Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 9 de 9
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
2.
J Infect ; 89(3): 106221, 2024 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38996819

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In the spring of 2022 and 2023 COVID-19 vaccine boosters were recommended for those aged ≥75 years in England as well as those in an immunosuppression risk group. The aim was to reduce severe COVID-19 disease in these groups. METHODS: The large difference in coverage between those above and below age 75 years was the basis for applying an age-discontinuity approach for measuring the impact of vaccination on COVID-19 hospitalisations in both spring 2022 and 2023. Hospitalisations in individuals positive by PCR for COVID-19 were obtained from the national secondary user service hospital dataset. The ratio of hospital counts by each year of age in 8-week periods after compared to before the roll out was modelled using negative binomial regression to estimate the discontinuity at age 75 years. RESULTS: A clear discontinuity was seen at age 75 years of 17.0% (95% CI: 6.1%-26.6%) in 2022 and 18.0% (3.3%-30.4%) in 2023. If applied to those aged ≥75 years this translates to 1302 and 418 averted hospitalisations in the 8-week period in 2022 and 2023, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a clear impact of vaccination on preventing COVID-19 hospitalisations and compliments other epidemiological methods assessing the impact of COVID-19 vaccines. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: One way to see if the booster vaccines doses given to protect against COVID-19 disease are working is to compare hospital admissions in groups of people who were and were not eligible for the dose. In England the spring booster doses were recommended for those aged 75 years and above. We could therefore compare hospitalisations in those above this age to those just below (aged 65-74) and see if there is a step change in rates from age 74 to 75 in the time after the vaccine was given. The results showed hospitalisations were about 18% lower in the group that were eligible, which is evidence that the vaccine is protecting against severe COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Inmunización Secundaria , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Anciano , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Masculino , Inmunización Secundaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos
3.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 18(5): e13284, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38773753

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: We report 2023/2024 season interim influenza vaccine effectiveness for three studies, namely, primary care in Great Britain, hospital settings in Scotland and hospital settings in England. METHODS: A test negative design was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: Estimated vaccine effectiveness against all influenzas ranged from 63% (95% confidence interval 46 to 75%) to 65% (41 to 79%) among children aged 2-17, from 36% (20 to 49%) to 55% (43 to 65%) among adults 18-64 and from 40% (29 to 50%) to 55% (32 to 70%) among adults aged 65 and over. CONCLUSIONS: During a period of co-circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) in the United Kingdom, evidence for effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in both children and adults was found.


Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Atención Primaria de Salud , Atención Secundaria de Salud , Humanos , Vacunas contra la Influenza/inmunología , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Adolescente , Adulto , Niño , Preescolar , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto Joven , Reino Unido , Anciano , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A/inmunología , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A/genética , Masculino , Femenino , Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A/inmunología , Estaciones del Año , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos
4.
J Infect ; 89(1): 106177, 2024 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38719110

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The last COVID-19 vaccine offered to all adults in England became available from November 2021. The most recent booster programme commenced in September 2023. Bivalent BA.4-5 or monovalent XBB.1.5 boosters were given. During the study period, the JN.1 variant became dominant in England. METHODS: Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation was estimated throughout using the test-negative case-control study design where positive PCR tests from hospitalised individuals are cases and comparable negative PCR tests are controls. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with the test result as the outcome, vaccination status as the primary exposure variable of interest and confounder adjustment. RESULTS: There was no evidence of residual protection for boosters given as part of previous campaigns. There were 28,916 eligible tests included to estimate the effectiveness of the autumn 2023 boosters in those aged 65 years and older. VE peaked at 50.6% (95% CI: 44.2-56.3%) after 2-4 weeks, followed by waning to 13.6% (95% CI: -11.7 to 33.2%). Estimates were generally higher for the XBB.1.5 booster than the BA.4-5 booster, but this difference was not statistically significant. Point estimates were highest against XBB sub-lineages. Effectiveness was lower against both JN.1 and EG.5.1 variants with confidence intervals non-overlapping with the effectiveness of the XBB sub-lineages at 2-4 weeks for EG.5.1 where VE was 44.5% (95% CI: 20.2-61.4%) and at 5-9 weeks for JN.1 where VE was 26.4% (95%CI: -3.4 to 47.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The recent monovalent XBB.1.5 and bivalent BA.4-5 boosters provided comparable and good protection against hospitalisation, however there was evidence of lower VE against hospitalisation of these boosters against JN.1.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Inmunización Secundaria , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Anciano , Masculino , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Femenino , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/inmunología , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto
5.
EClinicalMedicine ; 71: 102587, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38618208

