Initial protection against Omicron in children and adolescents by BNT162b2

  1. Ofra Amir
  2. Yair Goldberg
  3. Micha Mandel
  4. Yinon M. Bar-On
  5. Omri Bodenheimer
  6. Laurence Freedman
  7. Nachman Ash
  8. Sharon Alroy-Preis
  9. Amit Huppert
  10. Ron Milo

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) 2-dose vaccine for children and the BNT162b2 3rd dose for adolescents were approved shortly before the Omicron outbreak in Israel. The effects of these vaccines on the rates of Omicron confirmed infection are not yet clear.

METHODS

We extracted data for the Omicron-dominated (sub-lineage BA.1) period December 26, 2021 through January 8, 2022. We compared rates of confirmed Covid-19 infection between children 5-10 years old 14-35 days after receiving the 2nd dose to an internal control group of children 3-7 days after receiving the 1st dose (when the vaccine is not yet effective). Similarly, we compared confirmed infection rates in adolescents 12-15 years old 14-60 days after receiving a booster dose to an internal control group of adolescents 3-7 days after receiving the booster dose. We used Poisson regression, adjusting for age, sex, socioeconomic status, calendar week, and exposure.

RESULTS

In the 5-10 age group, the estimated rate of confirmed infection was 2.3 fold (95% CI, 2.0 to 2.5) lower in the 2nd dose group than in the internal control group. In adolescents, the third dose decreased confirmed infection rates by 3.3-fold (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.0).

CONCLUSIONS

A recent 2-dose BNT162b2 vaccination in children and a recent booster dose in adolescents reduced the rate of confirmed infection compared to the respective internal control groups. Future studies are needed to assess the duration of this protection and protection against other outcomes such as PIMS and long-COVID.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.05.22.22275323: (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

    No key resources detected.

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    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.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2022.05.22.22275323v1 on medRxiv