Aug 2026· Vaccine· Vol 90, pp.
129043
· 0 citations· 19 references
Medicine
TL;DR
A lower likelihood of subsequent COVID-19 booster uptake after experiencing systemic AE, particularly when severe or prolonged, or when experiencing a severe local AE is found, underscore the need to address experienced AE in communication strategies, as this may influence the success of vaccination campaigns.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
This study aimed to assess whether the occurrence, severity, and duration of AE following COVID-19 booster vaccination were associated with subsequent booster uptake during the 2022-2024 autumn booster campaigns in the Netherlands.
Methods
We included participants from the Vaccine Study COVID-19 (VASCO), an ongoing prospective cohort study, who were eligible for booster vaccination in 2022-2024. Participants completed a questionnaire on AE one month after booster vaccination. Logistic regression was performed to assess the association between the occurrence, severity, and duration of local and systemic AE, and revaccination during the subsequent year. We adjusted for demographics and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Results
In 2022 and 2023, 11,010 and 14,824 participants were vaccinated and completed the AE questionnaire. Of these, 73.7% and 87.0% were revaccinated in subsequent years. The occurrence of systemic AE in 2022 was associated with a lower odds of revaccination in 2023 (OR: 0.84 [95%CI, 0.76-0.93]). The likelihood of revaccination declined with increasing severity- moderate (0.79 [0.66-0.94]) and severe AE (0.45 [0.34-0.60]) - and longer duration (>5 days: 0.72 [0.54-0.95]) of systemic AE. Also, severe local AE (0.38 [0.23-0.60]) and seeking medical care for AE (0.50 [0.34-0.73]) were associated with reduced vaccination uptake. Similar associations were observed for revaccination in 2024.
Conclusion
This study found a lower likelihood of subsequent COVID-19 booster uptake after experiencing systemic AE, particularly when severe or prolonged, or when experiencing a severe local AE. These findings underscore the need to address experienced AE in communication strategies, as this may influence the success of vaccination campaigns.
Summary Background Vaccination is a vital tool in preventing acute COVID-19 and may confer additional protection against Long COVID, although it is unclear whether this protection wanes over time. Methods We assessed electronic health record (EHR) data from a national, retrospective cohort of patients, comparing the 12-month cumulative incidence of Long COVID (ICD-10 code U09.9) among (A) patients who were vaccinated versus unvaccinated (two or more versus zero doses) and (B) patients diagnosed with acute COVID-19 1–3 months, 3–5 months, or 5–7 months after vaccination. Findings In our binary cohort (n = 519,980), we found that patients who were vaccinated had a lower risk of Long COVID (adjusted risk ratio 0.84 (0.81, 0.88)) or mortality (adjusted risk ratio 0.83 (0.81, 0.86)) than patients who were unvaccinated. In our longitudinal cohort (n = 1,085,291), we did not find significant heterogeneity in Long COVID risk during the seven months following vaccination. Interpretation We found that COVID-19 vaccination was protective against Long COVID, and we did not observe a significant waning of this protection within seven months after vaccination. Funding This research was financially supported by the 10.13039/100000060National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (1K01AI182501 to Zachary Butzin-Dozier) and a Global Development grant (OPP1165144) from the 10.13039/100000865Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the 10.13039/100005595University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. Individual authors were supported by the following funding sources: 10.13039/100000025NIMHR01131542 (PI Rena C. Patel), Jerrod Anzalone is supported by the 10.13039/100000057National Institute of General Medical Sciences, U54 GM115458, which funds the Great Plains IDeA-CTR Network. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
Z. Butzin-Dozier, Yunwen Ji, Lin-Chiun Wang et al.· EBioMedicine· 0 citations
Background/Objectives We evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 adolescent vaccination in England at two different epidemic points: the autumn (August-November) 2021, in the presence of a large Omicron epidemic wave, and the autumn (August-November) 2022, when the subsequent Omicron epidemic was at an endemic stage. Methods Using the Covasim SARS-CoV-2 model for England, under varying vaccine uptake and onset time, we evaluated the impact of a)vaccinating 18+ only versus additional 12+ vaccination from the autumn 2021; and b)the current immunisation strategy at the time versus additional 12+ vaccination from September 2022, projecting the number of new daily SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalisations and deaths. Results In presence of the BA.1 Omicron wave in late 2021, the expanded adolescent vaccination averted ~3,000,000 cases across all-ages, ~1,010,000 SARS-CoV-2 infections in the period 2-6 months from vaccine onset in the vaccinated cohort. During the Omicron waves in 2022, additional adolescents vaccination did not significantly reduce the COVID-19 burden in the entire population, nor within the vaccinated cohort. Conclusions Our findings highlight that adolescent vaccination impact depends on the timing/speed of implementation, other present intervention strategies, and the status of the epidemic at the time and it should not be considered as a stand-alone immunisation strategy.
