Waning effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in older adults: a rapid review

  1. Etsuro Nanishi
  2. Ofer Levy
  3. Al Ozonoff

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1080/21645515.2022.2045857
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.01.15.22269364: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Ethicsnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    We conducted a PubMed search on 04 November 2021 for English-language articles, using combinations of the search terms of “SARS-CoV-2”, “COVID-19”, “vaccine”, “effectiveness”, “efficacy”, “older adults”, and “elder”.
    PubMed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    There are several limitations to our review. First, since there was little to no information regarding the dominant SARS-CoV-2 strain among the studies, circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains were not accounted for in our review. mRNA vaccine VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection is decreasing with increasing report of breakthrough infections 4, 5, 14. This is likely due to both waning immunity occurring months after vaccinations, and an emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants which become predominant during the study period. Several SARS-CoV-2 variants harboring mutations are associated with decreased mRNA VE against infection and/or severe COVID-19 22. Therefore, changes in circulating SARS-CoV-2 strains might have affected VE in the “middle” and “late” studies. Second, only U.S.-based studies were included. Our review focused on these studies for several reasons: 1) the initiation and progression of vaccination campaigns varied between countries; 2) some countries applied a modified vaccine regimen (e.g. prolonged interval between 1st and 2nd dose); and 3) the predominant circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain differs between countries. Future reviews should broaden scope to include studies conducted outside the U.S. Third, definition of VE (e.g. 7 vs 14 days after second dose, hospitalization vs death) and study design (e.g. test-negative, cohort registry) varied between the studies. Due to the above limitations, we did not pool VE data nor perform meta-analysis to avoid potential bias. Fourth, we onl...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2022.01.15.22269364 on medRxiv