Uptake and safety of pneumococcal vaccination in adults with immune mediated inflammatory diseases: a UK wide observational study.

OBJECTIVE: The uptake and safety of pneumococcal vaccination in people with immune mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) is poorly understood. We investigated the UK wide pneumococcal vaccine uptake in adults with IMIDs and explored the association between vaccination and IMID flare. METHODS: Adults with IMIDs diagnosed on or before 01/09/2018, prescribed steroid-sparing drugs within the last 12 months and contributing data to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold were included. Vaccine uptake was assessed using a cross-sectional study design. Self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis investigated the association between pneumococcal vaccination and IMID flare. The SCCS observation period was up-to six-month before and after pneumococcal vaccination. This was partitioned into a 14-day pre-vaccination induction, 90-days post-vaccination exposed, and the remaining unexposed periods. RESULTS: We included 32 277 patients, 14 151 with RA, 13 631 with IBD, 3,804 with axial spondyloarthritis and 691 with SLE. Overall, 57% were vaccinated against pneumococcus. Vaccine uptake was lower in those younger than 45 years (32%), with IBD (42%), and without additional indication(s) for vaccination (46%). In the vaccine-safety study, data for 1,067, 935, and 451vaccinated patients with primary-care consultations for joint pain, AIRD flare and IBD flare respectively were included. Vaccination against pneumococcal pneumonia was not associated with primary-care consultations for joint pain, AIRD flare and IBD flare in the exposed period with incidence rate ratios (95% Confidence Interval) 0.95 (0.83-1.09), 1.05 (0.92-1.19), and 0.83 (0.65-1.06) respectively. CONCLUSION: Uptake of pneumococcal vaccination in UK patients with IMIDs was suboptimal. Vaccination against pneumococcal disease was not associated with IMID flare.

Benralizumab in children with severe eosinophilic asthma: Pharmacokinetics and long-term safety (TATE study).

BACKGROUND: Benralizumab is an anti-interleukin-5 receptor α monoclonal antibody approved as an add-on maintenance treatment for patients with uncontrolled severe asthma. Prior Phase 3 studies have evaluated benralizumab in patients aged ≥12 years with severe uncontrolled asthma. The TATE study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of benralizumab treatment in children. METHODS: TATE was an open-label, Phase 3 study of benralizumab in children aged 6-11 years from the United States and Japan (plus participants aged 12-14 years from Japan) with severe eosinophilic asthma. Participants received benralizumab 10/30 mg according to weight (<35/≥35 kg). Primary endpoints included maximum serum concentration (Cmax ), clearance, half-life (t1/2 ), and blood eosinophil count. Clearance and t1/2 were derived from a population PK (popPK) analysis. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-eight children aged 6-11 years were included, with an additional two participants from Japan aged 12-14 years also included in the popPK analysis. Mean Cmax was 1901.2 and 3118.7 ng/mL in the 10 mg/<35 kg and 30 mg/≥35 kg groups, respectively. Clearance was 0.257, and mean t1/2 was 14.5 days. Near-complete depletion of blood eosinophils was shown across dose/weight groups. Exploratory efficacy analyses found numerical improvements in mean FEV1 , mean ACQ-IA, patient/clinician global impression of change, and exacerbation rates. Adverse events occurred in 22/28 (78.6%) of participants; none led to discontinuation/death. CONCLUSION: PK, PD, and safety data support long-term benralizumab in children with severe eosinophilic asthma, and were similar to findings in adolescents and adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov-ID: NCT04305405.

A novel tool using social and environmental determinants of health to assess pediatric asthma in the emergency department.

Asthma, the most common chronic disease in children, affects more than 4 million children in the United States, disproportionately affecting those who are economically disadvantaged and racial and ethnic minorities. Studies have shown that the racial and ethnic disparities in asthma outcomes can be largely explained by environmental, socioeconomic and other social determinants of health (SDoH). Utilizing new approaches to stratify disease severity and risk, which focus on the underlying SDoH that lead to asthma disparity, provides an opportunity to disentangle race and ethnicity from its confounding social determinants. In particular, with the growing use of geospatial information systems, geocoded data can enable researchers and clinicians to quantify social and environmental impacts of structural racism. When these data are systematically collected and tabulated, researchers, and ultimately clinicians at the bedside, can evaluate patients' neighborhood context and create targeted interventions toward those factors most associated with asthma morbidity. To do this, we have designed a view (mPage in the Cerner electronic health record) that centralizes key clinical information and displays it alongside SDoH variables shown to be linked to asthma incidence and severity. Once refined and validated, which is the next step in our project, our goal is for emergency medicine clinicians to use these data in real time while caring for patients with asthma. Our multidisciplinary, patient-centered approach that leverages modern informatics tools will create opportunities to better triage patients with asthma exacerbations, choose the best interventions, and target underlying determinants of disease.

