Real-world Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Among US Nursing Home Residents Aged ≥65 Years in the Pre-Delta and High Delta Periods.

Background: Long-term care residents were among the most vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Medicare nursing home residents aged ≥65 years during pre-Delta and high Delta periods. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 13 December 2020 to 20 November 2021 using Medicare claims data. Exposures included 2 and 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. We used inverse probability weighting and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate absolute and relative vaccine effectiveness. Results: Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death was 69.8% (95% CI, 65.9%‒73.3%) during the pre-Delta period and 55.7% (49.5%‒61.1%) during the high Delta period, without adjusting for time since vaccination. We observed substantial waning of effectiveness from 65.1% (54.2%‒73.5%) within 6 months from second-dose vaccination to 45.2% (30.6%‒56.7%) ≥6 months after second-dose vaccination in the high Delta period. Three doses provided 88.7% (73.5%‒95.2%) vaccine effectiveness against death, and the incremental benefit of 3 vs 2 doses was 74.6% (40.4%‒89.2%) during high Delta. Among beneficiaries with a prior COVID-19 infection, 3-dose vaccine effectiveness for preventing death was 78.6% (50.0%‒90.8%), and the additional protection of 3 vs 2 doses was 70.0% (30.1%‒87.1%) during high Delta. Vaccine effectiveness estimates against less severe outcomes (eg, infection) were lower. Conclusions: This nationwide real-world study demonstrated that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provided substantial protection against COVID-19-related death. Two-dose protection waned after 6 months. Third doses during the high Delta period provided significant additional protection for individuals with or without a prior COVID-19 infection.

Comparing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) enrollment data death dates to the National Death Index (NDI).

PURPOSE: In the United States, the National Death Index (NDI) is the most complete source of death information, while epidemiologic studies with mortality outcomes often rely on U.S. Medicare data for outcome ascertainment. The purpose of this study was to assess the agreement of death information between the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare enrolment data and NDI. METHODS: Using Medicare and NDI data from 1999 through 2016, we identified Medicare beneficiaries who were reported dead in the CMS Medicare enrolment database (EDB) and Common Medicare Environment (CME), linked these beneficiaries to the NDI using CMS Health Insurance Claim number, and compared death dates between the two data sources. To assess agreement between our data sources, we calculated kappa scores; where a kappa of 1 indicates perfect agreement and a kappa of 0 indicates agreement equivalent to chance. We also examined CMS to NDI linkage and death date matching for stability over time. RESULTS: Of the 36 785 640, Medicare beneficiaries reported dead in CMS enrollment data from 1999 to 2016, 97.5% were linked to the NDI. A kappa score of 0.98 showed a near perfect agreement between NDI and CMS reported deaths. The percentage of linked cases exactly matching on death dates increased from 94.8% in 1999 to 99.4% in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest strong concordance between death dates as recorded by CMS enrollment data and the NDI in the entire Medicare population.

Mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination: A self-controlled case series study.

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies found no-increased mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination, residual confounding bias might have impacted the findings. Using a modified self-controlled case series (SCCS) design, we assessed the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes after primary series COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed all deaths between December 14, 2020, and August 11, 2021, among individuals from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink sites. Demographic characteristics of deaths in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines and unvaccinated individuals were reported. We conducted SCCS analyses by vaccine type and death outcomes and reported relative incidences (RI). The observation period for death spanned from the dates of emergency use authorization to the end of the study period (August 11, 2021) without censoring the observation period upon death. We pre-specified a primary risk interval of 28-day and a secondary risk interval of 14-day after each vaccination dose. Adjusting for seasonality in mortality analyses is crucial because death rates vary over time. Deaths among unvaccinated individuals were included in SCCS analyses to account for seasonality by incorporating calendar month in the models. RESULTS: For Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), RIs of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes were below 1 and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) excluded 1 across both doses and both risk intervals. For Moderna (mRNA-1273), RI point estimates of all outcomes were below 1, although the 95 % CIs of two RI estimates included 1: cardiac-related (RI = 0.78, 95 % CI, 0.58-1.04) and non-COVID-19 cardiac-related mortality (RI = 0.80, 95 % CI, 0.60-1.08) 14 days after the second dose in individuals without pre-existing cancer and heart disease. For Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S), RIs of four cardiac-related death outcomes ranged from 0.94 to 0.98 for the 14-day risk interval, and 0.68 to 0.72 for the 28-day risk interval and 95 % CIs included 1. CONCLUSION: Using a modified SCCS design and adjusting for temporal trends, no-increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes among recipients of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.

