ArticleBMJ public health2025
Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 outcomes in immune-disordered people during the Omicron era: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 outcomes in immune-disordered people during the Omicron era: a prospective cohort study.BMJ public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Immune-deficient/disordered people (IDP) elicit a less robust immune response to COVID-19 vaccination than the general US population. Despite millions of IDP at presumed elevated risk, few population-level studies of IDP have been conducted in the Omicron era to evaluate breakthrough infection-related outcomes. Methods: We followed a prospective cohort of 219 IDP and 63 healthy volunteers (HV) in the USA from April 2021 (Alpha variant peak) to July 2023 (Omicron XBB variant peak). IDP had a primary or secondary immune disorder. All participants were≥3 years old and received COVID-19 vaccines external to this study. We quantified anti-spike IgG titre levels by ELISA, measured breakthroughs via participant reports and laboratory tests on saliva samples, compared breakthrough incidence among HV and IDP, assessed infection complications (persistent infections, reinfections and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC)) and used surveys to capture COVID-19 symptoms and preventive attitudes/behaviours. Results: Among IDP, the incidence of initial breakthrough infection was 8.8 (95% CI 4.5 to 62.5) times higher during than before the Omicron era. There were 88 initial breakthrough infections among IDP (incidence rate 23.7/100 person-years) and 28 among HV (27.3/100) throughout the study period. While COVID-19 symptoms were generally mild, five participants, all IDP, were hospitalised. In traditional analyses and an emulated trial, the quantity of anti-spike IgG 1 month after participants' most recent pre-infection vaccination was not associated with breakthrough. HV and IDP frequently practiced infection-limiting behaviours, but IDP were more likely to continue such behaviours after vaccination. IDP experienced persistent infections, PASC and reinfections more commonly than HV. Conclusions: Breakthrough rates in IDP were largely equivalent to HV. However, IDP experienced a slightly higher frequency of symptoms, hospitalisations, infection persistence, PASC and reinfections than HV. Further study is needed to elucidate the immunological mechanisms that increase the risks of such complications in IDP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.