• J Gen Intern Med · Jun 2023

    The Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in the Elderly: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

    • Xiu Hong Yang, Wen Jing Bao, Hua Zhang, Shun Kun Fu, and Hui Min Jin.
    • Division of Nephrology, Shanghai Pudong Hospital, Fudan University, Pudong Medical Center, Gong Wei Road, Shanghai, China.
    • J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Jun 2: 191-9.

    BackgroundGiven the reduced immune response to vaccines in older populations, this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccinations and its impact on breakthrough infection, hospital admission, and mortality in the elderly.MethodsWe carried out a systemic review and meta-analysis where MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials were queried to identify relevant literature. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized trials, prospective, observational cohort, and case-control studies assessing breakthrough infection, hospital admission, and mortality after coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in the elderly (≥ 60 years old).ResultsOverall, 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the unvaccinated group, the vaccinated group showed a decreased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection after 28-34 (relative risk [RR] = 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.49) and 35-60 days (RR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.62). There was a step-wise increase in efficacy with additional doses with the two-dose group experiencing decreased risk of breakthrough infection (RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.32-0.42), hospital admissions (RR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.14-0.45), disease severity (RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.20-0.70), and mortality (RR = 0.21, 95% CI 0.14-0.32) compared with those receiving one or no doses. Similarly three-dose and four-dose vaccine groups also showed a decreased risk of breakthrough infection (3-dose: RR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.10-0.20; 4-dose RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.4-0.53), hospital admissions (3-dose: RR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.07-0.17; 4-dose: RR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.32-0.55), and all-cause mortality (3-dose: RR = 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.48; 4-dose: RR = 0.48, 95% CI 0.28-0.84) Subgroup analysis found that protection against mortality for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated groups was similar by age (60-79 years: RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.74; ≥ 80 years: RR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.98) and gender (female: RR = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.50-0.87, male: (RR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76), and comorbid cardiovascular disease (CVD) (RR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.92) or diabetes (DM) (RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.89.ConclusionsOur pooled results showed that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines administered to the elderly is effective in preventing prevent breakthrough infection, hospitalization, severity, and death. What's more, increasing number of vaccine doses is becoming increasingly effective.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…