Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation

Eric Yuk Fai Wan; Boyuan Wang; Amanda Lauren Lee; Jiayi Zhou; Celine Sze Ling Chui; Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai; Carlos King Ho Wong; Ivan Fan Ngai Hung; Chak Sing Lau; Esther Wai Yin Chan; Ian Chi Kei Wong

doi:10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation

Eric Yuk Fai Wan, Boyuan Wang, Amanda Lauren Lee, Jiayi Zhou, Celine Sze Ling Chui, Francisco Tsz Tsun Lai, Carlos King Ho Wong, Ivan Fan Ngai Hung, Chak Sing Lau, Esther Wai Yin Chan, Ian Chi Kei Wong

Aston Pharmacy School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in vaccine effectiveness and safety.

METHODS: This target trial emulation study included individuals aged ≥ 12 during 2022. Propensity score matching was applied to ensure group balance. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the effectiveness outcomes including COVID-19 infection, severity, 28-day hospitalization and 28-day mortality after infection. Poisson regression was used for safety outcomes including 32 adverse events of special interests between groups.

RESULTS: 639,818 and 1,804,388 individuals were identified for the 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, respectively. In 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, the hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) were 0.844 [0.833-0.856] and 0.749 [0.743-0.755] for COVID-19 infection, 0.692 [0.656-0.731] and 0.582 [0.559-0.605] for hospitalization, 0.566 [0.417-0.769] and 0.590 [0.458-0.76] for severe COVID-19, and 0.563 [0.456-0.697] and 0.457 [0.372-0.561] for mortality for BNT162b2 recipients versus CoronaVac recipients, respectively. Regarding safety, 2-dose BNT162b2 recipients had a significantly higher incidence of myocarditis (Incidence rate ratio[IRR][95% CI]: 8.999 [1.14-71.017]) versus CoronaVac recipients, but the difference was insignificant in 3-dose comparison (IRR [95% CI]: 2.000 [0.500-7.996]).

CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2 has higher effectiveness among individuals aged ≥ 12 against COVID-19-related outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 omicron compared to CoronaVac, with almost 50% lower mortality risk. (200 words).

Original language	English
Article number	107149
Number of pages	10
Journal	International Journal of Infectious Diseases
Volume	146
Early online date	21 Jun 2024
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149
Publication status	Published - Sept 2024

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Data Access Statement

Data are not available as the data custodians (the HA and the DH of Hong Kong SAR) have not given permission for sharing due to patient confidentiality and privacy concerns. Local academic institutions, government departments, or nongovernmental organizations may apply for access to data through the HA’s data-sharing portal (https://www3.ha.org.hk/data).

Keywords

COVID-19
CoronaVac
BNT162b2

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149

EYF Wan et al_Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong_target trial emulation
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Final published version, 1.9 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Cite this

Wan, E. Y. F., Wang, B., Lee, A. L., Zhou, J., Chui, C. S. L., Lai, F. T. T., Wong, C. K. H., Hung, I. F. N., Lau, C. S., Chan, E. W. Y., & Wong, I. C. K. (2024). Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation. International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 146, Article 107149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149

@article{2b77d031f7f045cd879ba5c00e143e25,

title = "Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation",

abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in vaccine effectiveness and safety.METHODS: This target trial emulation study included individuals aged ≥ 12 during 2022. Propensity score matching was applied to ensure group balance. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the effectiveness outcomes including COVID-19 infection, severity, 28-day hospitalization and 28-day mortality after infection. Poisson regression was used for safety outcomes including 32 adverse events of special interests between groups.RESULTS: 639,818 and 1,804,388 individuals were identified for the 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, respectively. In 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, the hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) were 0.844 [0.833-0.856] and 0.749 [0.743-0.755] for COVID-19 infection, 0.692 [0.656-0.731] and 0.582 [0.559-0.605] for hospitalization, 0.566 [0.417-0.769] and 0.590 [0.458-0.76] for severe COVID-19, and 0.563 [0.456-0.697] and 0.457 [0.372-0.561] for mortality for BNT162b2 recipients versus CoronaVac recipients, respectively. Regarding safety, 2-dose BNT162b2 recipients had a significantly higher incidence of myocarditis (Incidence rate ratio[IRR][95% CI]: 8.999 [1.14-71.017]) versus CoronaVac recipients, but the difference was insignificant in 3-dose comparison (IRR [95% CI]: 2.000 [0.500-7.996]).CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2 has higher effectiveness among individuals aged ≥ 12 against COVID-19-related outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 omicron compared to CoronaVac, with almost 50% lower mortality risk. (200 words).",