Uptake, safety and effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine in inflammatory bowel disease: a UK-wide study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate (1) the UK-wide inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) uptake in adults with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), (2) the association between vaccination against influenza and IBD flare and (3) the effectiveness of IIV in preventing morbidity and mortality. DESIGN: Data for adults with IBD diagnosed before the 1 September 2018 were extracted from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold. We calculated the proportion of people vaccinated against seasonal influenza in the 2018-2019 influenza cycle. To investigate vaccine effectiveness, we calculated the propensity score (PS) for vaccination and conducted Cox proportional hazard regression with inverse-probability treatment weighting on PS. We employed self-controlled case series analysis to investigate the association between vaccination and IBD flare. RESULTS: Data for 13 631 people with IBD (50.4% male, mean age 52.9 years) were included. Fifty percent were vaccinated during the influenza cycle, while 32.1% were vaccinated on time, that is, before the seasonal influenza virus circulated in the community. IIV was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (aHR (95% CI): 0.73 (0.55,0.97) but not hospitalisation for pneumonia (aHR (95% CI) 0.52 (0.20-1.37), including in the influenza active period (aHR (95% CI) 0.48 (0.18-1.27)). Administration of the IIV was not associated with IBD flare. CONCLUSION: The uptake of influenza vaccine was low in people with IBD, and the majority were not vaccinated before influenza virus circulated in the community. Vaccination with the IIV was not associated with IBD flare. These findings add to the evidence to promote vaccination against influenza in people with IBD.

Real world evidence for public health decision-making on vaccination policies: perspectives from an expert roundtable.

INTRODUCTION: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality, but influenza vaccine uptake remains below most countries' targets. Vaccine policy recommendations vary, as do procedures for reviewing and appraising the evidence. AREAS COVERED: During a series of roundtable discussions, we reviewed procedures and methodologies used by health ministries in four European countries to inform vaccine recommendations. We review the type of evidence currently recommended by each health ministry and the range of approaches toward considering randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence (RWE) studies when setting influenza vaccine recommendations. EXPERT OPINION: Influenza vaccine recommendations should be based on data from both RCTs and RWE studies of efficacy, effectiveness, and safety. Such data should be considered alongside health-economic, cost-effectiveness, and budgetary factors. Although RCT data are more robust and less prone to bias, well-designed RWE studies permit timely evaluation of vaccine benefits, effectiveness comparisons over multiple seasons in large populations, and detection of rare adverse events, under real-world conditions. Given the variability of vaccine effectiveness due to influenza virus mutations and increasing diversification of influenza vaccines, we argue that consideration of both RWE and RCT evidence is the best approach to more nuanced and timely updates of influenza vaccine recommendations.

Effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in adults with common immune-mediated inflammatory diseases in the UK: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: People with immune-mediated inflammatory disease are at increased risk of pneumococcal pneumonia. The effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases has not been evaluated. We investigated the effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in preventing morbidity and mortality associated with pneumonia in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHODS: In this matched case-control study, we used primary-care electronic health record data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Gold database in the UK, with linked hospitalisation and mortality data. Adults with incident common immune-mediated inflammatory diseases diagnosed between April 1, 1997, and Dec 31, 2019, were followed up from the first diagnosis date to the occurrence of an outcome or date of last follow-up. Cases (ie, those with an outcome of interest) were age-matched and sex-matched to up to ten contemporaneous controls by use of incidence density sampling. Outcomes were hospitalisation due to pneumonia, death due to pneumonia, or primary-care consultation for lower respiratory tract infection requiring antibiotics. We defined hospital admission for pneumonia using hospital discharge diagnoses, death due to pneumonia using death certification data, and lower respiratory tract infection as present when primary-care consultation and antibiotic prescription occurred on the same date. We used multivariable, unconditional, logistical regression and constructed three models to examine the association between pneumococcal vaccination as an exposure and each of the three outcomes. FINDINGS: The first nested case-control analysis included 12 360 patients (7326 [59·3%] women and 5034 [40·7%] men): 1884 (15·2%) who were hospitalised due to pneumonia and 10 476 (84·8%) who were not admitted to hospital due to pneumonia. The second analysis included 5321 patients (3112 [58·5%] women and 2209 [41·5%] men): 781 (14·7%) who died due to pneumonia and 4540 (85·3%) who were alive on the index date. The third analysis included 54 530 patients (33 605 [61·6%] women and 20 925 [38·4%] men): 10 549 (19·3%) with lower respiratory tract infection treated with antibiotics and 43 981 (80·7%) without infection. In the multivariable analysis, pneumococcal vaccination was negatively associated with hospitalisation due to pneumonia (adjusted odds ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·60-0·81]), death due to pneumonia (0·60 [0·48-0·76]), and lower respiratory tract infection treated with antibiotics (0·76 [0·72-0·80]). INTERPRETATION: Pneumococcal vaccination is associated with protection against hospitalisation and death due to pneumonia in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases, without apparent residual confounding. However, residual unmeasured confounding cannot be fully excluded in observational research, which includes nested case-control studies. These findings should also be corroborated with data from other countries, given that this study used UK-based data. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Effect of a 2-week interruption in methotrexate treatment on COVID-19 vaccine response in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (VROOM study): a randomised, open label, superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is the first-line treatment for immune-mediated inflammatory diseases and reduces vaccine-induced immunity. We evaluated if a 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination improved antibody response against the S1 receptor binding domain (S1-RBD) of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and live SARS-CoV-2 neutralisation compared with uninterrupted treatment in patients with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. METHOD: We did a multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, superiority trial in secondary-care rheumatology and dermatology clinics in 26 hospitals in the UK. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases taking methotrexate (≤25 mg per week) for at least 3 months, who had received two primary vaccine doses from the UK COVID-19 vaccination programme were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a centralised validated computer program, to temporarily suspend methotrexate treatment for 2 weeks immediately after COVID-19 booster vaccination or continue treatment as usual. The primary outcome was S1-RBD antibody titres 4 weeks after COVID-19 booster vaccination and was assessed masked to group assignment. All randomly assigned patients were included in primary and safety analyses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN11442263; following a pre-planned interim analysis, recruitment was stopped early. FINDING: Between Sept 30, 2021, and March 7, 2022, we screened 685 individuals, of whom 383 were randomly assigned: to either suspend methotrexate (n=191; mean age 58·8 years [SD 12·5], 118 [62%] women and 73 [38%] men) or to continue methotrexate (n=192; mean age 59·3 years [11·9], 117 [61%] women and 75 [39%] men). At 4 weeks, the geometric mean S1-RBD antibody titre was 25 413 U/mL (95% CI 22 227-29 056) in the suspend methotrexate group and 12 326 U/mL (10 538-14 418) in the continue methotrexate group with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 2·08 (95% CI 1·59-2·70; p<0·0001). No intervention-related serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: 2-week interruption of methotrexate treatment in people with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases enhanced antibody responses after COVID-19 booster vaccination that were sustained at 12 weeks and 26 weeks. There was a temporary increase in inflammatory disease flares, mostly self-managed. The choice to suspend methotrexate should be individualised based on disease status and vulnerability to severe outcomes from COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Cost-utility analysis of molnupiravir for high-risk, community-based adults with COVID-19: an economic evaluation of the PANORAMIC trial.

