Эффективность защиты от омикрона
Apr. 30th, 2022 07:09 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chuka_lisКанадцы провели исследование на тему, как хорошо предохраняет предыдущий ковид, сам или вместе с прививками, от омикронового ковида. Ведь омикрон- он довольно сильно отличается от других штаммов. Что у них вышло, вкратце.
Для тех, кто не прививался:
В среднем, защитная эффективность предыдущего ковида для непривитых -44%
То, на сколько тяжело протекал предыдущий ковид, тоже играет роль. Касательно этого параметра:
То есть, кто легко болел- легко может и заразиться снова.
Однако, если кто-то уже болел ковидом, и к тому же привился, это повышает защиту от омикроновой инфекции.
Сам по себе предыдущий ковид защищал непривитых от госпитализации с омикроном на 81%.
Если человек болел ковидом, то его примерно одинаково защищали от госпитализации с омикроновым ковидом что 2, что 3 дозы прививки.
Но в целом, как видно из данных, добавление ковида к истории сталкивания с антигеном через прививки, снижает вероятность последующей болезни, повышая эффективность защиты на 70-80% ( у привитых и к тому же болевших , по сранвению с просто привитыми)
В статье есть еще подробности с вариациями (тк ковид мог случаться и между прививками).
Думаю, эта ситуация с защитой от предыдущей инфекции и(или) прививки, может распространяться и на другие, отличные от "исторических", штаммы коронавируса САРС2
Among all 224,007 cases during the study period, 9,505 (4.2%) were reinfections (Table 2). With respect to vaccination status, 17,633 (7.9%) cases overall were NI-NV, but most (142,326; 63.5%) were NI-V2. Conversely, 915 (0.4%) were PI-NV, 347 (0.2%) received any number of vaccine doses before their PI and 8243 (3.7%) after their PI. Among the 5,057 COVID-19 hospitalizations during the study period, 64 (1.3%) were cases with prior PI; whereas, no deaths were identified among cases with prior PI.
Among all 472,432 controls during the study period, PI was identified among 29,712 (6.3%) (Table 2). With respect to vaccination status, 20,997 (4.4%) controls overall were NI-NV but most (230,636; 48.8%) were NI-V3. Conversely, 1,817 (0.4%) were PI-NV, 1,889 (0.4%) received any number of vaccine doses before their PI and 26,006 (5.5%) after their PI.
Among the 9,505 reinfections during the study period, most (78%) had a prior PI genetically-categorized as pre-VOC, likely reflecting a longer period for accrual (notably pre-vaccine roll-out) compared to Alpha, Delta or other/unknown VOC circulation, which instead comprised 7%, 3%, and 12% of PIs, respectively
Without vaccination, prior non-Omicron infection reduced the Omicron re-infection risk by 44% (95%CI:38-48) (Table 3). The more severe the prior infection, the greater the Omicron risk-reduction: 8% (95%CI:17-28), 43% (95%CI:37-49) and 68% (95%CI:51-80) for prior asymptomatic, symptomatic ambulatory or hospitalized infections, also evident among vaccinated individuals. Protection induced by asymptomatic infection alone was evident for the first 6 months (49%;95%CI:8-72) but not thereafter
Prior infection-induced protection varied by VOC status: 29% (95%CI:20-37), 44% (95%CI:26-57) and 67% (95%CI:57-75) for pre-VOC, Alpha and Delta, respectively (Table 4). This, however, may also reflect waning over differential time since variant-specific circulation. Prior infection-induced protection against Omicron decreased from 66% (95%CI:57-73) at 3-5 months post-infection, reflecting the more-proximal Delta period, to 49% (95%CI:32-61) at 6-8 months when Alpha foremost contributed, and 35% (95%CI:21-47) at 9-11 months, remaining <30% thereafter and foremost reflecting the more distant pre-VOC period
VE against Omicron infection was consistently significantly higher among previously-infected vs. non-infected individuals: 65% (95%CI:63-67) vs. 20% (95%CI:16-24) for one dose; 68% (95%CI:67-70) vs. 42% (95%CI:41-44) for two doses; and 83% (95%CI:81-84) vs. 73% (95%CI:72-73) for three doses (Table 3). For the same number of vaccine doses, protection against reinfection was similar whether the prior infection came before, between or after vaccination
Two vaccine doses were significantly less effective than three doses among both previously-infected (68% vs. 83%) and non-infected (42% vs. 73%) individuals, recognizing longer median follow-up time since second vs. third dose among both the previously-infected (158 vs. 27 days) and uninfected (173 vs. 37 days) (not shown). For the same number of doses, the previously-infected were 40-60% better protected against Omicron re-infection than the previously-non-infected
Among the previously-infected, lower VE after one (65%) or two (68%) vs. three doses (83%) may in part be attributed to waning over differential time since vaccination since when standardized for the first 2 months post-vaccination, VE was instead similar at 81%, 82% and 83%, respectively. At 2-5 months post-vaccination, however, corresponding VE was 64%, 67% and 80% and thereafter ranged 60-65% among two-dose recipients
Without vaccination, prior non-Omicron infection reduced the Omicron hospitalization risk by 81% (95%CI:66-89). VE against Omicron hospitalization was consistently significantly higher among previously-infected vs non-infected individuals: 86% (95%CI:77-91) vs. 52% (95%CI:42-61) for one dose; 94% (95%CI:91-96) vs.76% (95%CI:74-78) for two doses; and 97% (95%CI:94-99) vs. 91% (95%CI:91-92) for three doses.