RESUMEN

Background: The Sanofi/GSK AS03-adjuvanted (VidPrevtyn Beta) vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA (Comirnaty Original/Omicron BA.4-5) bivalent vaccine were offered to adults aged 75 years and over in England from 3rd April 2023. This is the first time an adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccine has been administered as part of a UK COVID-19 vaccination programme. In clinical trials, antibody levels generated were comparable with mRNA vaccines but there are no real-world data on the effectiveness or duration of protection. Methods: We used a test-negative case-control study design to estimate the incremental vaccine effectiveness of the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer bivalent BA.4-5 boosters against hospitalisation amongst those aged 75 years and older in England. Cases (those testing positive) and controls (those testing negative) were identified from the national COVID-19 PCR testing data undertaken in hospital settings. The study period included tests from 3rd April 2023 to 27th August 2023. Tests were linked to the COVID-19 vaccination register and to the national hospital admission database, restricting to those with an acute respiratory infection coded in the primary diagnosis field. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using multivariable logistic regression amongst those who had last received an autumn 2022 booster given at least 3 months prior. The test result was the outcome and vaccination status the exposure. Analyses were adjusted for week of test, gender, age, clinical risk group status, care home resident status, region, index of multiple deprivation, ethnicity, influenza vaccination status and recent COVID-19 positivity. Findings: There were 14,169 eligible tests from hospitalised individuals aged 75 years and older; 3005 cases (positive tests) and 11,164 controls (negative tests). Effectiveness was highest in the period 9-13 days post vaccination for both manufacturers at about 50%; 43.7% (95% CI, 20.1-60.3%) and 56.1% (95% CI, 25.2-74.2%) for Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5, respectively. There was evidence of waning with a reduction to about 30% for both manufacturers after 5-9 weeks. The longest time interval post vaccination for which we were able to estimate effectiveness was 10+ weeks post vaccination, at which point vaccine effectiveness was 17.6% (95% CI, -3.6 to 34.5%) and 37.9% (95% CI, 13.2-55.5%) for the Sanofi/GSK and Pfizer BA.4-5 boosters, respectively. Interpretation: Both boosters provided good protection against hospitalisation amongst older adults. The finding that the adjuvanted vaccine targeting the distant Beta strain had similar effectiveness to the bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting more closely matched Omicron sub-lineages is notable and highlights the need for further real-world studies into the effectiveness of vaccines from different vaccine platforms and formulations in the presence of matched and unmatched strains. Funding: No external funding.

6.
Vaccine ; 42(7): 1656-1664, 2024 Mar 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38342716

RESUMEN

We present England 2021/22 end-of-season adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) against laboratory confirmed influenza related emergency care use in children aged 1-17 and in adults aged 50+, and serological findings in vaccinated vs unvaccinated adults by hemagglutination inhibition assay. Influenza vaccination has been routinely offered to all children aged 2-10 years and adults aged 65 years + in England. In 2021/22, the offer was extended to children to age 15 years, and adults aged 50-64 years. Influenza activity rose during the latter half of the 2021/22 season, while remaining comparatively low due to COVID-19 pandemic control measures. Influenza A(H3N2) strains predominated. A test negative design was used to estimate aVE by vaccine type. Cases and controls were identified within a sentinel laboratory surveillance system. Vaccine histories were obtained from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS), an influenza and COVID-19 vaccine registry. These were linked to emergency department presentations (excluding accidents) with respiratory swabbing ≤ 14 days before or ≤ 7 days after presentation. Amongst adults, 423 positive and 32,917 negative samples were eligible for inclusion, and 145 positive and 6,438 negative samples among children. Those admitted to hospital were further identified. In serology against the circulating A(H3N2) A/Bangladesh/4005/2020-like strain, 61 % of current season adult vaccinees had titres ≥ 1:40 compared to 17 % of those unvaccinated in 2020/21 or 2021/22 (p < 0.001). We found good protection from influenza vaccination against influenza requiring emergency care in children (72.7 % [95 % CI 52.7, 84.3 %]) and modest effectiveness in adults (26.1 % [95 % CI 4.5, 42.8 %]). Adult VE was higher for A(H1N1) (81 % [95 % CI 50, 93 %]) than A(H3N2) (33 % [95 % CI 6, 53 %]). Consistent protection was observable across preschool, primary and secondary school aged children. Imperfect test specificity combined with very low prevalence may have biased estimates towards null. With limited influenza circulation, the study could not determine differences by vaccine types.


