A pilot sentinel surveillance system to monitor treatment and treatment outcomes of chronic hepatitis B and C infections in clinical centres in three European countries, 2019.

BackgroundThe World Health Organization European Action Plan 2020 targets for the elimination of viral hepatitis are that > 75% of eligible individuals with chronic hepatitis B (HBV) or hepatitis C (HCV) are treated, of whom > 90% achieve viral suppression.AimTo report the results from a pilot sentinel surveillance to monitor chronic HBV and HCV treatment uptake and outcomes in 2019.MethodsWe undertook retrospective enhanced data collection on patients with a confirmed chronic HBV or HCV infection presenting at one of seven clinics in three countries (Croatia, Romania and Spain) for the first time between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2019. Clinical records were reviewed from date of first attendance to 31 December 2019 and data on sociodemographics, clinical history, laboratory results, treatment and treatment outcomes were collected. Treatment eligibility, uptake and case outcome were assessed.ResultsOf 229 individuals with chronic HBV infection, treatment status was reported for 203 (89%). Of the 80 individuals reported as eligible for treatment, 51% (41/80) were treated of whom 89% (33/37) had achieved viral suppression. Of 240 individuals with chronic HCV infection, treatment status was reported for 231 (96%). Of 231 eligible individuals, 77% (179/231) were treated, the majority of whom had received direct acting antivirals (99%, 174/176) and had achieved sustained virological response (98%, 165/169).ConclusionTreatment targets for global elimination were missed for HBV but not for HCV. A wider European implementation of sentinel surveillance with a representative sample of sites could help monitor progress towards achieving hepatitis control targets.

Global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from January 2020 to April 2022: A systematic review and meta-analysis of standardized population-based studies.

BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the global scale of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains incomplete: Routine surveillance data underestimate infection and cannot infer on population immunity; there is a predominance of asymptomatic infections, and uneven access to diagnostics. We meta-analyzed SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies, standardized to those described in the World Health Organization's Unity protocol (WHO Unity) for general population seroepidemiological studies, to estimate the extent of population infection and seropositivity to the virus 2 years into the pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, preprints, and grey literature for SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence published between January 1, 2020 and May 20, 2022. The review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020183634). We included general population cross-sectional and cohort studies meeting an assay quality threshold (90% sensitivity, 97% specificity; exceptions for humanitarian settings). We excluded studies with an unclear or closed population sample frame. Eligible studies-those aligned with the WHO Unity protocol-were extracted and critically appraised in duplicate, with risk of bias evaluated using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute checklist. We meta-analyzed seroprevalence by country and month, pooling to estimate regional and global seroprevalence over time; compared seroprevalence from infection to confirmed cases to estimate underascertainment; meta-analyzed differences in seroprevalence between demographic subgroups such as age and sex; and identified national factors associated with seroprevalence using meta-regression. We identified 513 full texts reporting 965 distinct seroprevalence studies (41% low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) sampling 5,346,069 participants between January 2020 and April 2022, including 459 low/moderate risk of bias studies with national/subnational scope in further analysis. By September 2021, global SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence from infection or vaccination was 59.2%, 95% CI [56.1% to 62.2%]. Overall seroprevalence rose steeply in 2021 due to infection in some regions (e.g., 26.6% [24.6 to 28.8] to 86.7% [84.6% to 88.5%] in Africa in December 2021) and vaccination and infection in others (e.g., 9.6% [8.3% to 11.0%] in June 2020 to 95.9% [92.6% to 97.8%] in December 2021, in European high-income countries [HICs]). After the emergence of Omicron in March 2022, infection-induced seroprevalence rose to 47.9% [41.0% to 54.9%] in Europe HIC and 33.7% [31.6% to 36.0%] in Americas HIC. In 2021 Quarter Three (July to September), median seroprevalence to cumulative incidence ratios ranged from around 2:1 in the Americas and Europe HICs to over 100:1 in Africa (LMICs). Children 0 to 9 years and adults 60+ were at lower risk of seropositivity than adults 20 to 29 (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). In a multivariable model using prevaccination data, stringent public health and social measures were associated with lower seroprevalence (p = 0.02). The main limitations of our methodology include that some estimates were driven by certain countries or populations being overrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that global seroprevalence has risen considerably over time and with regional variation; however, over one-third of the global population are seronegative to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Our estimates of infections based on seroprevalence far exceed reported Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. Quality and standardized seroprevalence studies are essential to inform COVID-19 response, particularly in resource-limited regions.

