Uptake and impact of COVID-19 vaccination among HIV key populations: a cohort study from Tamil Nadu, India

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

Objective:

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Key Populations (KPs) include Female Sex Workers (FSWs), men who have sex with men (MSM), transgender (TG), and transsexual (TS) persons. This study assessed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake among KPs for HIV in India, adverse events following immunization (AEFI), and breakthrough infections among the vaccinated.

Materials and Methods:

This retrospective cohort study was conducted among 421 KPs enrolled in 41 Targeted Intervention (TI) clusters in 31 districts of the Tamil Nadu State Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) Control Society (TANSACS), India, from June to September 2022. A semi-structured, bilingual (English and Tamil), interviewer-administered questionnaire was used to collect data on socio-demographic characteristics, vaccination status, AEFIs, and breakthrough infections among the KPs under the TIs.

Results:

Among the KPs, 45.4% were FSWs, 37.1% were MSM, 16.2% were TG, and 1.4% were TS persons. Among them, 4.3% had HIV, and 2.9% had syphilis or other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The COVID-19 vaccine uptake rate was 96%. Among the KPs, TG/TS persons had the highest vaccine uptake (98.6%), followed by FSWs (96.3%) and MSM (94.2%). AEFIs were reported by 85.4% of the participants. HIV positive status was significantly associated with the incidence of AEFI. The breakthrough infection rate was 5.4% among the vaccinated participants.

Conclusion:

The COVID-19 vaccine uptake among HIV KPs was high in Tamil Nadu. AEFIs and breakthrough infections among COVID-19 vaccinated HIV KPs may be low, with mild AEFIs.

Related collections

Most cited references 26

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant

Jamie Lopez Bernal, Nick Andrews, Charlotte Gower … (2021)

Background The B.1.617.2 (delta) variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), has contributed to a surge in cases in India and has now been detected across the globe, including a notable increase in cases in the United Kingdom. The effectiveness of the BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccines against this variant has been unclear. Methods We used a test-negative case–control design to estimate the effectiveness of vaccination against symptomatic disease caused by the delta variant or the predominant strain (B.1.1.7, or alpha variant) over the period that the delta variant began circulating. Variants were identified with the use of sequencing and on the basis of the spike ( S ) gene status. Data on all symptomatic sequenced cases of Covid-19 in England were used to estimate the proportion of cases with either variant according to the patients’ vaccination status. Results Effectiveness after one dose of vaccine (BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) was notably lower among persons with the delta variant (30.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 25.2 to 35.7) than among those with the alpha variant (48.7%; 95% CI, 45.5 to 51.7); the results were similar for both vaccines. With the BNT162b2 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 93.7% (95% CI, 91.6 to 95.3) among persons with the alpha variant and 88.0% (95% CI, 85.3 to 90.1) among those with the delta variant. With the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine, the effectiveness of two doses was 74.5% (95% CI, 68.4 to 79.4) among persons with the alpha variant and 67.0% (95% CI, 61.3 to 71.8) among those with the delta variant. Conclusions Only modest differences in vaccine effectiveness were noted with the delta variant as compared with the alpha variant after the receipt of two vaccine doses. Absolute differences in vaccine effectiveness were more marked after the receipt of the first dose. This finding would support efforts to maximize vaccine uptake with two doses among vulnerable populations. (Funded by Public Health England.)

0 comments Cited 1463 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study

Oliver J Watson, Gregory Barnsley, Jaspreet Toor … (2022)

Background The first COVID-19 vaccine outside a clinical trial setting was administered on Dec 8, 2020. To ensure global vaccine equity, vaccine targets were set by the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Facility and WHO. However, due to vaccine shortfalls, these targets were not achieved by the end of 2021. We aimed to quantify the global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination programmes. Methods A mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission and vaccination was separately fit to reported COVID-19 mortality and all-cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories. The impact of COVID-19 vaccination programmes was determined by estimating the additional lives lost if no vaccines had been distributed. We also estimated the additional deaths that would have been averted had the vaccination coverage targets of 20% set by COVAX and 40% set by WHO been achieved by the end of 2021. Findings Based on official reported COVID-19 deaths, we estimated that vaccinations prevented 14·4 million (95% credible interval [Crl] 13·7–15·9) deaths from COVID-19 in 185 countries and territories between Dec 8, 2020, and Dec 8, 2021. This estimate rose to 19·8 million (95% Crl 19·1–20·4) deaths from COVID-19 averted when we used excess deaths as an estimate of the true extent of the pandemic, representing a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19·8 million of 31·4 million) during the first year of COVID-19 vaccination. In COVAX Advance Market Commitment countries, we estimated that 41% of excess mortality (7·4 million [95% Crl 6·8–7·7] of 17·9 million deaths) was averted. In low-income countries, we estimated that an additional 45% (95% CrI 42–49) of deaths could have been averted had the 20% vaccination coverage target set by COVAX been met by each country, and that an additional 111% (105–118) of deaths could have been averted had the 40% target set by WHO been met by each country by the end of 2021. Interpretation COVID-19 vaccination has substantially altered the course of the pandemic, saving tens of millions of lives globally. However, inadequate access to vaccines in low-income countries has limited the impact in these settings, reinforcing the need for global vaccine equity and coverage. Funding Schmidt Science Fellowship in partnership with the Rhodes Trust; WHO; UK Medical Research Council; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; National Institute for Health Research; and Community Jameel.