Dispensing pharmacy chains and direct anticoagulants: Potential associations with patient outcomes.

PURPOSE: Pharmacy chains can differ with respect to the characteristics of their patient populations as well as their nonprescription products, services, and practices, and thus may serve as a surrogate for potential unmeasured confounding in observational studies of prescription drugs. This study evaluates whether a single-source drug can have different patient outcomes based on the dispensing pharmacy chain. METHODS: Separate analyses for two anticoagulant drugs, rivaroxaban and apixaban, were conducted using Medicare Fee-for-Service claims evaluating the association between dispensing pharmacy chain and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, all-cause mortality, and major GI bleeding. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline covariates across pharmacy chain cohorts, and outcome association was assessed with a Cox Proportional Hazards model. RESULTS: We observed no differences in outcomes across pharmacy chains for apixaban recipients. Rivaroxaban recipients from pharmacy chain C, however, had lower rates of GI bleeding (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-1.00) and ischemic stroke (adjusted HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.87) as compared to chain A in primary analyses with a 3-day grace period. The results moved closer to the null when 14- and 30-day grace periods were implemented. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dispensing pharmacy chains may have the potential to act as a confounder of associations between drug exposure and outcome in some observational studies. Additional studies of potential confounding by pharmacy chain are needed. Further evaluation of potential pharmacy chain effects on safe use would be of value.

Effectiveness of monovalent COVID-19 booster/additional vaccine doses in the United States.

Background: Monovalent booster/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized in August 2021 in the United States. We evaluated the real-world effectiveness of receipt of a monovalent booster/additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with receiving a primary vaccine series without a booster/additional dose. Methods: Cohorts of individuals receiving a COVID-19 booster/additional dose after receipt of a complete primary vaccine series were identified in 2 administrative insurance claims databases (Optum, CVS Health) supplemented with state immunization information system data between August 2021 and March 2022. Individuals with a complete primary series but without a booster/additional dose were one-to-one matched to boosted individuals on calendar date, geography, and clinical factors. COVID-19 diagnoses were identified in any medical setting, or specifically in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models; vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus the HR by vaccine brand overall and within subgroups of variant-specific eras, immunocompromised status, and homologous/heterologous booster status. Results: Across both data sources, we identified 752,165 matched pairs for BNT162b2, 410,501 for mRNA-1273, and 11,398 for JNJ-7836735. For any medically diagnosed COVID-19, meta-analyzed VE estimates for BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and JNJ-7836735, respectively, were: BNT162b2, 54% (95% CI, 53%-56%); mRNA-1273, 58% (95% CI, 56%-59%); JNJ-7836735, 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%). For hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19, VE estimates ranged from 70% to 76%. VE was generally lower during the Omicron era than the Delta era and for immunocompromised individuals. There was little difference observed by homologous or heterologous booster status. Conclusion: The original, monovalent booster/additional doses were reasonably effective in real-world use among the populations for which they were indicated during the study period. Additional studies may be informative in the future as new variants emerge and new vaccines become available.Registration: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website (https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf).

Severe Hypocalcemia With Denosumab Among Older Female Dialysis-Dependent Patients.