Rapidly adapting primary care sentinel surveillance across seven countries in Europe for COVID-19 in the first half of 2020: strengths, challenges, and lessons learned.

As the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020, primary care influenza sentinel surveillance networks within the Influenza - Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe (I-MOVE) consortium rapidly adapted to COVID-19 surveillance. This study maps system adaptations and lessons learned about aligning influenza and COVID-19 surveillance following ECDC / WHO/Europe recommendations and preparing for other diseases possibly emerging in the future. Using a qualitative approach, we describe the adaptations of seven sentinel sites in five European Union countries and the United Kingdom during the first pandemic phase (March-September 2020). Adaptations to sentinel systems were substantial (2/7 sites), moderate (2/7) or minor (3/7 sites). Most adaptations encompassed patient referral and sample collection pathways, laboratory testing and data collection. Strengths included established networks of primary care providers, highly qualified testing laboratories and stakeholder commitments. One challenge was the decreasing number of samples due to altered patient pathways. Lessons learned included flexibility establishing new routines and new laboratory testing. To enable simultaneous sentinel surveillance of influenza and COVID-19, experiences of the sentinel sites and testing infrastructure should be considered. The contradicting aims of rapid case finding and contact tracing, which are needed for control during a pandemic and regular surveillance, should be carefully balanced.

Estimation of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation in individuals aged ≥ 65 years using electronic health registries; a pilot study in four EU/EEA countries, October 2021 to March 2022.

By employing a common protocol and data from electronic health registries in Denmark, Navarre (Spain), Norway and Portugal, we estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19 in individuals aged ≥ 65 years old, without previous documented infection, between October 2021 and March 2022. VE was higher in 65-79-year-olds compared with ≥ 80-year-olds and in those who received a booster compared with those who were primary vaccinated. VE remained high (ca 80%) between ≥ 12 and < 24 weeks after the first booster administration, and after Omicron became dominant.

Effectiveness of complete primary vaccination against COVID-19 at primary care and community level during predominant Delta circulation in Europe: multicentre analysis, I-MOVE-COVID-19 and ECDC networks, July to August 2021.

IntroductionIn July and August 2021, the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant dominated in Europe.AimUsing a multicentre test-negative study, we measured COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection.MethodsIndividuals with COVID-19 or acute respiratory symptoms at primary care/community level in 10 European countries were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We measured complete primary course overall VE by vaccine brand and by time since vaccination.ResultsOverall VE was 74% (95% CI: 69-79), 76% (95% CI: 71-80), 63% (95% CI: 48-75) and 63% (95% CI: 16-83) among those aged 30-44, 45-59, 60-74 and ≥ 75 years, respectively. VE among those aged 30-59 years was 78% (95% CI: 75-81), 66% (95% CI: 58-73), 91% (95% CI: 87-94) and 52% (95% CI: 40-61), for Comirnaty, Vaxzevria, Spikevax and COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, respectively. VE among people 60 years and older was 67% (95% CI: 52-77), 65% (95% CI: 48-76) and 83% (95% CI: 64-92) for Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and Spikevax, respectively. Comirnaty VE among those aged 30-59 years was 87% (95% CI: 83-89) at 14-29 days and 65% (95% CI: 56-71%) at ≥ 90 days between vaccination and onset of symptoms.ConclusionsVE against symptomatic infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant varied among brands, ranging from 52% to 91%. While some waning of the vaccine effect may be present (sample size limited this analysis to only Comirnaty), protection was 65% at 90 days or more between vaccination and onset.

