approximated estimates against WGS-classified infections, calendar-period-based classification was subject to outcome misclassification (35% during Alpha period, 4% during Delta period).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that both waning protection and variant-specific immune evasion contributed to the lower effectiveness. While estimates of VE against calendar-period-classified infections mirrored that against WGS-classified infections, our analysis highlights the need for WGS when variants are co-circulating and misclassification is likely.Summary of main pointsUsing whole genome sequencing, we provide direct evidence of waning vaccine effectiveness and variant-specific immune evasion during the Delta wave. Effectiveness estimates against calendar-period-classified infections approximated estimates against WGS-classified infections, however, calendar-period classification was associated with a variant misclassification.

ObjectiveTo assess the Connecticut Department of Correction’s (DOC) COVID-19 vaccine program within jails.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among people who were incarcerated in a DOC-operated jail between February 2 and November 8, 2021, and were eligible for vaccination at the time of incarceration (intake). We compared the vaccination rates before and after incarceration using an age-adjusted survival analysis with a time-varying exposure of incarceration and an outcome of vaccination.ResultsDuring the study period, 3,716 people spent ≥1 night in jail and were eligible for vaccination at intake. Of these residents, 136 were vaccinated prior to incarceration, 2,265 had a recorded vaccine offer, and 476 were vaccinated while incarcerated. The age-adjusted hazard of vaccination following incarceration was significantly higher than prior to incarceration (12.5; 95% CI: 10.2-15.3).ConclusionsWe found that residents were more likely to become vaccinated in jail than the community. Though these findings highlight the utility of vaccination programs within jails, the low level of vaccination in this population speaks to the need for additional program development within jails and the community.

The effectiveness of inactivated vaccines (VE) against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 caused by omicron is unknown. We conducted a nationwide, test-negative, case-control study to estimate VE for homologous and heterologous (BNT162b2) booster doses in adults who received two doses of CoronaVac in Brazil in the Omicron context. Analyzing 1,386,544 matched-pairs, VE against symptomatic disease was 8.6% (95% CI, 5.6–11.5) and 56.8% (95% CI, 56.3–57.3) in the period 8–59 days after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. During the same interval, VE against severe Covid-19 was 73.6% (95% CI, 63.9–80.7) and 86.0% (95% CI, 84.5–87.4) after receiving a homologous and heterologous booster, respectively. Waning against severe Covid-19 after 120 days was only observed after a homologous booster. Heterologous booster might be preferable to individuals with completed primary series inactivated vaccine.

BackgroundThe benefit of vaccination in people who experienced a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear.ObjectiveTo estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose) and booster (third dose) vaccination against Omicron infection among people with a prior documented infection.DesignTest-negative case-control study.SettingYale New Haven Health System facilities.ParticipantsVaccine eligible people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing between November 1, 2021, and January 31, 2022.MeasurementsWe conducted two analyses, each with an outcome of Omicron BA.1 infection (S-gene target failure defined) and each stratified by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds among boosted and booster eligible people.ResultsOverall, 10,676 cases and 119,397 controls were included (6.1% and 7.8% occurred following a prior infection, respectively). The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14-149 days after 2nd dose was 36.1% (CI, 7.1% to 56.1%) for people with and 28.5% (CI, 20.0% to 36.2%) without prior infection. The odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people with prior infection was 0.83 (CI, 0.56 to 1.23), whereas the odds ratio comparing boosted and booster eligible people without prior infection was 0.51 (CI, 0.46 to 0.56).LimitationsMisclassification, residual confounding, reliance on TaqPath assay analyzed samples.ConclusionWhile primary vaccination provided protection against BA.1 infection among people with and without prior infection, booster vaccination was only associated with additional protection in people without prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of prior infection status but suggest that infection history should be considered when evaluating the need for booster vaccination.Primary Funding SourceBeatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth and Sendas Family Funds, Merck and Co through their Merck Investigator Studies Program, and the Yale Schools of Public Health and Medicine.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among individuals without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with previous infection is less clear. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of four COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, and death for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Using national COVID-19 notification, hospitalisation, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we did a test-negative, case-control study to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac [Sinovac], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZeneca], Ad26.COV2.S [Janssen], and BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNtech]) for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched cases with RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 with up to ten controls with negative RT-PCR tests who presented with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests done at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity and the odds of hospitalisation or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2020, and Nov 11, 2021, we identified 213 457 individuals who had a subsequent, symptomatic illness with RT-PCR testing done at least 90 days after their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection and after the vaccination programme started. Among these, 30 910 (14·5%) had a positive RT-PCR test consistent with reinfection, and we matched 22 566 of these cases with 145 055 negative RT-PCR tests from 68 426 individuals as controls. Among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 39·4% (95% CI 36·1-42·6) for CoronaVac, 56·0% (51·4-60·2) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 44·0% (31·5-54·2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64·8% (54·9-72·4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose than after the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalisation or death 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 81·3% (75·3-85·8) for CoronaVac, 89·9% (83·5-93·8) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 57·7% (-2·6 to 82·5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89·7% (54·3-97·7) for BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: All four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The provision of a full vaccine series to individuals after recovery from COVID-19 might reduce morbidity and mortality. FUNDING: Brazilian National Research Council, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Generalitat de Catalunya.