Importance: Dialysis-dependent patients experience high rates of morbidity from fractures, yet little evidence is available on optimal treatment strategies. Chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder is nearly universal in dialysis-dependent patients, complicating diagnosis and treatment of skeletal fragility. Objective: To examine the incidence and comparative risk of severe hypocalcemia with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates among dialysis-dependent patients treated for osteoporosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of female dialysis-dependent Medicare patients aged 65 years or older who initiated treatment with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates from 2013 to 2020. Clinical performance measures including monthly serum calcium were obtained through linkage to the Consolidated Renal Operations in a Web-Enabled Network database. Exposures: Denosumab, 60 mg, or oral bisphosphonates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Severe hypocalcemia was defined as total albumin-corrected serum calcium below 7.5 mg/dL (1.88 mmol/L) or a primary hospital or emergency department hypocalcemia diagnosis (emergent care). Very severe hypocalcemia (serum calcium below 6.5 mg/dL [1.63 mmol/L] or emergent care) was also assessed. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted cumulative incidence, weighted risk differences, and weighted risk ratios were calculated during the first 12 treatment weeks. Results: In the unweighted cohorts, 607 of 1523 denosumab-treated patients and 23 of 1281 oral bisphosphonate-treated patients developed severe hypocalcemia. The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of severe hypocalcemia was 41.1% with denosumab vs 2.0% with oral bisphosphonates (weighted risk difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 36.3%-41.9%]; weighted risk ratio, 20.7 [95% CI, 13.2-41.2]). The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of very severe hypocalcemia was also increased with denosumab (10.9%) vs oral bisphosphonates (0.4%) (weighted risk difference, 10.5% [95% CI, 8.8%-12.0%]; weighted risk ratio, 26.4 [95% CI, 9.7-449.5]). Conclusions and Relevance: Denosumab was associated with a markedly higher incidence of severe and very severe hypocalcemia in female dialysis-dependent patients aged 65 years or older compared with oral bisphosphonates. Given the complexity of diagnosing the underlying bone pathophysiology in dialysis-dependent patients, the high risk posed by denosumab in this population, and the complex strategies required to monitor and treat severe hypocalcemia, denosumab should be administered after careful patient selection and with plans for frequent monitoring.

Risk of Severe COVID-19 in Prevalent Users of Alpha-1 Adrenergic Receptor Antagonists: A National Case-Control Study of Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonists prevent cytokine storm in mouse sepsis models. This led to the hypothesis that alpha-1 blockers may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is characterized by hypercytokinemia and progressive respiratory failure. METHODS: We performed an observational case-control study in male Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, with or without benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and treated with alpha-1 receptor blockers or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for outcomes of uncomplicated and severe COVID-19 hospitalization (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death). RESULTS: There were 20,963 cases of hospitalized COVID-19 matched to 101,161 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. In the primary analysis (males with BPH), there was no difference in risk of uncomplicated COVID-19 hospitalization (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.996-1.17) or hospitalization with severe complications (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.08). In the secondary analysis (males with or without BPH), the corresponding aORs were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96-1.09) (uncomplicated) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.91-1.07) (complicated), respectively. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. Of note, there was no difference in risk of severe COVID-19 hospitalization when comparing non-selective vs selective alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.10), higher- vs lower-dose alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.08), or current vs remote alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalent use of alpha-1 receptor blockers was not associated with a protective or harmful effect on risk of uncomplicated or severe hospitalized COVID-19.

Association of Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine Use With Hospitalized Pneumonia in Medicare Beneficiaries 65 Years or Older With and Without Medical Conditions, 2014 to 2017.

Importance: The association of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) use with pneumonia hospitalization in older adults, especially those with underlying medical conditions, is not well described. Objective: To evaluate the association of PCV13 use with pneumonia, non-health care-associated (non-HA) pneumonia, and lobar pneumonia (LP) hospitalization among US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study with time-varying exposure assignment analyzed claims data from US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older enrolled in Parts A/B with a residence in the 50 US states or the District of Columbia by September 1, 2014. New Medicare Parts A/B beneficiaries within 6 months after their 65th birthday were continuously included in the cohort after September 1, 2014, and followed through December 31, 2017. Participants were censored if they died, changed enrollment status, or developed a study outcome. Most of the analyses were conducted from 2018 to 2019, and additional analyses were performed from 2021 to 2022. Exposures: Use of PCV13 vaccination 14 days or more before pneumonia hospitalization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Discrete-time survival models were used to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and number of pneumonia hospitalizations averted through PCV13 use. The adjusted IRR for the association of PCV13 vaccination with pneumonia hospitalization was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE). Results: At the end of follow-up (December 2017), 24 121 625 beneficiaries (13 593 975 women [56.4%]; 418 005 [1.7%] Asian, 1 750 807 [4.8%] Black, 338 044 [1.4%] Hispanic, 111 508 [0.5%] Native American, and 20 700 948 [85.8%] White individuals) were in the cohort; 4 936 185 (20.5%) had received PCV13 only, and 10 646 220 (79.5%) had not received any pneumococcal vaccines. More than half of the beneficiaries in the cohort were younger than 75 years, White, and had either immunocompromising or chronic medical conditions. Coverage with PCV13 increased from 0.8% (September 2014) to 41.5% (December 2017). The VE for PCV13 was estimated at 6.7% (95% CI, 5.9%-7.5%) for pneumonia, 4.7% (95% CI, 3.9%-5.6%) for non-HA pneumonia, and 5.8% (95% CI, 2.6%-8.9%) for LP. From September 2014 through December 2017, an estimated 35 127 pneumonia (95% CI, 33 011-37 270), 24 643 non-HA pneumonia (95% CI, 22 761-26 552), and 1294 LP (95% CI, 797-1819) hospitalizations were averted through PCV13 use. Conclusions and Relevance: The study results suggest that PCV13 use was associated with reduced pneumonia hospitalization among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older, many of whom had underlying medical conditions. Increased PCV13 coverage and use of recently approved higher-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines may avert additional pneumonia hospitalizations in adults.

