Comparative Effectiveness of BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S for the Prevention of COVID-19 among Dialysis Patients

  1. Steven M. Brunelli
  2. Scott Sibbel
  3. Steph Karpinski
  4. Gilbert Marlowe
  5. Adam G. Walker
  6. Jeffrey Giullian
  7. David Van Wyck
  8. Tara Kelley
  9. Rachael Lazar
  10. Meredith L. Zywno
  11. Jeffrey J. Connaire
  12. Amy Young
  13. Francesca Tentori
1 evaluations Published on
Read the full article Related papers
This article on Sciety

Abstract

Background

mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been shown to be highly effective among dialysis patients. Because individual vaccines may be differentially available or acceptable to patients, it is important to understand comparative effectiveness of other vaccines, such those based on adeno-virus technologies.

Methods

This retrospective study compared the clinical effectiveness of Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson and Johnson) to BNT162b2 among dialysis patients. Patients initiating BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) were matched 1:1 to Ad26.COV2.S recipients based on age, race, US state of residence, calendar week of first vaccine receipt, and history of COVID-19. The primary outcome was the comparative rate of COVID-19 considered over 3 follow-up intervals: weeks 1-3, 4-6, and ≥ 7 post-vaccination. In a subset of consented Ad26.COV2.S patients, blood samples were collected ≥28 days after vaccination and anti-SARS-Cov-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies were measured.

Results

There were 2659 matched pairs of patients who received a first dose of each vaccine. During weeks 1-3, incidence rates were 1.13 vs 1.39 per 1000 patient-weeks (pt-wks) for BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S recipients, respectively (incident rate difference [IRD]: 0.25; 95% CI: -0.90, 1.36). During weeks 4-6, incidence rates were 0.78 vs 0.39 per 1000 pt-wks for BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S recipients, respectively (IRD: -0.39; 95% CI: -1.16, 0.38). After week 7, incidence rates were 1.29 vs 1.39 per 1000 pt-wks for BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S recipients, respectively (IRD: 0.10; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.55). Results were similar when considering only patients without a history of COVID-19 and among matched pairs in which BNT162b2 recipients completed the 2-dose regimen. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 59.4% (95% CI: 53.0%-65.5%) of Ad26.COV2.S patients.

Conclusion

In a large real-world cohort of dialysis patients, no difference was detected in the clinical effectiveness of BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S, despite an inconsistent antibody response to the latter. These data support the use of either agent in ongoing vaccination efforts in this population.

Related articles

Related articles are currently not available for this article.