Incidence and severity of pertussis hospitalisations in infants aged less than 1 year in 37 hospitals of six EU/EEA countries, results of PERTINENT sentinel pilot surveillance system, December 2015 to December 2018.

IntroductionPERTINENT is a pilot active surveillance system of infants hospitalised with pertussis in six European Union/European Economic Area countries (37 hospitals, seven sites).AimThis observational study aimed to estimate annual pertussis incidence per site from 2016 to 2018 and respective trends between 2017 and 2018. Pertussis cases were described, including their severity.MethodsWe developed a generic protocol and laboratory guidelines to harmonise practices across sites. Cases were hospitalised infants testing positive for Bordetella pertussis by PCR or culture. Sites collected demographic, clinical, laboratory data, vaccination status, and risk/protective factors. We estimated sites' annual incidences by dividing case numbers by the catchment populations.ResultsFrom December 2015 to December 2018, we identified 469 cases (247 males; 53%). The median age, birthweight and gestational age were 2.5 months (range: 0-11.6; interquartile range (IQR): 2.5), 3,280 g (range: 700-4,925; IQR: 720) and 39 weeks (range: 25-42; IQR: 2), respectively. Thirty cases (6%) had atypical presentation either with cough or cyanosis only or with absence of pertussis-like symptoms. Of 330 cases with information, 83 (25%) were admitted to intensive care units including five deceased infants too young to be vaccinated. Incidence rate ratios between 2018 and 2017 were 1.43 in Czech Republic (p = 0.468), 0.25 in Catalonia (p = 0.002), 0.71 in France (p = 0.034), 0.14 in Ireland (p = 0.002), 0.63 in Italy (p = 0.053), 0.21 in Navarra (p = 0.148) and zero in Norway.ConclusionsIncidence appeared to decrease between 2017 and 2018 in all but one site. Enhanced surveillance of hospitalised pertussis in Europe is essential to monitor pertussis epidemiology and disease burden.

Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults aged 65 years and older in primary care: I-MOVE-COVID-19 project, Europe, December 2020 to May 2021.

We measured COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection at primary care/outpatient level among adults ≥ 65 years old using a multicentre test-negative design in eight European countries. We included 592 SARS-CoV-2 cases and 4,372 test-negative controls in the main analysis. The VE was 62% (95% CI: 45-74) for one dose only and 89% (95% CI: 79-94) for complete vaccination. COVID-19 vaccines provide good protection against COVID-19 presentation at primary care/outpatient level, particularly among fully vaccinated individuals.

Interim 2019/20 influenza vaccine effectiveness: six European studies, September 2019 to January 2020.

BackgroundInfluenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B viruses were co-circulating in Europe between September 2019 and January 2020.AimTo provide interim 2019/20 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from six European studies, covering 10 countries and both primary care and hospital settings.MethodsAll studies used the test-negative design, although there were some differences in other study characteristics, e.g. patient selection, data sources, case definitions and included age groups. Overall and influenza (sub)type-specific VE was estimated for each study using logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders.ResultsThere were 31,537 patients recruited across the six studies, of which 5,300 (17%) were cases with 5,310 infections. Most of these (4,466; 84%) were influenza A. The VE point estimates for all ages were 29% to 61% against any influenza in the primary care setting and 35% to 60% in hospitalised older adults (aged 65 years and over). The VE point estimates against A(H1N1)pdm09 (all ages, both settings) was 48% to 75%, and against A(H3N2) ranged from -58% to 57% (primary care) and -16% to 60% (hospital). Against influenza B, VE for all ages was 62% to 83% (primary care only).ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination is of continued benefit during the ongoing 2019/20 influenza season. Robust end-of-season VE estimates and genetic virus characterisation results may help understand the variability in influenza (sub)type-specific results across studies.

Interim 2018/19 influenza vaccine effectiveness: six European studies, October 2018 to January 2019.

Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) viruses both circulated in Europe in October 2018-January 2019. Interim results from six studies indicate that 2018/19 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates among all ages in primary care was 32-43% against influenza A; higher against A(H1N1)pdm09 and lower against A(H3N2). Among hospitalised older adults, VE estimates were 34-38% against influenza A and slightly lower against A(H1N1)pdm09. Influenza vaccination is of continued benefit during the ongoing 2018/19 influenza season.

Impact of influenza vaccination programmes among the elderly population on primary care, Portugal, Spain and the Netherlands: 2015/16 to 2017/18 influenza seasons.

BackgroundTo increase the acceptability of influenza vaccine, it is important to quantify the overall benefits of the vaccination programme.AimTo assess the impact of influenza vaccination in Portugal, Spain and the Netherlands, we estimated the number of medically attended influenza-confirmed cases (MAICC) in primary care averted in the seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18 among those ≥ 65 years.MethodsWe used an ecological approach to estimate vaccination impact. We compared the number of observed MAICC (n) to the estimated number that would have occurred without the vaccination programme (N). To estimate N, we used: (i) MAICC estimated from influenza surveillance systems, (ii) vaccine coverage, (iii) pooled (sub)type-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness estimates for seasons 2015/16 to 2017/18, weighted by the proportion of virus circulation in each season and country. We estimated the number of MAICC averted (NAE) and the prevented fraction (PF) by the vaccination programme.ResultsThe annual average of NAE in the population ≥ 65 years was 33, 58 and 204 MAICC per 100,000 in Portugal, Spain and the Netherlands, respectively. On average, influenza vaccination prevented 10.7%, 10.9% and 14.2% of potential influenza MAICC each season in these countries. The lowest PF was in 2016/17 (4.9-6.1%) with an NAE ranging from 24 to 69 per 100,000.ConclusionsOur results suggest that influenza vaccination programmes reduced a substantial number of MAICC. Together with studies on hospitalisations and deaths averted by influenza vaccination programmes, this will contribute to the evaluation of the impact of vaccination strategies and strengthen public health communication.

Low 2018/19 vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2) among 15-64-year-olds in Europe: exploration by birth cohort.

IntroductionInfluenza A(H3N2) clades 3C.2a and 3C.3a co-circulated in Europe in 2018/19. Immunological imprinting by first childhood influenza infection may induce future birth cohort differences in vaccine effectiveness (VE).AimThe I-MOVE multicentre primary care test-negative study assessed 2018/19 influenza A(H3N2) VE by age and genetic subgroups to explore VE by birth cohort.MethodsWe measured VE against influenza A(H3N2) and (sub)clades. We stratified VE by usual age groups (0-14, 15-64, ≥ 65-years). To assess the imprint-regulated effect of vaccine (I-REV) hypothesis, we further stratified the middle-aged group, notably including 32-54-year-olds (1964-86) sharing potential childhood imprinting to serine at haemagglutinin position 159.ResultsInfluenza A(H3N2) VE among all ages was -1% (95% confidence interval (CI): -24 to 18) and 46% (95% CI: 8-68), -26% (95% CI: -66 to 4) and 20% (95% CI: -20 to 46) among 0-14, 15-64 and ≥ 65-year-olds, respectively. Among 15-64-year-olds, VE against clades 3C.2a1b and 3C.3a was 15% (95% CI: -34 to 50) and -74% (95% CI: -259 to 16), respectively. VE was -18% (95% CI: -140 to 41), -53% (95% CI: -131 to -2) and -12% (95% CI: -74 to 28) among 15-31-year-olds (1987-2003), 32-54-year-olds (1964-86) and 55-64-year-olds (1954-63), respectively.DiscussionThe lowest 2018/19 influenza A(H3N2) VE was against clade 3C.3a and among those born 1964-86, corresponding to the I-REV hypothesis. The low influenza A(H3N2) VE in 15-64-year-olds and the public health impact of the I-REV hypothesis warrant further study.

