Vaccine failure mode determines population-level impact of vaccination campaigns during epidemics

Vaccines are a crucial tool for controlling infectious diseases, yet rarely offer perfect protection. 'Vaccine efficacy' describes a population-level effect measured in clinical trials, but mathematical models used to evaluate the impact of vaccination campaigns require specifying how vaccines fail at the individual level, which is often impossible to measure. Does 90% efficacy imply perfect protection in 90% of people and no protection in 10% ('all-or-nothing') or that the per-exposure risk is reduced by 90% in all vaccinated individuals ('leaky') or somewhere in between? Here, we systematically investigate the role of vaccine failure mode in controlling ongoing epidemics. We find that the difference in population-level impact between all-or-nothing and leaky vaccines can be substantial when <i>R</i><sub>0</sub> is higher, vaccines efficacy is intermediate, and vaccines slow but cannot curtail an outbreak. Comparing COVID-19 pandemic phases, we show times when model predictions would have been most sensitive to assumptions about vaccine failure mode. When determining the optimal risk group to prioritize for limited vaccines, we find that modelling a leaky vaccine as all-or-nothing (or vice versa) can change the recommended target group. Overall, we conclude that models of vaccination campaigns should include uncertainty about vaccine failure mode in their design and interpretation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Published
2025-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2024.0689
Citations
8
Primary Topic
SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.17

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Vaccine failure mode determines population-level impact of vaccination campaigns during epidemics

Anjalika Nande, Michael Z. Levy, Thayer L. Anderson, Alison L. Hill et al.
8 citations
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
11.17
article

Vaccine failure mode determines population-level impact of vaccination campaigns during epidemics

Anjalika Nande, Michael Z. Levy, Thayer L. Anderson, Alison L. Hill, Dain Lee
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Vaccines are a crucial tool for controlling infectious diseases, yet rarely offer perfect protection. 'Vaccine efficacy' describes a population-level effect measured in clinical trials, but mathematical models used to evaluate the impact of vaccination campaigns require specifying how vaccines fail at the individual level, which is often impossible to measure. Does 90% efficacy imply perfect protection in 90% of people and no protection in 10% ('all-or-nothing') or that the per-exposure risk is reduced by 90% in all vaccinated individuals ('leaky') or somewhere in between? Here, we systematically investigate the role of vaccine failure mode in controlling ongoing epidemics. We find that the difference in population-level impact between all-or-nothing and leaky vaccines can be substantial when <i>R</i><sub>0</sub> is higher, vaccines efficacy is intermediate, and vaccines slow but cannot curtail an outbreak. Comparing COVID-19 pandemic phases, we show times when model predictions would have been most sensitive to assumptions about vaccine failure mode. When determining the optimal risk group to prioritize for limited vaccines, we find that modelling a leaky vaccine as all-or-nothing (or vice versa) can change the recommended target group. Overall, we conclude that models of vaccination campaigns should include uncertainty about vaccine failure mode in their design and interpretation.

Journal of The Royal Society InterfaceVol. 22(223)
Johns Hopkins University (US), University of Pennsylvania (US)
National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
11.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.