Against hospitalization, VE for two doses was similar to three doses among the previously-infected (94% vs. 97%) but was significantly lower among the previously-uninfected (76% vs. 91%), recognizing longer median follow-up time since second vs. third dose, as per above (Table 3). For the same number of doses, the previously-infected were significantly 70-80% better protected than the previously non-infected Among previously-infected individuals, two-dose VE against Omicron hospitalization was similar at <6 and 6-11 months post-vaccination (95%; 95%CI:92-97 vs. 93%; 95%CI:86-96); whereas, among the previously non-infected, significant decline in two-dose VE was observed (81%; 95%CI:79-83 vs. 73%; 95%CI:71-75, respectively)
Для тех, кто не прививался:
| Время после предыдущего ковида | Эффективность защиты от омикрона |
| 3-5 мес | 66% |
| 9-11 мес | 35% |
| Более 11 мес | менее 30% |
То, на сколько тяжело протекал предыдущий ковид, тоже играет роль. Касательно этого параметра:
| Симптоматичность предыдущего ковида | Эффективность защиты от омикрона |
| Асимптоматичный | 8% |
| Средний | 43% |
| Тяжелый | 68% |
Однако, если кто-то уже болел ковидом, и к тому же привился, это повышает защиту от омикроновой инфекции.
| История привико-ковида | Эффективность защиты от омикроновой инфекции | Эффективность защиты от госпитализации с омикроном |
| 1 доза мРНК вакцины, без предыдущего ковида | 20% | 52% |
| 2 дозы мРНК, без предыдущего ковида | 42% | 76% |
| 3 дозы мРНК, без предыдущего ковида | 73% | 91% |
| 1 ковид, 1 доза вакцины | 65% | 86% |
| 1 ковид, 2 дозы вакцины | 68% | 94% |
| 1 ковид, 3 дозы вакцины | 83% | 97% |
Сам по себе предыдущий ковид защищал непривитых от госпитализации с омикроном на 81%.
Если человек болел ковидом, то его примерно одинаково защищали от госпитализации с омикроновым ковидом что 2, что 3 дозы прививки.
Но в целом, как видно из данных, добавление ковида к истории сталкивания с антигеном через прививки, снижает вероятность последующей болезни, повышая эффективность защиты на 70-80% ( у привитых и к тому же болевших , по сранвению с просто привитыми)
В статье есть еще подробности с вариациями (тк ковид мог случаться и между прививками).
Думаю, эта ситуация с защитой от предыдущей инфекции и(или) прививки, может распространяться и на другие, отличные от "исторических", штаммы коронавируса САРС2
Among all 224,007 cases during the study period, 9,505 (4.2%) were reinfections (Table 2). With respect to vaccination status, 17,633 (7.9%) cases overall were NI-NV, but most (142,326; 63.5%) were NI-V2. Conversely, 915 (0.4%) were PI-NV, 347 (0.2%) received any number of vaccine doses before their PI and 8243 (3.7%) after their PI. Among the 5,057 COVID-19 hospitalizations during the study period, 64 (1.3%) were cases with prior PI; whereas, no deaths were identified among cases with prior PI.
Among all 472,432 controls during the study period, PI was identified among 29,712 (6.3%) (Table 2). With respect to vaccination status, 20,997 (4.4%) controls overall were NI-NV but most (230,636; 48.8%) were NI-V3. Conversely, 1,817 (0.4%) were PI-NV, 1,889 (0.4%) received any number of vaccine doses before their PI and 26,006 (5.5%) after their PI.
