New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Vaccines Remain Effective against BA.2, but Protection from Infection Wanes over Time

Such protection declines within months of the mRNA COVID vaccines’ third dose. Yet the vaccines continue to ward off severe disease

SARS-CoV-2 virus particle detail

Transmission electron micrograph of a SARS-CoV-2 virus particle (UK B.1.1.7 variant), isolated from a patient sample and cultivated in cell culture.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The Omicron subvariant BA.2 is replacing its sister version, BA.1, as the dominant form of SARS-CoV-2 in many countries, which has led scientists to wonder whether the COVID-19 pandemic is about to throw these regions into disarray yet again. But a study published on 13 March shows that mRNA vaccines offer a similar degree of protection against the two strains—although protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic disease wanes within months of a third dose.

The study, published on the preprint server medRxiv, has not yet been peer reviewed.

Researchers have known for months that the BA.1 subvariant evades much of the protection that mRNA vaccines offer against mild-to-moderate disease. Scientists quickly realized that BA.2 spreads more rapidly than BA.1, but it wasn’t immediately clear whether the newcomer would also prove to be more adept at evading vaccines.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“BA.2 could be even worse than BA.1—this was the fear,” says Laith Abu-Raddad, an infectious-diseases epidemiologist at Weill Cornell Medicine–Qatar in Doha and a co-author of the study.

Abu-Raddad and his colleagues performed a massive observational study using vaccination records and SARS-CoV-2 test results from Qatar’s health-care system. They found that Qatari residents who received two doses of either the Pfizer–BioNTech or Moderna mRNA-based vaccine enjoyed several months of substantial protection against symptomatic disease caused by either BA.1 or BA.2. But protection waned to around 10% after only 4–6 months, meaning that the vaccines prevented only 10% of the cases that would have occurred if all of the individuals had been unvaccinated.

Protection against BA.2 did not seem to wane any faster than protection against BA.1, and a booster shot brought the protection against symptomatic infection by either subvariant back to 30–60%. Surveillance data collected in the United Kingdom reveal a similar trend: vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 is less than 20% for both subvariants 25 weeks or more after a second dose, but rises to roughly 70% 2–4 weeks after a third dose.

The researchers also analysed the degree of protection that mRNA vaccines offer against severe disease, but to do so they had to pool the data on BA.1 and BA.2 cases—a measure that was necessary because Qatar’s population is strongly skewed towards young people, making severe COVID-19 cases rare. Only after pooling did the researchers have enough cases to achieve meaningful results.

This analysis showed that protection against severe disease remained at 68% or higher for at least 7 months, even in people who had only received two vaccine doses, and shot up to over 80% after a booster dose. Abu-Raddad says that because 70-80% of the pooled cases were BA.2, he suspects that vaccines still offer a high level of protection against severe disease in the face of surging BA.2 levels.

Promising results

In an e-mail to Nature, virologist Andrew Pekosz at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, wrote that, overall, the work is “a very sound study. Qatar has been at the lead when it comes to reporting data on COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in a very rapid manner.”

Abu-Raddad says the results give him hope because vaccines prevent many of the worst COVID-19 cases, even in response to BA.2. “The vaccines are actually working remarkably well, given the challenges of evolution,” he said.

Pekosz agrees, adding in his e-mail that the results emphasize the importance of booster doses. “Focusing on the primary vaccination schedule isn’t enough any more. There have to be plans to effectively get populations vaccinated through a booster,” he wrote.

But going forwards, Abu-Raddad thinks researchers should move away from designing vaccines against single variants and instead focus on pan-coronavirus vaccines. “This would be a more fundamental solution for the future,” he says.

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on March 18 2022.

Saima May Sidik is a freelance science journalist based in Somerville, Mass. Follow her on Twitter @SaimaMaySidik

More by Saima May Sidik

First published in 1869, Nature is the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer-reviewed research that drives ground-breaking discovery, and is read by thought-leaders and decision-makers around the world.

More by Nature magazine

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe