Hepatitis of unknown aetiology in children - epidemiological overview of cases reported in Europe, 1 January to 16 June 2022.

Following the report of an excess in paediatric cases of severe acute hepatitis of unknown aetiology by the United Kingdom (UK) on 5 April 2022, 427 cases were reported from 20 countries in the World Health Organization European Region to the European Surveillance System TESSy from 1 January 2022 to 16 June 2022. Here, we analysed demographic, epidemiological, clinical and microbiological data available in TESSy. Of the reported cases, 77.3% were 5 years or younger and 53.5% had a positive test for adenovirus, 10.4% had a positive RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 and 10.3% were coinfected with both pathogens. Cases with adenovirus infections were significantly more likely to be admitted to intensive care or high-dependency units (OR = 2.11; 95% CI: 1.18-3.74) and transplanted (OR = 3.36; 95% CI: 1.19-9.55) than cases with a negative test result for adenovirus, but this was no longer observed when looking at this association separately between the UK and other countries. Aetiological studies are needed to ascertain if adenovirus plays a role in this possible emergence of hepatitis cases in children and, if confirmed, the mechanisms that could be involved.

Infectious disease surveillance system descriptors: proposal for a comprehensive set.

To tailor a surveillance system to its objectives and to evaluate its fitness for purpose, an accurate description of its structural elements is essential. Existing recommendations for setting up a system seldom offer a comprehensive list of all surveillance elements to be considered. Moreover, there is sometimes confusion in the way terms describing these elements are interpreted. The objective of this paper is to propose a comprehensive set of surveillance system descriptors that can delineate the important elements and clarify the meaning of the terms used. We identified 20 descriptors that we classified in five categories: (i) surveillance scheme; (ii) population and cases; (iii) supplementary data; (iv) information flow; and (v) period of time. We tried to make the definitions of these descriptors as clear and simple as possible to avoid confusion or misinterpretation of the terms used. The relative importance of each element may vary depending on the objectives of the surveillance scheme. Surveillance descriptors should be reviewed periodically to document changes and to assess if the system continues to be fit for purpose. Together with the minimum requirements for variables and the planned outputs for disseminating the data, the surveillance descriptors can be used to define surveillance standards.

Costs and benefits of influenza vaccination: more evidence, same challenges.

Seasonal influenza vaccination coverage in most EU/EEA remains suboptimal. Providers' and users' confidence in influenza vaccines is undermined by reports of moderate to low vaccine effectiveness and by the lack of solid evidence on disease burden. A study from Preaud and co. indicates that even with current levels of vaccine effectiveness, increasing vaccination coverage would significantly reduce disease burden and health cost. The results of the study should be interpreted cautiously because some of the assumptions are not generalizable or are imprecise, especially those on vaccine coverage, disease burden and health cost. Increasing vaccination coverage in EU/EEA countries is very challenging. Multifaceted approaches and country specific strategies are needed to address vaccine hesitancy in health care workers and in the population, and to manage organisational and financial obstacles. One key element for increasing vaccination coverage is the development of better influenza vaccines, e.g. vaccines that are more effective, provide longer lasting immunity and do not require annual administration. Vaccine producers should consider this as the highest research priority in the field of influenza vaccine development.

The importance of influenza prevention for public health.

Annual epidemics of seasonal (inter-pandemic) influenza represent a significant burden on society in terms of morbidity, mortality, hospitalizations and lost working time. The impact of influenza depends on a mix of direct and indirect effects and is not easy to assess. Nevertheless there is a consensus in considering influenza prevention and mitigation high priorities for public health. We review the available evidence to assess the impact of influenza prevention focusing especially on vaccines and immunization strategies.

I-MOVE multi-centre case control study 2010-11: overall and stratified estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness in Europe.

BACKGROUND: In the third season of I-MOVE (Influenza Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe), we undertook a multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks in eight European Union (EU) member states to estimate 2010/11 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. METHODS: Using systematic sampling, practitioners swabbed ILI/ARI patients within seven days of symptom onset. We compared influenza-positive to influenza laboratory-negative patients among those meeting the EU ILI case definition. A valid vaccination corresponded to > 14 days between receiving a dose of vaccine and symptom onset. We used multiple imputation with chained equations to estimate missing values. Using logistic regression with study as fixed effect we calculated influenza VE adjusting for potential confounders. We estimated influenza VE overall, by influenza type, age group and among the target group for vaccination. RESULTS: We included 2019 cases and 2391 controls in the analysis. Adjusted VE was 52% (95% CI 30-67) overall (N = 4410), 55% (95% CI 29-72) against A(H1N1) and 50% (95% CI 14-71) against influenza B. Adjusted VE against all influenza subtypes was 66% (95% CI 15-86), 41% (95% CI -3-66) and 60% (95% CI 17-81) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 respectively. Among target groups for vaccination (N = 1004), VE was 56% (95% CI 34-71) overall, 59% (95% CI 32-75) against A(H1N1) and 63% (95% CI 31-81) against influenza B. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest moderate protection from 2010-11 trivalent influenza vaccines against medically-attended ILI laboratory-confirmed as influenza across Europe. Adjusted and stratified influenza VE estimates are possible with the large sample size of this multi-centre case-control. I-MOVE shows how a network can provide precise summary VE measures across Europe.

Study designs for timely estimation of influenza vaccine effectiveness using European sentinel practitioner networks.

European sentinel practitioner influenza surveillance networks represent a simple and feasible framework to conduct observational studies providing rapid and repeated influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates. The minimum requirements for those studies should be to correctly ascertain vaccination status, to include laboratory-confirmed influenza as outcome and to collect variables to control for confounding. Various study designs are possible including the screening method, computerised cohort and case control studies using various control groups. Selecting the study design is a compromise between methodological constraints, availability and ease of access to data sources and resources available. Results from practitioner-based studies complement other pieces of evidence (e.g. immunogenicity studies, vaccine efficacy, surveillance data) to assess the effect of influenza vaccination in the population.

[Risk factors for mortality during a heat-wave in Bari (Italy), summer 2005.]. / Fattori di rischio per la mortalità durante un'ondata di calore a Bari, estate 2005.

INTRODUCTION: The Italian Heat Health Watch Warning System (HHWWS) was set up following the over 3000 excess deaths which occurred in Italy during the heat wave of 2003, In June 2005 the warning system issued a heat warning in various Italian cities. METHODS: A case control study was performed in one of these cities (Bari) in order to identify individual and environmental risk factors as well as preventive strategies for reducing mortality during future heat waves. Cases were defined as subjects aged <65 years who had died during the heat wave and whose death certificate listed one of the following as the cause of death: heat, cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disorders, neurocognitive disorders, dehydration or fever/infection not otherwise specified. For each case, three age-matched controls were randomly selected among individuals followed by the same general practitioner as the case. All variables significantly associated with mortality (<0.1) in the univariate analysis were entered into a conditional logistic regression model and the population attributable fraction (PAF) was calculated for significant variables (at p<0.05). RESULTS: Twenty cases and sixty controls were included in the study. In 17 cases (89%) death had occurred at home and 11(55%) of these were cardiovascular- related deaths. At the multivariate analysis, the factors significantly associated with mortality risk during the heat wave were: having a functioning air conditioner at home [OR:0.09(95% CI 0.01-1.00)], having an Activities of Daily Living score <2 [OR:21.0(95%CI 1.81-242.47)] and having been hospitalized the year preceding death [OR:18.1(95%CI 2.04-160.51)]. CONCLUSIONS: Public health interventions during heat waves should include the provision of access to an air conditioned environment. Subjects with impaired health (especially if recently hospitalized) and with significant limitations in their activities of daily living are probably at higher risk during heat waves.

Strategies for evaluation of suitable donors: Italian experience.

Italy was lacking standardised procedures for donor safety evaluation. We developed practice guidelines, while a panel of experts coordinated by the National Transplant Centre, is available 24 hours a day to support decisions in difficult cases. The guidelines identify five levels of risk and give recommendations for the utilization of donors with HBV and HCV infections as well as for malignancies with negligible or very low risk of transmission. In conclusion we aim to standardize the process of donor evaluation across Italy, to increase the pool of utilised donors and to reduce the risk of communicable disease transmission.

The effect of number of mutations and of drug-class sparing on virological response to salvage genotype-guided antiretroviral therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess on longitudinal data the impact of number of drug-associated mutations at genotype resistance testing (GRT) and history of previous exposure to antiretrovirals on the virological response to genotype-guided antiretroviral therapy. METHODS: Subjects that failed HAART who underwent GRT between June 1999 and March 2002 were enrolled. GRT was performed by Viroseq-2 with expert advice offered to physicians. Main outcome was reaching undetectable (< 80 copies/ml) HIV-1 RNA level after GRT and maintaining undetectable viraemia for at least 6 months. The number of mutations conferring resistance to each class of antiretrovirals was categorized and their effect on virological outcome investigated. Mutations considered in the analysis were those reported by the IAS-USA in 2002. Multivariate analysis was performed by Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS: Four-hundred-and-seventy consecutive subjects were enrolled and followed-up for a median of 14 (IQR 9-19) months after GRT. Sustained undetectable viraemia was reached by 80 of 449 subjects (18%). Using as end-point reaching and maintaining for at least 6 months < 400 copies/ml after GRT, 103 out of 447 subjects (23%) reached the outcome. For each single protease inhibitor (PI)-, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI)-and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-associated mutation, there was a reduction of, respectively, 11% (P = 0.008), 12% (P = 0.001) and 39% (P = 0.005) in the likelihood of reaching virological outcome. Subjects carrying > or = 6 mutations to NRTIs, > or = 7 mutations to PIs and > or = 2 mutations to NNRTIs were less likely to reach the virological success compared with those carrying 0-1 (NRTI and PI) or 0 (NNRTI) mutations [HR = 0.25 (95% CI: 0.10-0.65); HR = 0.33 (950% CI: 0.16-0.67); HR = 0.33 (95% CI: 0.14-0.77)], respectively. However, at multivariate analysis the probability of reaching a favourable virological outcome in patients with > or = 7 mutations to PIs, if naive for NNRTIs [HR = 1.74 (0.69-4.36)], and in subjects with > or = 2 mutations for NNRTIs if naive for PIs [HR = 1.23 (0.22-6.80)], was comparable to those observed in patients with none or one mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed a non-linear association between resistance-conferring mutations and virological outcome. GRT-guided therapy still provided remarkable chances of durable virological success even in subjects with > or = 7 mutations to PIs and in subjects with > or = 2 mutations to NNRTIs, when the subjects did not have a three-class exposure or if GRT showed no evidence of mutations for a drug class. GRT and as-long-as-possible sparing of a drug class could be a convenient strategy for long-term management of drug-failing patients.