Mortality Among Parkinson's Disease Patients Treated With Pimavanserin or Atypical Antipsychotics: An Observational Study in Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: Pimavanserin, a serotonin 5-HT2 antagonist, is indicated for treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis. In premarketing trials in patients with Parkinson's disease psychosis, 11% of patients died during open-label pimavanserin treatment. Antipsychotics, which are used off-label in Parkinson's disease psychosis, increase mortality in dementia patients. The authors compared mortality with pimavanserin and atypical antipsychotics in a large database. METHODS: This was a retrospective new-user cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with Parkinson's disease initiating pimavanserin (N=3,227) or atypical antipsychotics (N=18,442) from April 2016 to March 2019. All-cause mortality hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for pimavanserin compared with atypical antipsychotics, using segmented proportional hazards regression over 1-180 and 181+ days of treatment. Potential confounding was addressed through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). RESULTS: Pimavanserin users had a mean age of approximately 78 years, and 45% were female. Before IPTW, some comorbidities were more prevalent in atypical antipsychotic users; after IPTW, comorbidities were well balanced between groups. In the first 180 days of treatment, mortality was approximately 35% lower with pimavanserin than with atypical antipsychotics (hazard ratio=0.65, 95% CI=0.53, 0.79), with approximately one excess death per 30 atypical antipsychotic-treated patients; however, during treatment beyond 180 days, there was no additional mortality advantage with pimavanserin (hazard ratio=1.05, 95% CI=0.82, 1.33). Pimavanserin showed no mortality advantage in nursing home patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pimavanserin use was associated with lower mortality than atypical antipsychotic use during the first 180 days of treatment, but only in community-dwelling patients, not nursing home residents.

Risk Factors for COVID-19 Deaths Among Elderly Nursing Home Medicare Beneficiaries in the Prevaccine Period.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated prevaccine pandemic period COVID-19 death risk factors among nursing home (NH) residents. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study covering Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years residing in US NHs, we estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regressions. RESULTS: Among 608251 elderly NH residents, 57398 (9.4%) died of COVID-19-related illness 1 April to 22 December 2020; 46.9% (26893) of these deaths occurred without prior COVID-19 hospitalizations. We observed a consistently increasing age trend for COVID-19 deaths. Racial/ethnic minorities shared similarly high risk of NH COVID-19 deaths with whites. NH facility characteristics for-profit ownership and low health inspection ratings were associated with higher death risk. Resident characteristics (male [HR, 1.69], end-stage renal disease [HR, 1.42], cognitive impairment [HR, 1.34], and immunocompromised status [HR, 1.20]) were death risk factors. Other individual-level characteristics were less predictive of death than in community-dwelling population. CONCLUSIONS: Low NH health inspection ratings and private ownership contributed to COVID-19 death risks. Nearly half of NH COVID-19 deaths occurred without prior COVID-19 hospitalization and older residents were less likely to get hospitalized with COVID-19. No substantial differences were observed by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status for NH COVID-19 deaths.

Risk of Guillain-Barré Syndrome Following Recombinant Zoster Vaccine in Medicare Beneficiaries.

