MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400217375 · doi:10.1101/2024.06.28.24309666

COVID-19 severity and risk of SARS-CoV-2-associated asthma exacerbation by time since booster vaccination: a longitudinal analysis of data from the COVIDENCE UK study

2024· preprint· en· W4400217375 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Giulia Vivaldi, Mohammad Talaei, Paul E Pfeffer, Seif O. Shaheen, Adrian R. Martineau

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAsthma and Lung UKBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCancer Research UKBritish Lung FoundationBarts CharityDSM Nutritional ProductsDiabetes UKUK Research and InnovationArthritis SocietyVasculitis UK
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Booster (rocketry)ExacerbationAsthmaMedicineVaccinationAsthma exacerbationsPandemicSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakLongitudinal dataVirologyDemographyInfectious disease (medical specialty)ImmunologyOutbreakInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In several countries, COVID-19 booster vaccinations are offered annually to priority groups, but many people have not been vaccinated in over a year. We aimed to assess the association between time since booster vaccination and characteristics of breakthrough infection. We also assessed whether incident COVID-19 continued to associate with asthma exacerbations in boosted individuals, and whether risk of COVID-19-associated exacerbation was affected by time since vaccination. Methods COVIDENCE UK is a prospective, longitudinal, population-based study of COVID-19. We included adult participants who had received ≥1 booster vaccination. Time since vaccination was binarised at 6 months or 12 months according to vaccine eligibility subgroup. We used logistic, Cox, and linear regression to obtain adjusted estimates for the association between time since vaccination and breakthrough infection severity, symptom duration, and acute changes to health-related quality of life (measured by the EQ-5D-3L Index). We then assessed the association of incident COVID-19 with asthma exacerbations using multilevel mixed models, by time since vaccination. Results 7391 boosted participants reported a breakthrough infection. Across all eligibility subgroups, greater time since vaccination associated with increased odds of infection requiring bedrest ( vs milder symptoms), with the highest odds for adults aged 65–75 years (1.83 [95% CI 1.51–2.23] when vaccinated >6 months vs ≤6 months prior). However, we observed little evidence of association between time since vaccination and symptom duration. Vaccination >12 months prior ( vs ≤12 months) was associated with a small decrease in EQ-5D-3L Index among participants younger than 65 years (-0.03 points [-0.04 to -0.01]). Among 2100 participants with asthma, incident COVID-19 associated with increased risk of asthma exacerbation, both ≤12 months after vaccination (OR 5.31 [4.36–6.48]) and later (6.06 [3.23–11.38]), with a greater difference in point estimates when specifically considering severe asthma exacerbations (6.82 [4.88–9.54] for ≤12 months vs 10.06 [3.90–25.92] for >12 months). Conclusion Longer time since booster vaccination consistently associates with more severe breakthrough infections, and may potentially increase risk of severe asthma exacerbations. These findings highlight the importance of ensuring those currently eligible receive their booster vaccinations, and the need for research on further vaccinations in people with asthma no longer eligible for boosters.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies→French-language works237,207→