A. Fairweather, B. Swallow, R. Stuart et al.· medRxiv· 0 citations
During the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccinations were highly beneficial to public health, preventing disease and reducing mortality. This study aimed to investigate long-term adverse clinical symptoms following COVID-19 vaccination with the Oxford AstraZeneca (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, Oxford), Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), and Moderna (mRNA-1273) vaccines. In this cross-sectional study, the total number of participants was 429; among them, 243 (56.6%) were male, and 186 (43.4%) were female. An online Google Form was prepared in both Arabic and English and distributed to participants who received the Oxford AstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Moderna vaccines. The most common long-term adverse effects reported after COVID-19 vaccination were chronic fatigue, impaired cognitive function, and menstrual irregularity. The Moderna vaccine had a higher self-reported symptom rate among male participants (50–61.5%) than among female participants (33.3–28%). Chronic fatigue was more frequent among Oxford AstraZeneca recipients (34.7%) than among Moderna (22.2%) and Pfizer-BioNTech (27.7%) recipients. The second dose was associated with slightly higher rates of chronic fatigue among Oxford AstraZeneca recipients (38.9%) than among Moderna (25%) and Pfizer-BioNTech recipients (27.3%). For cognitive problems, the prevalence was similar across all brands (25%). Menstrual irregularity was slightly higher among females who received Pfizer-BioNTech (14.8%) than among Oxford AstraZeneca recipients (18.9%). The highest proportion of recipients who were infected after vaccination was among those who received the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine (46.3%). In conclusion, the most commonly reported long-term adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination were chronic fatigue, cognitive impairment, and menstrual irregularity. Further large-scale studies are required to provide more conclusive evidence.
COVID-19 vaccination helped change the course of the pandemic and remains critical for protecting high-risk groups. We analyzed data submitted to WHO to describe COVID-19 vaccination coverage during the emergency period from 2021-2023 and annual uptake in 2024, the first post-emergency calendar year after the Public Health Emergency of International Concern designation was lifted. By end-2023, global complete primary series coverage reached 65% in the total population, 82% among older adults, and 91% among health and care workers (HCWs), across reporting countries. Booster coverage was lower, at 33%, 60%, and 69%, respectively. Across indicators, disparities by country income group and region emerged early and persisted through 2024. In 2024, vaccination of older adults and HCWs was limited and heterogeneous. These findings underscore the need for stronger, sustainably financed adult immunization platforms and associated monitoring systems to enhance life-course vaccination benefits and to support future outbreak, epidemic, and pandemic responses.
D. Brooks, A. Germann, L. Craw et al.· medRxiv· 0 citations
BACKGROUND
Real-world data studies suggest that the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a fourth mRNA vaccine dose against SARS-CoV2 infection related hospitalisation wanes after a few months, potentially warranting consideration of additional booster doses.
METHODS
A multi-database cohort study was conducted through the Data Analysis and Real World Interrogation Network (DARWIN EU®) using routinely collected electronic health records from the UK (CPRD GOLD), the Netherlands (IPCI), and Spain (SIDIAP) from January 2021 to June 2023. The study included individuals aged 12 and above, vaccinated with at least three doses. We matched fourth-dose to third-dose vaccinated individuals using a weekly sequential approach, defining the date of the last dose received by the exposed individual as index date. Primary outcomes were SARS-CoV2 infection related death and hospitalisation. Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models, with VE defined as the percentage of 1 minus HR. Waning of VE was assessed at monthly intervals.
FINDINGS
A total number of 975,496 matched pairs were identified from the three databases, with a median age of 63-78. The pooled VE of a fourth vaccine dose against SARS-CoV2 infection related death compared to three vaccine doses was 30% (95%CI 9 to 46, I2=0). VE against SARS-CoV2 infection related hospitalisation was 26% (19% to 33%) and 46% (15% to 66%), in Spain (SIDIAP, median follow-up 8 weeks) and Netherlands (IPCI, median follow-up 21 weeks) respectively. VE of a fourth dose started waning at 4-8 weeks after vaccination.
INTERPRETATION
A fourth dose of a mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was effective against SARS-CoV2 infection related death and hospitalisation. However, effectiveness waned over time. Periodic revaccination should be considered, with recommendations regarding booster timing taking into account circulating variants, patterns of viral transmission, and population uptake.
FUNDING
European Medicines Agency.
Xintong Li, N. Mercadé-Besora, Amy Shuk Man Lam et al.· Journal of Infection· 0 citations
Men were significantly more than twice as likely to receive the booster dose compared to females, while individuals who had positive attitudes toward the booster dose were up to 5 times more likely to be vaccinated.
Mohammed J. Almalki, Amani A Alotaibi· Frontiers in Public Health· 0 citations