0 comments Cited 621 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in HIV infection: a single-arm substudy of a phase 2/3 clinical trial

John Frater, Katie Ewer, Ane Ogbe … (2021)

Background Data on vaccine immunogenicity against SARS-CoV-2 are needed for the 40 million people globally living with HIV who might have less functional immunity and more associated comorbidities than the general population. We aimed to explore safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine in people with HIV. Methods In this single-arm open-label vaccination substudy within the protocol of the larger phase 2/3 trial COV002, adults aged 18–55 years with HIV were enrolled at two HIV clinics in London, UK. Eligible participants were required to be on antiretroviral therapy (ART), with undetectable plasma HIV viral loads (<50 copies per mL), and CD4 counts of more than 350 cells per μL. A prime-boost regimen of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, with two doses was given 4–6 weeks apart. The primary outcomes for this substudy were safety and reactogenicity of the vaccine, as determined by serious adverse events and solicited local and systemic reactions. Humoral responses were measured by anti-spike IgG ELISA and antibody-mediated live virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated immune responses were measured by ex-vivo IFN-γ enzyme-linked immunospot assay (ELISpot) and T-cell proliferation. All outcomes were compared with an HIV-uninfected group from the main COV002 study within the same age group and dosing strategy and are reported until day 56 after prime vaccination. Outcomes were analysed in all participants who received both doses and with available samples. The COV002 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04400838, and is ongoing. Findings Between Nov 5 and Nov 24, 2020, 54 participants with HIV (all male, median age 42·5 years [IQR 37·2–49·8]) were enrolled and received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Median CD4 count at enrolment was 694·0 cells per μL (IQR 573·5–859·5). No serious adverse events occurred. Local and systemic reactions occurring during the first 7 days after prime vaccination included pain at the injection site (26 [49%] of 53 participants with available data), fatigue (25 [47%]), headache (25 [47%]), malaise (18 [34%]), chills (12 [23%]), muscle ache (19 [36%]), joint pain (five [9%]), and nausea (four [8%]), the frequencies of which were similar to the HIV-negative participants. Anti-spike IgG responses by ELISA peaked at day 42 (median 1440 ELISA units [EUs; IQR 704–2728]; n=50) and were sustained until day 56 (median 941 EUs [531–1445]; n=49). We found no correlation between the magnitude of the anti-spike IgG response at day 56 and CD4 cell count (p=0·93) or age (p=0·48). ELISpot and T-cell proliferative responses peaked at day 14 and 28 after prime dose and were sustained to day 56. Compared with participants without HIV, we found no difference in magnitude or persistence of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific humoral or cellular responses (p>0·05 for all analyses). Interpretation In this study of people with HIV, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 was safe and immunogenic, supporting vaccination for those well controlled on ART. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

0 comments Cited 136 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Rural Med

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Rural Med

Journal ID (publisher-id): JRM

Title: Journal of Rural Medicine : JRM

Publisher: The Japanese Association of Rural Medicine

ISSN (Print): 1880-487X

ISSN (Electronic): 1880-4888

Publication date (Electronic): 01 October 2023

Publication date (Print): October 2023

Volume: 18

Issue: 4

Pages: 215-221

Affiliations

[1 ]Department of Community Medicine, Government Dindigul Medical College, India

[2 ]Department of Community Medicine, Government Vellore Medical College, India

[3 ]Targeted Intervention and Strategic Information Management Unit, Tamil Nadu AIDS Control Society, India

[4 ]Department of Community Medicine, ESIC Medical College & Hospital, Hyderabad, India

Author notes

^aEqually contributed and first authors

Correspondence: Aravind P Gandhi, Department of Community Medicine, ESIC Medical College & Hospital, Sanath Nagar, Hyderabad, India. E-mail: aravindsocialdoc@ 123456gmail.com

Article

Publisher ID: 2023-008

DOI: 10.2185/jrm.2023-008

PMC ID: 10579930

PubMed ID: 37854511

SO-VID: 86d74367-c9d5-4815-9b0a-fa0e0de6f6ee

License:

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd) License. (CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ )

History

Date received : 07 April 2023

Date accepted : 12 June 2023

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

Most referenced authors 470

See all reference authors

Uptake and impact of COVID-19 vaccination among HIV key populations: a cohort study from Tamil Nadu, India

Read this article at

Abstract

Objective:

Materials and Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 26

Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant

Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study

Safety and immunogenicity of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in HIV infection: a single-arm substudy of a phase 2/3 clinical trial

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 695

Most referenced authors 470