Interim 2017/18 influenza seasonal vaccine effectiveness: combined results from five European studies.

Between September 2017 and February 2018, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B viruses (mainly B/Yamagata, not included in 2017/18 trivalent vaccines) co-circulated in Europe. Interim results from five European studies indicate that, in all age groups, 2017/18 influenza vaccine effectiveness was 25 to 52% against any influenza, 55 to 68% against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, -42 to 7% against influenza A(H3N2) and 36 to 54% against influenza B. 2017/18 influenza vaccine should be promoted where influenza still circulates.

2015/16 seasonal vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among elderly people in Europe: results from the I-MOVE+ project.

We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study in 27 hospitals of 11 European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among people aged ≥ 65 years. Patients swabbed within 7 days after onset of symptoms compatible with severe acute respiratory infection were included. Information on demographics, vaccination and underlying conditions was collected. Using logistic regression, we measured IVE adjusted for potential confounders. We included 355 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 110 influenza B cases, and 1,274 controls. Adjusted IVE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI): 22 to 57). It was 59% (95% CI: 23 to 78), 48% (95% CI: 5 to 71), 43% (95% CI: 8 to 65) and 39% (95% CI: 7 to 60) in patients with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung and heart disease, respectively. Adjusted IVE against influenza B was 52% (95% CI: 24 to 70). It was 62% (95% CI: 5 to 85), 60% (95% CI: 18 to 80) and 36% (95% CI: -23 to 67) in patients with diabetes mellitus, lung and heart disease, respectively. 2015/16 IVE estimates against hospitalised influenza in elderly people was moderate against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B, including among those with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung or heart diseases.

Vaccine effectiveness in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in primary care patients in a season of co-circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, B and drifted A(H3N2), I-MOVE Multicentre Case-Control Study, Europe 2014/15.

Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co-circulated in Europe in 2014/15. We undertook a multicentre case-control study in eight European countries to measure 2014/15 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed all or a systematic sample of ILI patients. We compared the odds of vaccination of ILI influenza positive patients to negative patients. We calculated adjusted VE by influenza type/subtype, and age group. Among 6,579 ILI patients included, 1,828 were A(H3N2), 539 A(H1N1)pdm09 and 1,038 B. VE against A(H3N2) was 14.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): -6.3 to 31.0) overall, 20.7% (95%CI: -22.3 to 48.5), 10.9% (95%CI -30.8 to 39.3) and 15.8% (95% CI: -20.2 to 41.0) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and  ≥60 years, respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 54.2% (95%CI: 31.2 to 69.6) overall, 73.1% (95%CI: 39.6 to 88.1), 59.7% (95%CI: 10.9 to 81.8), and 22.4% (95%CI: -44.4 to 58.4) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and  ≥60 years respectively. VE against B was 48.0% (95%CI: 28.9 to 61.9) overall, 62.1% (95%CI: 14.9 to 83.1), 41.4% (95%CI: 6.2 to 63.4) and 50.4% (95%CI: 14.6 to 71.2) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 years respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 and B was moderate. The low VE against A(H3N2) is consistent with the reported mismatch between circulating and vaccine strains.

I-MOVE multicentre case-control study 2010/11 to 2014/15: Is there within-season waning of influenza type/subtype vaccine effectiveness with increasing time since vaccination?