Asunto(s)
Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Adulto , Niño , Preescolar , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Estaciones del Año , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Pandemias/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la Influenza/uso terapéutico , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Vacunación , Atención Primaria de Salud
7.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 20(1): 2311969, 2024 Dec 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38299507

RESUMEN

Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) has been identified as an Adverse Event of Special Interest in the COVID-19 vaccine programme due to its long-standing temporal association with a wide range of other vaccines. Case reports of ADEM shortly following COVID-19 vaccination have now been documented. There were 217 ADEM admissions in 215 individuals in the period 8th December 2020 to 31st March 2023. An increased risk of ADEM following the first dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine was observed (relative incidence (RI) = 3.13, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.56-6.25]) with a vaccine attributable risk of 0.39 per million doses. When doses 1 and 2 were combined this increased risk remained just significant (1.96 [95%CI 1.01-3.82]). No significant increased risk was observed with any other vaccine or dose. This small, elevated risk after the first dose of ChAdOx1-S vaccine demonstrates how large national electronic datasets can be used to identify very rare risks and provides reassurance that any risk of ADEM following the ChAdOx1-S COVID-19 vaccination is extremely small. Given the rarity of this risk, further studies in settings with access to data on large populations should be carried out to verify these findings.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Encefalomielitis Aguda Diseminada , Vacunas , Humanos , Encefalomielitis Aguda Diseminada/inducido químicamente , Encefalomielitis Aguda Diseminada/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , COVID-19/complicaciones , Vacunas/efectos adversos , Vacunación/efectos adversos , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Inglaterra/epidemiología
9.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 35: 100755, 2023 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38115965

RESUMEN

Background: Since the first emergence of Omicron BA.1 in England in November 2021, numerous sub-lineages have evolved. In September 2022, BA.5 dominated. The prevalence of BQ.1 increased from October, while the prevalence of CH.1.1 and XBB.1.5 increased from December 2022 and January 2023, respectively. Little is known about the effectiveness of the vaccines against hospitalisation with these sub-lineages, nor the relative severity, so we here used national-level electronic health records from England to estimate vaccine effectiveness and variant severity. Methods: The study period for tests contributing to all analyses was from 5th December 2022 to 2nd April 2023, when the variants of interest were co-circulating. A test-negative case-control study was used to estimate the incremental effectiveness of the bivalent BA.1 booster vaccines against hospitalisation, relative to those with waned immunity where the last dose was at least 6 months prior. The odds of hospital admission for those testing PCR positive on the day of an attendance to accident and emergency departments and the odds of intensive care unit admission or death amongst COVID-19 admissions were compared between variants. Additionally, a Cox proportional hazards survival regression was used to investigate length of stay amongst hospitalised cases by variant. Findings: Our vaccine effectiveness study included 191,229 eligible tests with 1647 BQ.1 cases, 877 CH.1.1 cases, 1357 XBB.1.5 cases and 187,348 test negative controls. There was no difference in incremental vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with BQ.1, CH.1.1 or XBB.1.5, nor was there a difference in the severity of these variants. Effectiveness against hospitalisation was 48.0% (95% C.I.; 38.5-56.0%), 29.7% (95% C.I.; 7.5-46.6%) and 52.7% (95% C.I.; 24.6-70.4%) against BQ.1, CH.1.1 and XBB.1.5, respectively, at 5-9 weeks post booster vaccination. Compared to BQ.1, the odds of hospital admission were 0.87 (95% C.I.; 0.77-0.99) and 0.88 (95% C.I.; 0.75-1.02) for CH.1.1 and XBB.1.5 cases attending accident and emergency departments, respectively. There was no significant difference in the odds of admission to intensive care units or death for those with CH.1.1 (OR 0.96, 95% C.I.; 0.71-1.30) or XBB.1.5 (OR 0.67, 95% C.I.; 0.44-1.02) compared to BQ.1. There was also no significant difference in the length of hospital stay by variant. Interpretation: Together, these results provide reassuring evidence that the bivalent BA.1 booster vaccines provide similar protection against hospitalisation with BQ.1, CH.1.1 and XBB.1.5, and that the emergent CH.1.1 and XBB.1.5 sub-lineages do not cause more severe disease than BQ.1. Funding: None.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...