keywords = "COVID-19, CoronaVac, BNT162b2",

author = "Wan, {Eric Yuk Fai} and Boyuan Wang and Lee, {Amanda Lauren} and Jiayi Zhou and Chui, {Celine Sze Ling} and Lai, {Francisco Tsz Tsun} and Wong, {Carlos King Ho} and Hung, {Ivan Fan Ngai} and Lau, {Chak Sing} and Chan, {Esther Wai Yin} and Wong, {Ian Chi Kei}",

note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).",

year = "2024",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149",

language = "English",

volume = "146",

journal = "International Journal of Infectious Diseases",

issn = "1201-9712",

publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation

AU - Wan, Eric Yuk Fai

AU - Wang, Boyuan

AU - Lee, Amanda Lauren

AU - Zhou, Jiayi

AU - Chui, Celine Sze Ling

AU - Lai, Francisco Tsz Tsun

AU - Wong, Carlos King Ho

AU - Hung, Ivan Fan Ngai

AU - Lau, Chak Sing

AU - Chan, Esther Wai Yin

AU - Wong, Ian Chi Kei

N1 - Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of International Society for Infectious Diseases. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

PY - 2024/9

Y1 - 2024/9

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in vaccine effectiveness and safety.METHODS: This target trial emulation study included individuals aged ≥ 12 during 2022. Propensity score matching was applied to ensure group balance. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the effectiveness outcomes including COVID-19 infection, severity, 28-day hospitalization and 28-day mortality after infection. Poisson regression was used for safety outcomes including 32 adverse events of special interests between groups.RESULTS: 639,818 and 1,804,388 individuals were identified for the 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, respectively. In 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, the hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) were 0.844 [0.833-0.856] and 0.749 [0.743-0.755] for COVID-19 infection, 0.692 [0.656-0.731] and 0.582 [0.559-0.605] for hospitalization, 0.566 [0.417-0.769] and 0.590 [0.458-0.76] for severe COVID-19, and 0.563 [0.456-0.697] and 0.457 [0.372-0.561] for mortality for BNT162b2 recipients versus CoronaVac recipients, respectively. Regarding safety, 2-dose BNT162b2 recipients had a significantly higher incidence of myocarditis (Incidence rate ratio[IRR][95% CI]: 8.999 [1.14-71.017]) versus CoronaVac recipients, but the difference was insignificant in 3-dose comparison (IRR [95% CI]: 2.000 [0.500-7.996]).CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2 has higher effectiveness among individuals aged ≥ 12 against COVID-19-related outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 omicron compared to CoronaVac, with almost 50% lower mortality risk. (200 words).

AB - OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the difference between BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in vaccine effectiveness and safety.METHODS: This target trial emulation study included individuals aged ≥ 12 during 2022. Propensity score matching was applied to ensure group balance. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the effectiveness outcomes including COVID-19 infection, severity, 28-day hospitalization and 28-day mortality after infection. Poisson regression was used for safety outcomes including 32 adverse events of special interests between groups.RESULTS: 639,818 and 1,804,388 individuals were identified for the 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, respectively. In 2-dose and 3-dose comparison, the hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence intervals [CI]) were 0.844 [0.833-0.856] and 0.749 [0.743-0.755] for COVID-19 infection, 0.692 [0.656-0.731] and 0.582 [0.559-0.605] for hospitalization, 0.566 [0.417-0.769] and 0.590 [0.458-0.76] for severe COVID-19, and 0.563 [0.456-0.697] and 0.457 [0.372-0.561] for mortality for BNT162b2 recipients versus CoronaVac recipients, respectively. Regarding safety, 2-dose BNT162b2 recipients had a significantly higher incidence of myocarditis (Incidence rate ratio[IRR][95% CI]: 8.999 [1.14-71.017]) versus CoronaVac recipients, but the difference was insignificant in 3-dose comparison (IRR [95% CI]: 2.000 [0.500-7.996]).CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2 has higher effectiveness among individuals aged ≥ 12 against COVID-19-related outcomes for SARS-CoV-2 omicron compared to CoronaVac, with almost 50% lower mortality risk. (200 words).

KW - COVID-19

KW - CoronaVac

KW - BNT162b2

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971224002200

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85199453484&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149

DO - 10.1016/j.ijid.2024.107149

M3 - Article

C2 - 38909928

SN - 1201-9712

VL - 146

JO - International Journal of Infectious Diseases

JF - International Journal of Infectious Diseases

M1 - 107149

ER -

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in Hong Kong: A Target Trial Emulation

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Data Access Statement

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this