BACKGROUND: The cost-effectiveness of molnupiravir, an oral antiviral for early treatment of SARS-CoV-2, has not been established in vaccinated populations. AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of molnupiravir relative to usual care alone among mainly vaccinated community-based people at higher risk of severe outcomes from COVID-19 over 6 months. DESIGN AND SETTING: An economic evaluation of the PANORAMIC trial in the UK. METHOD: A cost-utility analysis that adopted a UK NHS and personal social services perspective and a 6-month time horizon was performed using PANORAMIC trial data. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses assessed the impacts of uncertainty and heterogeneity. Threshold analysis explored the price for molnupiravir consistent with likely reimbursement. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, molnupiravir had higher mean costs of £449 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 445 to 453) and higher mean QALYs of 0.0055 (95% CI = 0.0044 to 0.0067) than usual care (mean incremental cost per QALY of £81 190). Sensitivity and subgroup analyses showed similar results, except for those aged ≥75 years, with a 55% probability of being cost-effective at a £30 000 per QALY threshold. Molnupiravir would have to be priced around £147 per course to be cost-effective at a £15 000 per QALY threshold. CONCLUSION: At the current cost of £513 per course, molnupiravir is unlikely to be cost-effective relative to usual care over a 6-month time horizon among mainly vaccinated patients with COVID-19 at increased risk of adverse outcomes, except those aged ≥75 years.

Randomized controlled trial of molnupiravir SARS-CoV-2 viral and antibody response in at-risk adult outpatients.

Viral clearance, antibody response and the mutagenic effect of molnupiravir has not been elucidated in at-risk populations. Non-hospitalised participants within 5 days of SARS-CoV-2 symptoms randomised to receive molnupiravir (n = 253) or Usual Care (n = 324) were recruited to study viral and antibody dynamics and the effect of molnupiravir on viral whole genome sequence from 1437 viral genomes. Molnupiravir accelerates viral load decline, but virus is detectable by Day 5 in most cases. At Day 14 (9 days post-treatment), molnupiravir is associated with significantly higher viral persistence and significantly lower anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike antibody titres compared to Usual Care. Serial sequencing reveals increased mutagenesis with molnupiravir treatment. Persistence of detectable viral RNA at Day 14 in the molnupiravir group is associated with higher transition mutations following treatment cessation. Viral viability at Day 14 is similar in both groups with post-molnupiravir treated samples cultured up to 9 days post cessation of treatment. The current 5-day molnupiravir course is too short. Longer courses should be tested to reduce the risk of potentially transmissible molnupiravir-mutated variants being generated. Trial registration: ISRCTN30448031.

Food protein-induced proctocolitis and enteropathy.

Non-IgE (immunoglobulin E) mediated gastrointestinal food allergies include several separate clinical entities, including food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP) and food protein-induced enteropathy (FPE). Although FPIAP and FPE both primarily affect the gastrointestinal tract, their presentations are vastly different. FPIAP presents with bloody stools in otherwise healthy infants, whereas FPE presents with chronic diarrhea, vomiting, malabsorption, and hypoproteinemia. These both typically present in infancy and resolve by early childhood. Although the presenting signs and symptoms may be different, management is similar in that both require avoidance of the suspected causal food.