Since the 2008/9 influenza season, the I-MOVE multicentre case-control study measures influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like-illness (ILI) laboratory confirmed as influenza. In 2011/12, European studies reported a decline in VE against influenza A(H3N2) within the season. Using combined I-MOVE data from 2010/11 to 2014/15 we studied the effects of time since vaccination on influenza type/subtype-specific VE. We modelled influenza type/subtype-specific VE by time since vaccination using a restricted cubic spline, controlling for potential confounders (age, sex, time of onset, chronic conditions). Over 10,000 ILI cases were included in each analysis of influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B; with 4,759, 3,152 and 3,617 influenza positive cases respectively. VE against influenza A(H3N2) reached 50.6% (95% CI: 30.0-65.1) 38 days after vaccination, declined to 0% (95% CI: -18.1-15.2) from 111 days onwards. At day 54 VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 reached 55.3% (95% CI: 37.9-67.9) and remained between this value and 50.3% (95% CI: 34.8-62.1) until season end. VE against influenza B declined from 70.7% (95% CI: 51.3-82.4) 44 days after vaccination to 21.4% (95% CI: -57.4-60.8) at season end. To assess if vaccination campaign strategies need revising more evidence on VE by time since vaccination is urgently needed.

Household transmission investigation: Design, reporting and critical appraisal.

Background: Household transmission investigations (HHTIs) contribute timely epidemiologic knowledge in response to emerging pathogens. HHTIs conducted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020-21 reported variable methodological approaches, producing epidemiological estimates that vary in meaning, precision and accuracy. Because specific tools to assist with the optimal design and critical appraisal of HHTIs are not available, the aggregation and pooling of inferences from HHTIs to inform policy and interventions may be challenging. Methods: In this manuscript, we discuss key aspects of the HHTI design, provide recommendations for the reporting of these studies and propose an appraisal tool that contributes to the optimal design and critical appraisal of HHTIs. Results: The appraisal tool consists of 12 questions that explore 10 aspects of HHTIs and can be answered 'yes', 'no' or 'unclear'. We provide an example of the use of this tool in the context of a systematic review that aimed to quantify the household secondary attack rate from HHTIs. Conclusion: We seek to fill a gap in the epidemiologic literature and contribute to standardised HHTI approaches across settings to achieve richer and more informative datasets.

Monitoring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death using electronic health registries in ≥65 years old population in six European countries, October 2021 to November 2022.

BACKGROUND: Within the ECDC-VEBIS project, we prospectively monitored vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalisation and COVID-19-related death using electronic health registries (EHR), between October 2021 and November 2022, in community-dwelling residents aged 65-79 and ≥80 years in six European countries. METHODS: EHR linkage was used to construct population cohorts in Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Navarre (Spain), Norway and Portugal. Using a common protocol, for each outcome, VE was estimated monthly over 8-week follow-up periods, allowing 1 month-lag for data consolidation. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and VE = (1 - aHR) × 100%. Site-specific estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: For ≥80 years, considering unvaccinated as the reference, VE against COVID-19 hospitalisation decreased from 66.9% (95% CI: 60.1; 72.6) to 36.1% (95% CI: -27.3; 67.9) for the primary vaccination and from 95.6% (95% CI: 88.0; 98.4) to 67.7% (95% CI: 45.9; 80.8) for the first booster. Similar trends were observed for 65-79 years. The second booster VE against hospitalisation ranged between 82.0% (95% CI: 75.9; 87.0) and 83.9% (95% CI: 77.7; 88.4) for the ≥80 years and between 39.3% (95% CI: -3.9; 64.5) and 80.6% (95% CI: 67.2; 88.5) for 65-79 years. The first booster VE against COVID-19-related death declined over time for both age groups, while the second booster VE against death remained above 80% for the ≥80 years. CONCLUSIONS: Successive vaccine boosters played a relevant role in maintaining protection against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death, in the context of decreasing VE over time. Multicountry data from EHR facilitate robust near-real-time VE monitoring in the EU/EEA and support public health decision-making.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against influenza A subtypes in Europe: Results from the 2021-2022 I-MOVE primary care multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: In 2021-2022, influenza A viruses dominated in Europe. The I-MOVE primary care network conducted a multicentre test-negative study to measure influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). METHODS: Primary care practitioners collected information on patients presenting with acute respiratory infection. Cases were influenza A(H3N2) or A(H1N1)pdm09 RT-PCR positive, and controls were influenza virus negative. We calculated VE using logistic regression, adjusting for study site, age, sex, onset date, and presence of chronic conditions. RESULTS: Between week 40 2021 and week 20 2022, we included over 11 000 patients of whom 253 and 1595 were positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 75% (95% CI: 43-89) and 81% (95% CI: 45-93) among those aged 15-64 years. Overall VE against influenza A(H3N2) was 29% (95% CI: 12-42) and 25% (95% CI: -41 to 61), 33% (95% CI: 14-49), and 26% (95% CI: -22 to 55) among those aged 0-14, 15-64, and over 65 years, respectively. The A(H3N2) VE among the influenza vaccination target group was 20% (95% CI: -6 to 39). All 53 sequenced A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses belonged to clade 6B.1A.5a.1. Among 410 sequenced influenza A(H3N2) viruses, all but eight belonged to clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2. DISCUSSION: Despite antigenic mismatch between vaccine and circulating strains for influenza A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09, 2021-2022 VE estimates against circulating influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 were the highest within the I-MOVE network since the 2009 influenza pandemic. VE against A(H3N2) was lower than A(H1N1)pdm09, but at least one in five individuals vaccinated against influenza were protected against presentation to primary care with laboratory-confirmed influenza.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among healthcare workers in Albania (COVE-AL): protocol for a prospective cohort study and cohort baseline data.

