For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
19
views
10
references
 Top references
cited by
23
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      350
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC): A prospective cohort study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Symptoms of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC) may improve following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. However few prospective data that also explore the underlying biological mechanism are available. We assessed the effect of vaccination on symptomatology of participants with PASC, and compared antibody dynamics between those with and without PASC.

          Methods

          RECoVERED is a prospective cohort study of adult patients with mild to critical COVID-19, enrolled from illness onset. Among participants with PASC, vaccinated participants were exact-matched 1:1 on age, sex, obesity status and time since illness onset to unvaccinated participants. Between matched pairs, we compared the monthly mean numbers of symptoms over a 3-month follow-up period, and, using exact logistic regression, the proportion of participants who fully recovered from PASC. Finally, we assessed the association between PACS status and rate of decay of spike- and RBD-binding IgG titers up to 9 months after illness onset using Bayesian hierarchical linear regression.

          Findings

          Of 349 enrolled participants, 316 (90.5%) had ≥3 months of follow-up, of whom 186 (58.9%) developed PASC. Among 36 matched pairs with PASC, the mean number of symptoms reported each month during 3 months of follow-up were comparable between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Odds of full recovery from PASC also did not differ between matched pairs (OR 1.57 [95%CI 0.46-5.84]) within 3 months after the matched time-point. The median half-life of spike- and RBD-binding IgG levels were, in days (95%CrI), 233 (183-324) and 181 (147-230) among participants with PASC, and 170 (125-252) and 144 (113-196) among those without PASC, respectively.

          Interpretation

          Our study found no strong evidence to suggest that vaccination improves symptoms of PASC. This was corroborated by comparable spike- and RBD-binding IgG waning trajectories between those with and without PASC, refuting any immunological basis for a therapeutic effect of vaccination on PASC.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine

          Fernando P Polack, Stephen J. Thomas, Nicholas R.E. Kitchin … (2023)
          Abstract Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the resulting coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) have afflicted tens of millions of people in a worldwide pandemic. Safe and effective vaccines are needed urgently. Methods In an ongoing multinational, placebo-controlled, observer-blinded, pivotal efficacy trial, we randomly assigned persons 16 years of age or older in a 1:1 ratio to receive two doses, 21 days apart, of either placebo or the BNT162b2 vaccine candidate (30 μg per dose). BNT162b2 is a lipid nanoparticle–formulated, nucleoside-modified RNA vaccine that encodes a prefusion stabilized, membrane-anchored SARS-CoV-2 full-length spike protein. The primary end points were efficacy of the vaccine against laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 and safety. Results A total of 43,548 participants underwent randomization, of whom 43,448 received injections: 21,720 with BNT162b2 and 21,728 with placebo. There were 8 cases of Covid-19 with onset at least 7 days after the second dose among participants assigned to receive BNT162b2 and 162 cases among those assigned to placebo; BNT162b2 was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19 (95% credible interval, 90.3 to 97.6). Similar vaccine efficacy (generally 90 to 100%) was observed across subgroups defined by age, sex, race, ethnicity, baseline body-mass index, and the presence of coexisting conditions. Among 10 cases of severe Covid-19 with onset after the first dose, 9 occurred in placebo recipients and 1 in a BNT162b2 recipient. The safety profile of BNT162b2 was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate pain at the injection site, fatigue, and headache. The incidence of serious adverse events was low and was similar in the vaccine and placebo groups. Conclusions A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines. (Funded by BioNTech and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04368728.)
          Article 0 comments Cited 7106 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Characterising long COVID: a living systematic review

            Melina Michelen, Lakshmi Manoharan, Natalie Elkheir … (2021)
            Background While it is now apparent clinical sequelae (long COVID) may persist after acute COVID-19, their nature, frequency and aetiology are poorly characterised. This study aims to regularly synthesise evidence on long COVID characteristics, to help inform clinical management, rehabilitation strategies and interventional studies to improve long-term outcomes. Methods A living systematic review. Medline, CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (Ovid), WHO Global Research on COVID-19 database, LitCovid and Google Scholar were searched till 17 March 2021. Studies including at least 100 people with confirmed or clinically suspected COVID-19 at 12 weeks or more post onset were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the tool produced by Hoy et al . Results were analysed using descriptive statistics and meta-analyses to estimate prevalence. Results A total of 39 studies were included: 32 cohort, 6 cross-sectional and 1 case–control. Most showed high or moderate risk of bias. None were set in low-income countries and few included children. Studies reported on 10 951 people (48% female) in 12 countries. Most included previously hospitalised people (78%, 8520/10 951). The longest mean follow-up time was 221.7 (SD: 10.9) days post COVID-19 onset. Over 60 physical and psychological signs and symptoms with wide prevalence were reported, most commonly weakness (41%; 95% CI 25% to 59%), general malaise (33%; 95% CI 15% to 57%), fatigue (31%; 95% CI 24% to 39%), concentration impairment (26%; 95% CI 21% to 32%) and breathlessness (25%; 95% CI 18% to 34%). 37% (95% CI 18% to 60%) of patients reported reduced quality of life; 26% (10/39) of studies presented evidence of reduced pulmonary function. Conclusion Long COVID is a complex condition with prolonged heterogeneous symptoms. The nature of studies precludes a precise case definition or risk evaluation. There is an urgent need for prospective, robust, standardised, controlled studies into aetiology, risk factors and biomarkers to characterise long COVID in different at-risk populations and settings. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020211131.
            Article 0 comments Cited 359 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching

              S. M. Iacus, Melony King, G. Porro (2012)
              Article 0 comments Cited 352 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Vaccine
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Vaccine
                Title: Vaccine
                Publisher: Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                ISSN (Print): 0264-410X
                ISSN (Electronic): 1873-2518
                Publication date PMC-release: 7 June 2022
                Publication date (Electronic): 7 June 2022
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [b ]Department of Medical Microbiology & Infection Prevention, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [c ]Stichting HIV Monitoring, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [d ]Department of Infectious Diseases, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [e ]Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [f ]Faculty of Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                [g ]Department of Experimental Immunology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding authors at: Nieuwe Achtergracht 100, 1018 XT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
                [1]

                these authors contributed equally.

                [**]

                Listed under acknowledgements.

                Article
                Publisher Item ID: S0264-410X(22)00748-4
                DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.05.090
                PMC ID: 9170535
                PubMed ID: 35725782
                SO-VID: 5422cc5a-83c1-420c-a647-2dbdc46473be
                Copyright © © 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                License:

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                Date received : 7 March 2022
                Date revision received : 25 May 2022
                Date accepted : 31 May 2022
                Categories
                Subject: Article

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content350

                See all similar

                Cited by23

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors408

                See all reference authors