Importance: Guillain-Barré syndrome can be reported after vaccination. This study assesses the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after administration of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV or Shingrix), which is administered in 2 doses 2 to 6 months apart. Objective: Use Medicare claims data to evaluate risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome following vaccination with zoster vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series cohort study included 849 397 RZV-vaccinated and 1 817 099 zoster vaccine live (ZVL or Zostavax)-vaccinated beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Self-controlled analyses included events identified from 2 113 758 eligible RZV-vaccinated beneficiaries 65 years or older. We compared the relative risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after RZV vs ZVL, followed by claims-based and medical record-based self-controlled case series analyses to assess risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during a postvaccination risk window (days 1-42) compared with a control window (days 43-183). In self-controlled analyses, RZV vaccinees were observed from October 1, 2017, to February 29, 2020. Patients were identified in the inpatient, outpatient procedural (including emergency department), and office settings using Medicare administrative data. Exposures: Vaccination with RZV or ZVL vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Guillain-Barré syndrome was identified in Medicare administrative claims data, and cases were assessed through medical record review using the Brighton Collaboration case definition. Results: Amongst those who received RZV vaccinees, the mean age was 74.8 years at first dose, and 58% were women, whereas among those who received the ZVL vaccine, the mean age was 74.3 years, and 60% were women. In the cohort analysis we detected an increase in risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome among RZV vaccinees compared with ZVL vaccinees (rate ratio [RR], 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.41; P = .047). In the self-controlled analyses, we observed 24 and 20 cases during the risk and control period, respectively. Our claims-based analysis identified an increased risk in the risk window compared with the control window (RR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.53-5.27; P = .001), with an attributable risk of 3 per million RZV doses (95% CI, 0.62-5.64). Our medical record-based analysis confirmed this increased risk (RR, 4.96; 95% CI, 1.43-17.27; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this case series cohort study indicate a slightly increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the 42 days following RZV vaccination in the Medicare population, with approximately 3 excess Guillain-Barré syndrome cases per million vaccinations. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this risk, while considering the benefit of decreasing the risk of herpes zoster and its complications through an efficacious vaccine, as risk-benefit balance remains in favor of vaccination.

Risk of Covid-19-Related Hospitalization and More Severe Outcomes in Medicare Beneficiaries Treated with Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System Inhibitors for Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: There are theoretical concerns that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) could increase the risk of severe Covid-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine if ACEIs and ARBs are associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization overall, or hospitalization involving intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. DESIGN: Observational case-control study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 66 years with hypertension, treated with ACEIs, ARBs, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), or thiazide diuretics. MAIN MEASURES: Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of Covid-19 hospitalization, or hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. RESULTS: A total of 35,300 cases of hospitalized Covid-19 were matched to 228,228 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. The median age of cases was 79 years, 57.4% were female, and the median duration of hospitalization was 8 days (interquartile range 5-12). ACEIs and ARBs were associated with a slight reduction in Covid-19 hospitalization risk compared with treatment with other first-line antihypertensives (OR for ACEIs 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98; OR for ARBs 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.97). Similar results were obtained for hospitalizations involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. There were no meaningful differences in risk for ACEIs compared with ARBs. In an analysis restricted to monotherapy with a first-line agent, CCBs were associated with a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization compared with ACEIs (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14), ARBs (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15), or thiazide diuretics (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: ACEIs and ARBs were not associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization or with hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. The finding of a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization with CCBs was unexpected and could be due to residual confounding.

ICD-10 anaphylaxis algorithm and the estimate of vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis incidence in Medicare.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a rare, serious allergic reaction. Its identification in large healthcare databases can help better characterize this risk. OBJECTIVE: To create an ICD-10 anaphylaxis algorithm, estimate its positive predictive values (PPVs) in a post-vaccination risk window, and estimate vaccination-attributable anaphylaxis rates in the Medicare Fee For Service (FFS) population. METHODS: An anaphylaxis algorithm with core and extended portions was constructed analyzing ICD-10 anaphylaxis claims data in Medicare FFS from 2015 to 2017. Cases of post-vaccination anaphylaxis among Medicare FFS beneficiaries were then identified from October 1, 2015 to February 28, 2019 utilizing vaccine relevant anaphylaxis ICD-10 codes. Information from medical records was used to determine true anaphylaxis cases based on the Brighton Collaboration's anaphylaxis case definition. PPVs were estimated for incident anaphylaxis and the subset of vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis within a 2-day post-vaccination risk window. Vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis rates in Medicare FFS were also estimated. RESULTS: The study recorded 66,572,128 vaccinations among 21,685,119 unique Medicare FFS beneficiaries. The algorithm identified a total of 190 suspected anaphylaxis cases within the 2-day post-vaccination window; of these 117 (62%) satisfied the core algorithm, and 73 (38%) additional cases satisfied the extended algorithm. The core algorithm's PPV was 66% (95% CI [56%, 76%]) for identifying incident anaphylaxis and 44% (95% CI [34%, 56%]) for vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis. The vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis incidence rate after any vaccination was 0.88 per million doses (95% CI [0.67, 1.16]). CONCLUSION: The ICD-10 claims algorithm for anaphylaxis allows the assessment of anaphylaxis risk in real-world data. The algorithm revealed vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis is rare among vaccinated Medicare FFS beneficiaries.