BackgroundThe CDC recommends serial rapid antigen assay collection within congregate facilities for screening and outbreak testing. Though modeling and observational studies from community and long-term care facilities have shown serial collection provides adequate sensitivity and specificity, the diagnostic accuracy of this testing strategy within correctional facilities remains unknown.MethodsUsing Connecticut Department of Corrections (DOC) data from November 21st2020 to June 15th2021, we estimated the accuracy of a rapid assay, BinaxNOW, under three collection strategies, a single test in isolation and two and three serial tests separated by 1-4 day intervals. Diagnostic accuracy metrics were estimated in relation to RT-PCRs collected within one day before the first or after the last included rapid antigen tests in a series.ResultsOf the 17,669 residents who contributed at least one RT-PCR or rapid antigen during the study period, 3,979 contributed ≥1 paired rapid antigen test series. In relation to RT-PCR, the three-rapid antigen test strategy had a sensitivity of 89.6% (95% confidence intervals: 86.1-92.6%) and specificity of 97.2% (CI: 95.1-98.3%). The sensitivities for two and one-rapid antigen test strategy were 75.2% and 52.8%, respectively, and the specificities were 98.5% and 99.4%, respectively. The sensitivity was higher among symptomatic residents and when the RT-PCR was collected before the rapid antigen tests.ConclusionsWe found the serial collection of an antigen test resulted in high diagnostic accuracy. These findings support serial testing within correctional facilities for outbreak investigation, screening, and when rapid detection is required (such as intakes or transfers).

The CDC recommends serial rapid antigen assay collection within congregate facilities. Though modeling and observational studies from communities and long-term care facilities have shown serial collection provides adequate sensitivity and specificity, the accuracy within correctional facilities remains unknown.Using Connecticut Department of Corrections (DOC) data from November 21st 2020 to June 15th 2021, we estimated the accuracy of a rapid assay, BinaxNOW, under three collection strategies, single test collection and serial collection of two and three tests separated by 1-4 days. The sensitivity and specificity of the first (including single), second, and third serially collected BinaxNOW tests were estimated relative to RT-PCRs collected within one day of the BinaxNOW test. The accuracy metrics of the testing strategies were then estimated as the sum (sensitivity) and product (specificity) of tests in each strategy.Of the 13,112 residents who contributed ≥1 BinaxNOW test during the study period, 3,825 contributed ≥1 RT-PCR paired BinaxNOW test. In relation to RT-PCR, the three-rapid antigen test strategy had a sensitivity of 95.9% (95% confidence intervals (CI): 93.6-97.5%) and specificity of 98.3% (CI: 96.7-99.1%). The sensitivity of the two- and one-rapid antigen test strategies were 88.8% and 66.8%, respectively, and the specificities were 98.5% and 99.4%, respectively. The sensitivity was higher among symptomatic residents and when RT-PCRs were collected before BinaxNOW tests.We found serial antigen test collection resulted in high diagnostic accuracy. These findings support serial collection for outbreak investigation, screening, and when rapid detection is required (such as intakes or transfers).

