Want to take quizzes and track your credits?
Did the effectiveness of the mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, and JNJ-78436735 COVID-19 vaccines change among US-based military personnel before and during the predominance of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) variant?
In this case-control study of 441 379 active US military personnel, overall COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness decreased by 19% from the pre-Delta to the Delta period. JNJ-78436735 had the lowest overall vaccine effectiveness in the pre-Delta (81.8%) and Delta (38.3%) periods.
In this study, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness decreased among US-based military personnel during the time of SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant predominance, especially for recipients of the JNJ-78436735 vaccine; this finding supports the use of booster doses to increase effectiveness.
No studies to date have evaluated the effectiveness of 3 COVID-19 vaccines in the US military population, especially during the circulation of the SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) variant.
To estimate the effectiveness of the mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, and JNJ-78436735 vaccines among US military personnel before and during the predominance of the Delta variant in the US.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This case-control study was conducted among all unvaccinated and fully vaccinated US military personnel who had a documented SARS-CoV-2 test performed in the US between January 1 and September 24, 2021. Individuals were identified using Department of Defense (DOD) electronic medical, laboratory, and surveillance databases. The pre-Delta period was defined as January 1 to May 31, 2021, and the Delta period as June 19 to September 24, 2021. Case individuals were defined by a positive polymerase chain reaction SARS-CoV-2 test result or a positive antigen test result with symptoms. Control individuals had at least 1 negative SARS-CoV-2 test result.
COVID-19 vaccination with the mRNA-1273, BNT162b2, or JNJ-78436735 vaccine, assessed from DOD electronic vaccination records.
Main Outcomes and Measures
COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness overall, by vaccine type, and by outcome stratified by the pre-Delta and Delta periods in the US. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as 100 × (1 − odds ratio) in a logistic regression model with adjustment for potential confounders.
The cohort included 441 379 individuals, with 290 256 in the pre-Delta period (236 555 [81%] male; median age, 25 years [range, 17-68 years]) and 151 123 in the Delta period (120 536 [80%] male; median age, 26 years [range, 17-70 years]). Adjusted vaccine effectiveness of all vaccines was significantly higher during the pre-Delta period (89.2%; 95% CI, 88.1%-90.1%) compared with the Delta period (70.2%; 95% CI, 69.3%-71.1%) for all outcomes, an overall decrease of 19%. mRNA-1273 vaccine effectiveness was highest in the pre-Delta (93.5%; 95% CI, 91.9%-94.7%) and Delta (79.4%; 95% CI, 78.3%-80.4%) periods for all outcomes, whereas the JNJ-78436735 vaccine had the lowest effectiveness during the pre-Delta (81.8%; 95% CI, 74.2%- 87.1%) and Delta (38.3%; 95% CI, 34.5%-41.9%) periods. Effectiveness for all vaccines during both periods was higher for symptomatic infection and hospitalization among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Conclusions and Relevance
In this case-control study, among US military personnel, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness was significantly lower during the period when the Delta variant predominated compared with the period before Delta variant predominance; this was especially true for the JNJ-78436735 vaccine. These findings were confounded by time since vaccination; this and the change in effectiveness support the need for booster doses and continued evaluation of vaccine effectiveness as new variants of SARS-CoV-2 emerge.
Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates
JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC
CME Disclosure Statement: Unless noted, all individuals in control of content reported no relevant financial relationships. If applicable, all relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.
Accepted for Publication: March 2, 2022.
Published: April 20, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.8071
Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2022 Eick-Cost AA et al. JAMA Network Open.
Corresponding Author: Angelia A. Eick-Cost, PhD, Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, Defense Health Agency, 11800 Tech Rd, Ste 220, Silver Spring, MD 20904 (Angelia.firstname.lastname@example.org).
Author Contributions: Drs Eick-Cost and Ying had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: Eick-Cost, Wells.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Eick-Cost, Ying.
Drafting of the manuscript: Eick-Cost.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
Statistical analysis: Eick-Cost, Ying.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Eick-Cost, Wells.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
Additional Contributions: Ms Zheng Hu, MS, Defense Health Agency, Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division, provided biostatistics guidance with the analysis and received no compensation beyond her regular salary.
You currently have no searches saved.
You currently have no courses saved.