Severe Hypoglycemia Risk With Long-Acting Insulin Analogs vs Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin.

Importance: Previous studies have found that the risk of severe hypoglycemia does not differ between long-acting insulin analogs and neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, these studies did not focus on patients 65 years or older, who are at an increased risk for hypoglycemia, or did not include patients with concomitant prandial insulin use. Objective: To examine the risk of emergency department (ED) visits or hospitalizations for hypoglycemia among older community-residing patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated long-acting insulin or NPH insulin in real-world settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, new-user cohort study assessed Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older who initiated insulin glargine (n = 407 018), insulin detemir (n = 141 588), or NPH insulin (n = 26 402) from January 1, 2007, to July 31, 2019. Exposures: Insulin glargine, insulin detemir, and NPH insulin. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to first ED visit or hospitalization for hypoglycemia, defined using a modified validated algorithm. Propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs. The risk of recurring hypoglycemia events was estimated using the Andersen-Gill model. Post hoc analyses were conducted investigating possible effect modification by age. Results: Of the 575 008 patients initiating use of insulin (mean [SD] age 74.9 [6.7] years; 53% female), 407 018 used glargine, 141 588 used detemir, and 26 402 used NPH insulin. The study included 7347 ED visits or hospitalizations for hypoglycemia (5194 for glargine, 1693 for detemir, and 460 for NPH insulin, with a median follow-up across the 3 cohorts of 0.37 years (interquartile range, 0.20-0.76 years). Initiation of glargine and detemir use was associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia compared with NPH insulin use (HR for glargine vs NPH insulin, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.63-0.80; HR, detemir vs NPH insulin, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.63-0.82). The HRs were similar for the recurrent event analysis. The protective association of long-acting insulin analogs varied by age and was not seen with concomitant prandial insulin use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, initiation of long-acting analogs was associated with a lower risk of ED visits or hospitalizations for hypoglycemia compared with NPH insulin in older patients with type 2 diabetes in Medicare. However, this association was not seen with concomitant prandial insulin use.

Babesiosis Occurrence Among United States Medicare Beneficiaries, Ages 65 and Older, During 2006-2017: Overall and by State and County of Residence.

BACKGROUND: Human babesiosis is a mild-to-severe parasitic infection that poses health concerns especially in older and other at-risk populations. The study objective was to assess babesiosis occurrence among US Medicare beneficiaries, ages 65 and older, during 2006-2017. METHODS: Our retrospective claims-based study used Medicare databases. Babesiosis cases were identified using recorded diagnosis codes. The study estimated rates (per 100 000 beneficiary-years) overall, by year, diagnosis month, demographics, and state and county of residence. RESULTS: Nationwide, 19 469 beneficiaries had babesiosis recorded, at a rate of 6 per 100 000 person-years, ranging from 4 in 2006 to 9 in 2017 (P < .05). The highest babesiosis rates by state were in the following: Massachusetts (62), Rhode Island (61), Connecticut (51), New York (30), and New Jersey (19). The highest rates by county were in the following: Nantucket, Massachusetts (1089); Dukes, Massachusetts (236); Barnstable, Massachusetts (213); and Dutchess, New York (205). Increasing rates, from 2006 through 2017 (P < .05), were identified in multiple states, including states previously considered nonendemic. New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and Delaware saw rates increase by several times. CONCLUSIONS: Our 12-year study shows substantially increasing babesiosis diagnosis trends, with highest rates in well established endemic states. It also suggests expansion of babesiosis infections in other states and highlights the utility of real-world evidence.

Recombinant Zoster Vaccine (Shingrix): Real-World Effectiveness in the First 2 Years Post-Licensure.