COVID-19 has disproportionally burdened racial and ethnic minority groups within the United States. Leveraging statewide data, we examined the evolution of racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 related deaths among Connecticut residents residing in non-congregate settings over three periods of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite observing large disparities in the age-adjusted mortality rates between Hispanics, non-Hispanic Blacks, and non-Hispanic Whites during the initial pandemic period (March to August 2020), we observed meaningful reductions in the disparities during the subsequent periods (August 2020 to July 2021; July to mid December 2021). Further, during the third period, we failed to find a significant difference in age-adjusted mortality between non-Hispanic Blacks and non-Hispanic Whites. These findings provide evidence that attenuation of racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 related outcomes are achievable.

ObjectiveTo estimate the change in odds of covid-19 over time following primary series completion of the inactivated whole virus vaccine, CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) in São Paulo state, Brazil.DesignTest negative case-control study.SettingCommunity testing for covid-19 in São Paulo state, Brazil.ParticipantsAdults aged 18-120 years who were residents of São Paulo state, without a previous laboratory-confirmed covid-19 infection, who received only two doses of CoronaVac, and underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 from 17 January to 30 September 2021.Main outcome measuresRT-PCR-confirmed symptomatic covid-19 and associated hospital admissions and deaths. Cases were pair-matched to test-negative controls by age (in 5-year bands), municipality of residence, healthcare worker (HCW) status, and date of RT-PCR test (±3 days). Conditional logistic regression was adjusted for sex, number of covid-19-associated comorbidities, race, and previous acute respiratory infection.ResultsFrom 137,820 eligible individuals, 37,929 cases with symptomatic covid-19 and 25,756 test-negative controls with covid-19 symptoms were formed into 37,929 matched pairs. Adjusted odds ratios of symptomatic covid-19 increased with time since series completion, and this increase was greater in younger individuals, and among HCWs compared to non-HCWs. Adjusted odds ratios of covid-19 hospitalisation or death were significantly increased from 98 days since series completion, compared to individuals vaccinated 14-41 days previously: 1.40 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.79) from 98-125 days, 1.55 (1.16 to 2.07) from 126-153 days, 1.56 (1.12 to 2.18) from 154-181 days, and 2.12 (1.39-3.22) from 182 days.ConclusionsIn the general population of São Paulo state, Brazil, an increase in odds of moderate and severe covid-19 outcomes was observed over time following primary series completion with CoronaVac.What is already known on this topic-The effectiveness of the inactivated whole virus vaccine, CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) against moderate and severe covid-19 has been demonstrated in clinical trials and observational studies.-Observational studies have suggested that effectiveness of other covid-19 vaccines appears to decrease over time, prompting many countries to deploy additional doses for individuals who have completed their primary series.-There is currently no evidence for change in the rate of breakthrough infection in individuals who have received a primary series of CoronaVac.What this study adds-In individuals receiving two doses of CoronaVac, the odds of symptomatic covid-19 increased over time since series completion.-Larger increases in covid-19 odds were observed in individuals aged 18-40, and in healthcare workers compared to non-healthcare workers.-Odds of covid-19 hospitalisation or death increased over time since series completion, but to a lesser extent.

BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among SARS-CoV-2 naive individuals, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with prior infection is less clear.MethodsUtilizing national COVID-19 notification, hospitalization, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we performed a case-control study using a test-negative design to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S and BNT162b2) among individuals with laboratory-confirmed prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 cases with RT-PCR-negative controls presenting with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests performed at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity, and the odds of hospitalization or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines.FindingsAmong individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection ≥ 14 days from vaccine series completion was 39.4% (95% CI 36.1-42.6) for CoronaVac, 56.0% (95% CI 51.4-60.2) for ChAdOx1, 44.0% (95% CI 31.5-54.2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64.8% (95% CI 54.9-72.4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose compared with the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalization or death ≥ 14 days from vaccine series completion was 81.3% (95% CI 75.3-85.8) for CoronaVac, 89.9% (95% CI 83.5-93.8) for ChAdOx1, 57.7% (95% CI −2.6-82.5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89.7% (95% CI 54.3-97.7) for BNT162b2.InterpretationAll four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. Provision of a full vaccine series to individuals following recovery from COVID-19 may reduce morbidity and mortality.FundingBrazilian National Research Council, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS S.A., Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Generalitat de Catalunya.RESEARCH IN CONTEXTEvidence before this studyWe searched PubMed, medRxiv, and SSRN for articles published from January 1, 2020 until December 15, 2021, with no language restrictions, using the search terms “vaccine effectiveness” AND “previous*” AND (“SARS-CoV-2” OR “COVID-19”). We found several studies evaluating ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2, and one additionally reporting on mRNA-1273 and Ad26.COV2.S, which found that previously infected individuals who were vaccinated had lower risk of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. One study found that risk of hospitalization was lower for previously infected individuals after a full series of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273. Limited evidence is available comparing effectiveness of one versus two doses among individuals with prior infection. No studies reported effectiveness of inactivated vaccines among previously infected individuals.Added value of this studyWe used national databases of COVID-19 case surveillance, laboratory testing, and vaccination from Brazil to investigate effectiveness of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, Ad26.COV2.S and BNT162b2 among individuals with a prior, laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched >22,000 RT-PCR-confirmed re-infections with >145,000 RT-PCR-negative controls using a test-negative design. All four vaccines were effective against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections, with effectiveness from 14 days after series completion ranging from 39-65%. For vaccines with two-dose regimens, the second dose provided significantly increased effectiveness compared with one dose. Effectiveness against COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death from 14 days after series completion was >80% for CoronaVac, ChAdOx1and BNT162b2.Implications of all the available evidenceWe find evidence that four vaccines, using three different platforms, all provide protection to previously infected individuals against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe outcomes, with a second dose conferring significant additional benefits. These results support the provision of a full vaccine series among individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

ObjectiveTo estimate the change in odds of covid-19 over time following primary series completion of the inactivated whole virus vaccine CoronaVac (Sinovac Biotech) in São Paulo State, Brazil.DesignTest negative case-control study.SettingCommunity testing for covid-19 in São Paulo State, Brazil.ParticipantsAdults aged ≥18 years who were residents of São Paulo state, had received two doses of CoronaVac, did not have a laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination, and underwent reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for SARS-CoV-2 from 17 January to 14 December 2021. Cases were matched to test negative controls by age (in 5 year bands), municipality of residence, healthcare worker status, and epidemiological week of RT-PCR test.Main outcome measuresRT-PCR confirmed symptomatic covid-19 and associated hospital admissions and deaths. Conditional logistic regression was adjusted for sex, number of covid-19 associated comorbidities, race, and previous acute respiratory illness.ResultsFrom 202 741 eligible people, 52 170 cases with symptomatic covid-19 and 69 115 test negative controls with covid-19 symptoms were formed into 43 257 matched sets. Adjusted odds ratios of symptomatic covid-19 increased with time since completion of the vaccination series. The increase in odds was greater in younger people and among healthcare workers, although sensitivity analyses suggested that this was in part due to bias. In addition, the adjusted odds ratios of covid-19 related hospital admission or death significantly increased with time compared with the odds 14-41 days after series completion: from 1.25 (95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.51) at 70-97 days up to 1.94 (1.41 to 2.67) from 182 days onwards.ConclusionsSignificant increases in the risk of moderate and severe covid-19 outcomes occurred three months after primary vaccination with CoronaVac among people aged 65 and older. These findings provide supportive evidence for the implementation of vaccine boosters in these populations who received this inactivated vaccine. Studies of waning should include analyses designed to uncover common biases.