Among the 9,505 reinfections during the study period, most (78%) had a prior PI genetically-categorized as pre-VOC, likely reflecting a longer period for accrual (notably pre-vaccine roll-out) compared to Alpha, Delta or other/unknown VOC circulation, which instead comprised 7%, 3%, and 12% of PIs, respectively
Without vaccination, prior non-Omicron infection reduced the Omicron re-infection risk by 44% (95%CI:38-48) (Table 3). The more severe the prior infection, the greater the Omicron risk-reduction: 8% (95%CI:17-28), 43% (95%CI:37-49) and 68% (95%CI:51-80) for prior asymptomatic, symptomatic ambulatory or hospitalized infections, also evident among vaccinated individuals. Protection induced by asymptomatic infection alone was evident for the first 6 months (49%;95%CI:8-72) but not thereafter
Prior infection-induced protection varied by VOC status: 29% (95%CI:20-37), 44% (95%CI:26-57) and 67% (95%CI:57-75) for pre-VOC, Alpha and Delta, respectively (Table 4). This, however, may also reflect waning over differential time since variant-specific circulation. Prior infection-induced protection against Omicron decreased from 66% (95%CI:57-73) at 3-5 months post-infection, reflecting the more-proximal Delta period, to 49% (95%CI:32-61) at 6-8 months when Alpha foremost contributed, and 35% (95%CI:21-47) at 9-11 months, remaining <30% thereafter and foremost reflecting the more distant pre-VOC period
VE against Omicron infection was consistently significantly higher among previously-infected vs. non-infected individuals: 65% (95%CI:63-67) vs. 20% (95%CI:16-24) for one dose; 68% (95%CI:67-70) vs. 42% (95%CI:41-44) for two doses; and 83% (95%CI:81-84) vs. 73% (95%CI:72-73) for three doses (Table 3). For the same number of vaccine doses, protection against reinfection was similar whether the prior infection came before, between or after vaccination
Two vaccine doses were significantly less effective than three doses among both previously-infected (68% vs. 83%) and non-infected (42% vs. 73%) individuals, recognizing longer median follow-up time since second vs. third dose among both the previously-infected (158 vs. 27 days) and uninfected (173 vs. 37 days) (not shown). For the same number of doses, the previously-infected were 40-60% better protected against Omicron re-infection than the previously-non-infected
Among the previously-infected, lower VE after one (65%) or two (68%) vs. three doses (83%) may in part be attributed to waning over differential time since vaccination since when standardized for the first 2 months post-vaccination, VE was instead similar at 81%, 82% and 83%, respectively. At 2-5 months post-vaccination, however, corresponding VE was 64%, 67% and 80% and thereafter ranged 60-65% among two-dose recipients
Without vaccination, prior non-Omicron infection reduced the Omicron hospitalization risk by 81% (95%CI:66-89). VE against Omicron hospitalization was consistently significantly higher among previously-infected vs non-infected individuals: 86% (95%CI:77-91) vs. 52% (95%CI:42-61) for one dose; 94% (95%CI:91-96) vs.76% (95%CI:74-78) for two doses; and 97% (95%CI:94-99) vs. 91% (95%CI:91-92) for three doses.
Against hospitalization, VE for two doses was similar to three doses among the previously-infected (94% vs. 97%) but was significantly lower among the previously-uninfected (76% vs. 91%), recognizing longer median follow-up time since second vs. third dose, as per above (Table 3). For the same number of doses, the previously-infected were significantly 70-80% better protected than the previously non-infected Among previously-infected individuals, two-dose VE against Omicron hospitalization was similar at <6 and 6-11 months post-vaccination (95%; 95%CI:92-97 vs. 93%; 95%CI:86-96); whereas, among the previously non-infected, significant decline in two-dose VE was observed (81%; 95%CI:79-83 vs. 73%; 95%CI:71-75, respectively)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2022-05-01 05:48 am (UTC)https://eugenegp.dreamwidth.org/500037.html
То есть если вам важно именно не умереть, то вакцины мРНК никак не не защищают.
no subject
Date: 2022-05-01 06:15 am (UTC)В том что касается плацебо вс вакцина, именно по клиническим трейлам- то там мало шансов увидеть разницу по смертям от любых причин. оно там все должно быть гораздо ниже или уже на уровне смертности в среднем по популяции.
тк выборки для клинческих трейлов были небольшие, конкретно длz ковидной вакцины, и сами испытания прошли галопом по европам.
т.е, если смотреть, даже сравнивая аденовирусны с мрнк, и с плацебо, в прицнипе оно все там, ну просто "ни о чем".
смертность от всех причин, в год, допустим, в США составляет
1,027.0 deaths per 100,000 population
в статье у них в группе ковидо вакцины (любой причем) приблизительная смертность была 30-90 человек на 100 тыс.
(по мрнк- 31 человек на 38 тыс, и 30 на 37 тыс плацебо, по адено- 16 человек на 60 тыс и 30 человек на 60 тыс, плацебо).
видим- в плацебо группе 1 вакцины смертность в 2.5 раза больеш чем в палцебо группе для другой вакцины. Вау, да? что ж там за смертельное плацебо в 1й группе?
а это все разброс, и только.
те, реальная цифра "смертности от всех причин" в популяции, она (1000+), мы видим на порядок или почти 2 порядка выше 1000+ "средней смертности от всех причин" в выборке для ковида (менее 100, хоть по вакцине, хоть по пацаебо). Конечно она меньше в исследованиях, тк туда не брали совсем уж старых и больных итп.
так что это все в пределах погрешности, и зависит от выборки.
я о том что метод который выбран, никак не соответствует поставленной цели, на его основании ниче не скажешь, кроме чего-то "высосать из пальца".