BACKGROUND: Shingrix (recombinant zoster vaccine) was licensed to prevent herpes zoster, dispensed as 2 doses given 2-6 months apart among adults aged ≥50 years. Clinical trials yielded efficacy of >90% for confirmed herpes zoster, but post-market performance has not been evaluated. Efficacy of a single dose and a delayed second dose and efficacy among persons with autoimmune or immunosuppressive conditions have not been studied. We aimed to assess post-market vaccine effectiveness of Shingrix. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study among Medicare Part D community-dwelling beneficiaries aged >65 years. Herpes zoster was identified using a medical office visit diagnosis with treatment, and postherpetic neuralgia was identified using a validated algorithm. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to improve cohort balance and marginal structural models to estimate hazard ratios. RESULTS: We found a vaccine effectiveness of 70.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.6-71.5) and 56.9% (95% CI, 55.0-58.8) for 2 and 1 doses, respectively. The 2-dose vaccine effectiveness was not significantly lower for beneficiaries aged >80 years, for second doses received at ≥180 days, or for individuals with autoimmune conditions. The vaccine was also effective among individuals with immunosuppressive conditions. Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against postherpetic neuralgia was 76.0% (95% CI, 68.4-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: This large real-world observational study of the effectiveness of Shingrix demonstrates the benefit of completing the 2-dose regimen. Second doses administered beyond the recommended 6 months did not impair effectiveness. Our effectiveness estimates were lower than the clinical trials estimates, likely due to differences in outcome specificity.

Trends in Erythropoiesis-stimulating agent use and blood transfusions for chemotherapy-induced anemia throughout FDA's risk evaluation and mitigation strategy lifecycle.

PURPOSE: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), indicated for treating some patients with chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA), may increase the risk of tumor progression and mortality. FDA required a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) to mitigate these risks. We assessed REMS impact on ESA administration and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion as surrogate metrics for REMS effectiveness. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study including data from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2018 for beneficiaries ≥65 years enrolled in Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare Parts A/B with a cancer diagnosis; patients with other indications for ESA use were excluded. Study time was divided into five periods demarcated by issuance of CMS National Coverage Determination (NCD) (Pre-NCD, Pre-REMS) and REMS milestones (Grace Period, REMS, post-REMS). Study outcomes were monthly proportion of chemotherapy episodes (CTEs) with concomitant ESA administration, with post-CTE ESA administration, and with RBC transfusions. RESULTS: Of 1 778 855 beneficiaries treated with CT, 308742 received concomitant ESA for CIA. The proportion of CTEs with concomitant and post-CTE ESA administration decreased Pre-REMS (9.0 percentage points [pp] and 3.5 pp, respectively). There were no significant post-REMS changes in the proportion of CTEs with concomitant (0.0 pp) and post-CTE ESA administration (0.1 pp). Fluctuation in RBC transfusions was <4 pp throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare beneficiaries showed a substantive decrease in ESA administration after NCD, with minimal impact by the REMS and its removal. Small changes in RBC transfusion over the study period were likely due to a national secular trend.

Comparative Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines Among US Medicare Beneficiaries Ages 65 Years and Older During the 2019-2020 Season.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50 000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the United States, overwhelmingly among individuals aged ≥65 years. Although vaccination is the primary prevention tool, investigations have shown low vaccine effectiveness (VE) in recent years, particularly among the elderly. We analyzed the relative VE (RVE) of all influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years to prevent influenza hospital encounters during the 2019-2020 season. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using Poisson regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Exposures included egg-based high-dose trivalent (HD-IIV3), egg-based adjuvanted trivalent (aIIV3), egg-based standard dose (SD) quadrivalent (IIV4), cell-based SD quadrivalent (cIIV4), and recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccines. RESULTS: We studied 12.7 million vaccinated beneficiaries. Following IPTW, cohorts were well balanced for all covariates and health-seeking behavior indicators. In the adjusted analysis, RIV4 (RVE, 13.3%; 95% CI, 7.4-18.9%), aIIV3 (RVE, 8.2%; 95% CI, 4.2-12.0%), and HD-IIV3 (RVE, 6.8%; 95% CI, 3.3-10.1%) were significantly more effective in preventing hospital encounters than the reference egg-based SD IIV4, while cIIV4 was not significantly more effective than IIV4 (RVE, 2.8%; 95% CI, -2.8%, 8.2%). Our results were consistent across all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In this influenza B-Victoria and A(H1N1)-dominated season, RIV4 was moderately more effective than other vaccines, while HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 were more effective than the IIV4 vaccines, highlighting the contributions of antigen amount and adjuvant use to VE. Egg adaptation likely did not substantially affect our RVE evaluation. Our findings, specific to the 2019-2020 season, should be evaluated in other studies using virological case confirmation.