Lessons Learned on Observed-to-Expected Analysis Using Spontaneous Reports During Mass Vaccination.

During the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, observed-to-expected analysis was used by the European Medicines Agency to contextualise data from spontaneous reports to generate real-time evidence on emerging safety concerns that may impact the benefit-risk profile of COVID-19 vaccines. Observed-to-expected analysis compares the number of cases spontaneously reported for an event of interest after vaccination ('observed') to the 'expected' number of cases anticipated to occur in the same number of individuals had they not been vaccinated. Observed-to-expected analysis is a robust methodology that relies on several assumptions that have been described in regulatory guidelines and scientific literature. The use of observed-to-expected analysis to support the safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines has provided valuable insights and lessons on its design and interpretability, which could prove to be beneficial in future analyses. When undertaking an observed-to-expected analysis within the context of safety monitoring, several aspects need attention. In particular, we emphasise the importance of stratified and harmonised data collection both for vaccine exposure and spontaneous reporting data, the need for alignment between coding dictionaries and the crucial role of accurate background incidence rates for adverse events of special interest. While these considerations and recommendations were determined in the context of the COVID-19 mass vaccination setting, they are generalisable in principle.

Hepatitis C community prevalence is over-estimated: a prospective, birth cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus infection is often asymptomatic, and many patients may be unaware they are infected. Community-based, birth cohort screening has been advocated to identify these patients. It has been estimated that 0.7-1% of individuals born between 1965 and 1985 in Ireland are infected. The cost-effectiveness of screening is critically dependent on the population prevalence. AIMS: The aim is to determine the community prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection in the birth cohort 1965-1985. METHODS: Residual serum samples from blood tests ordered by community general practitioners were anonymised and analysed for the presence of hepatitis C antibody ± antigen. Twelve large general hospitals throughout the country participated. RESULTS: A total of 14,320 samples were tested, 9347 of which were from the birth cohort 1965-1985. Seventy-two samples were positive for hepatitis C antibody of which 12 were positive for hepatitis C antigen (17%). The overall prevalence of hepatitis C antigen in the birth cohort was 0.09%. A higher prevalence (0.39%) was identified in males in two urban areas of Dublin. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis C virus seroprevalence was much lower than previously estimated. The proportion of antibody positive patients with hepatitis C antigen was also lower than expected suggesting the effects of treatment and/or high spontaneous viral clearance. Universal birth cohort screening is unlikely to be cost-effective. Targeted birth cohort screening in high prevalence areas could be considered.