INTRODUCTION: Critical questions remain about COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in real-world settings, particularly in middle-income countries. We describe a study protocol to evaluate COVID-19 VE in preventing laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in health workers (HWs) in Albania, an upper-middle-income country. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this 12-month prospective cohort study, we enrolled HWs at three hospitals in Albania. HWs are vaccinated through the routine COVID-19 vaccine campaign. Participants completed a baseline survey about demographics, clinical comorbidities, and infection risk behaviours. Baseline serology samples were also collected and tested against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and respiratory swabs were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Participants complete weekly symptom questionnaires and symptomatic participants have a respiratory swab collected, which is tested for SARS-CoV-2. At 3, 6, 9 months and 12 months of the study, serology will be collected and tested for antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein and spike protein. VE will be estimated using a piecewise proportional hazards model (VE=1-HR). BASELINE DATA: From February to May 2021, 1504 HWs were enrolled. The median age was 44 (range: 22-71) and 78% were female. At enrolment, 72% of participants were seropositive for SARS-CoV-2. 56% of participants were vaccinated with one dose, of whom 98% received their first shot within 4 days of enrolment. All HWs received the Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol and procedures were reviewed and approved by the WHO Ethical Review Board, reference number CERC.0097A, and the Albanian Institute of Public Health Ethical Review Board, reference number 156. All participants have provided written informed consent to participate in this study. The primary results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal at the time of completion. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04811391.

Early epidemiological investigations: World Health Organization UNITY protocols provide a standardized and timely international investigation framework during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The declaration of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on 30 January 2020 required rapid implementation of early investigations to inform appropriate national and global public health actions. METHODS: The suite of existing pandemic preparedness generic epidemiological early investigation protocols was rapidly adapted for COVID-19, branded the 'UNITY studies' and promoted globally for the implementation of standardized and quality studies. Ten protocols were developed investigating household (HH) transmission, the first few cases (FFX), population seroprevalence (SEROPREV), health facilities transmission (n = 2), vaccine effectiveness (n = 2), pregnancy outcomes and transmission, school transmission, and surface contamination. Implementation was supported by WHO and its partners globally, with emphasis to support building surveillance and research capacities in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). RESULTS: WHO generic protocols were rapidly developed and published on the WHO website, 5/10 protocols within the first 3 months of the response. As of 30 June 2021, 172 investigations were implemented by 97 countries, of which 62 (64%) were LMIC. The majority of countries implemented population seroprevalence (71 countries) and first few cases/household transmission (37 countries) studies. CONCLUSION: The widespread adoption of UNITY protocols across all WHO regions indicates that they addressed subnational and national needs to support local public health decision-making to prevent and control the pandemic.