Author Interviews, Brigham & Women's - Harvard, COVID -19 Coronavirus, NEJM, Vaccine Studies / 02.12.2021
Veterans Study Compares Pfizer with Moderna Vaccines
MedicalResearch.com Interview with:
[caption id="attachment_58438" align="alignleft" width="200"]
Dr. Dickerman[/caption]
Dr. Barbra Dickerman, PhD
CAUSALab investigator and instructor
Department of Epidemiology
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Early randomized trials showed that the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines were both remarkably effective at preventing symptomatic disease, when comparing each vaccine with no vaccine. However, head-to-head comparisons of these vaccines have been lacking, leaving open the question of which vaccine is more effective.
In this study, we analyzed the VA’s high-quality databases in a way that emulated the design of the hypothetical trial that would have answered this question. Specifically, we used the findings from the original trials to benchmark our methods and then extended them to provide novel evidence for the comparative effectiveness of these two vaccines in a real-world setting and across diverse subgroups and different time periods.
Dr. Dickerman[/caption]
Dr. Barbra Dickerman, PhD
CAUSALab investigator and instructor
Department of Epidemiology
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Early randomized trials showed that the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines were both remarkably effective at preventing symptomatic disease, when comparing each vaccine with no vaccine. However, head-to-head comparisons of these vaccines have been lacking, leaving open the question of which vaccine is more effective.
In this study, we analyzed the VA’s high-quality databases in a way that emulated the design of the hypothetical trial that would have answered this question. Specifically, we used the findings from the original trials to benchmark our methods and then extended them to provide novel evidence for the comparative effectiveness of these two vaccines in a real-world setting and across diverse subgroups and different time periods.
Dr. Woodruff[/caption]
Carina M. Woodruff, MD
Department of Dermatolog
University of California, San Francisco
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study? What are the main findings?
Response: Rigorous hand hygiene has been an important component of the CDC's COVID-19 guidelines. With millions of Americans now using hand sanitizers regularly, we are seeing many more cases of hand dermatitis. Our study evaluated the key product features and most common allergens in the top-reviewed, commercial hand sanitizers sold by major US retailers.
We found that the most common potential allergens were tocopherol, fragrance, propylene glycol and phenoxyethanol. Our study also showed that nearly 1 in 5 marketing claims on these products was misleading. For example, 70% of sanitizers with the marketing claim "hypoallergenic" included at least one common allergen in its formulation.
Dr. Elwy[/caption]
Rani Elwy, PhD
Bridge Quality Enhancement Research Initiative Program, Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research,
VA Bedford Healthcare System
Bedford, Massachusetts
Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Alpert Medical School
Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: The VA operates a very robust, embedded quality improvement and implementation science program, of which our team is involved. As the VA was one of the first US healthcare systems to rollout COVID-19 vaccination programs, we were asked to evaluate these efforts in real-time, to provide input to VA healthcare leaders on what was going well and what could be improved. This survey reported in JAMA Network Open is one of the quality improvement efforts we engaged in.
Lara van der Schoot[/caption]
Lara van der Schoot
MD, PhD candidate
Department of Dermatology
Radboud University Medical Center
Nijmegen, The Netherlands
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Psoriasis is a chronic, immune mediated skin disease for which effective targeted biological agents have become available the past years. Inherent to their immunomodulatory mechanism of action, biologics might increase infections risk. We know from clinical trial data that respiratory tract infections are among the most common adverse events during biologic treatment, but real-world data is sparse. Regarding the risk of serious infections among biologic users, mostly defined as infections requiring hospitalization, previous studies provided different results and there is limited comparative data for the newer biologics available.
The COVID-19 pandemic turned attention to the risk of infections among biologic users, especially for respiratory tract infections, as they might relate to susceptibility for viral respiratory tract infections such as COVID-19.
In our study, the primary aim was to determine the risk of respiratory tract infections among real-world psoriasis patients treated with biologics, including the newer IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. The secondary aim was to assess risk of serious infections in this cohort. Additionally, rates of SARS-CoV-2 infections were assessed.

Dr. Blumenthal[/caption]
Kimberly G. Blumenthal, MD, MSc
Massachusetts General Hospital
The Mongan Institute
Boston, MA 02114
[caption id="attachment_57828" align="alignleft" width="100"]
Dr. Krantz[/caption]
Matthew S. Krantz, MD
Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine
Department of Medicine,
Vanderbilt University Medical Center,
Nashville, Tennessee
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: During the initial COVID-19 vaccine campaign with healthcare workers in December 2020, there was an unexpected higher than anticipated rate of immediate allergic reactions after Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines. This prompted both patient and provider concerns, particularly in those with underlying allergic histories, on the associated risks for immediate allergic reactions with the mRNA vaccines.
Because of the significantly improved effectiveness of two doses of an mRNA vaccine compared to one dose, it was important to determine if those who experienced immediate allergic reaction symptoms after their first dose could go on to tolerate a second dose safely.
Dr. Correa[/caption]
Andres F. Correa, MD
Assistant Professor
Department of Surgical Oncology, and
[caption id="attachment_57815" align="alignleft" width="150"]
Dr. Bernstein[/caption]
Adrien Bernstein, MD
Second Year Urologic Oncology Fellow
Fox Chase Cancer Center
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Unfortunately, it has been well-established that historically Black Americans experience increased cancer specific mortality compared to white patients. In prostate cancer specifically studies have shown that when access to care is equitable this gap resolves. This suggests that biological factors are not driving these differences but rather the result of the complex interplay of social determinants and systemic inequities in our healthcare system.
Early in the pandemic, multiple studies demonstrated that minority communities disproportionately shouldered poor COVID-19 outcomes. On March 13th 2020, the American College of Surgeons recommended against elective procedures; however, the definition of an elective oncologic case was left to the discretion of the provider. As prostate cancer treatment can be safely deferred up to a year follow diagnosis, management of prostate cancer during the initial lockdown period of the COVID-19 Pandemic provided a useful analysis of the differential restrictions placed on non-emergent health care during the Pandemic.
Dr. Els Broens[/caption]
Els M. Broens DVM, PhD, Dipl. ECVM, EBVS
European Veteirnary Specialist in Veterinary Microbiology
Associate Professor / Director VMDC
Department Biomolecular Health Sciences (Clinical Infectiology)
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine | Utrecht University
MedicalResearch.com: What is the background for this study?
Response: Several events have demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 can infect animals, felines and mustelids in particular. In companion animals these are currently considered to be incidents with a negligible risk for public health since the main force of the pandemic is transmission between humans. However, it is urgent to understand the potential risk of animal infections for public health in the later stages of the pandemic when SARS-CoV-2 transmission between humans is greatly reduced and a virus reservoir in animals could become more important.
Incidental cases have shown that COVID-19 positive owners can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to their dog or cat. The close contact between owners and their dogs and cats and the interaction between dogs and cats from different households raises questions about the risk for pets to contract the disease and also about role of these animals in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.