RESUMO
Older age and comorbid conditions increase risk for severe RSV. Skilled nursing (SNF) and assisted living (AL) facilities represent an intersection of risk factors. In a 3-year prospective study (Rochester, NY) we compared population-based incidence of RSV-associated hospitalization for community-dwelling, SNF and AL adults ≥65 years. Median age was 76, 83 and 86 years, respectively, and dementia and CHF more prevalent among SNF and assisted living residents. Average annual incidence was 117 (95%CI:104-132), 440 (95%CI:307-629) and 740/100,000 persons (95%CI:523-1045) for community-dwelling, SNF and AL adults ≥65 years, respectively, demonstrating need for unequivocal RSV vaccine recommendations in SNF and AL residents.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes substantial respiratory disease. Bivalent RSV prefusion F (RSVpreF) vaccine is licensed in ≥60-year-olds. RSVpreF was well-tolerated and immunogenic in a phase 1/2 study. We evaluated antibody persistence after initial vaccination and safety and immunogenicity after revaccination from this study. METHODS: Healthy adults were randomized to receive both initial vaccination and revaccination 12 months later with either placebo or RSVpreF 240 µg (±Al(OH)3). RSV-A and RSV-B geometric mean neutralizing titers (GMTs) were measured through 12 months after both vaccinations. Tolerability/safety was assessed. RESULTS: There were 263 participants revaccinated (18-49-years-old, n=134; 65-85-years-old, n=129). Among 18-49-year-olds and 65-85-year-olds, respectively, geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) for both RSV subgroups (RSV-A; RSV-B) 1 month after initial RSVpreF vaccination were 13.3-20.4 and 8.9-15.5 compared with levels before initial vaccination; corresponding GMFRs 12 months after initial vaccination were 4.1-5.0 and 2.6-4.1. GMFRs 1 month after revaccination compared with levels before revaccination were 1.4-2.3 and 1.4-2.2 for 18-49-year-olds and 65-85-year-olds, respectively. Peak GMTs after revaccination were lower than those after initial vaccination. GMTs 12 months after initial vaccination and revaccination were similar, with GMFRs ranging from 0.7-1.6. No safety signals occurred. CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF revaccination was immunogenic and well-tolerated among adults. NCT03529773.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines are highly efficacious at preventing severe disease in the general population, current data are lacking regarding vaccine efficacy (VE) for individuals with mild immunocompromising conditions. METHODS: A post hoc, cross-protocol analysis of participant-level data from the blinded phase of four randomized, placebo-controlled, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine phase 3 trials (Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax) was performed. We defined a "tempered immune system" (TIS) variable via a consensus panel based on medical history and medications to determine VE against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases in TIS participants versus non-TIS individuals starting at 14 days after completion of the primary series through the blinded phase for each of the 4 trials. An analysis of participants living with well-controlled human immunodeficiency virus was conducted using the same methods. RESULTS: A total of 3852/30 351 (12.7%) Moderna participants, 3088/29 868 (10.3%) Novavax participants, 3549/32 380 (11.0%) AstraZeneca participants, and 5047/43 788 (11.5%) Janssen participants were identified as having a TIS. Most TIS conditions (73.9%) were due to metabolism and nutritional disorders. Vaccination (vs placebo) significantly reduced the likelihood of symptomatic and severe COVID-19 for all participants for each trial. VE was not significantly different for TIS participants versus non-TIS for either symptomatic or severe COVID-19 for each trial, nor was VE significantly different in the symptomatic endpoint for participants with human immunodeficiency virus. CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with mildly immunocompromising conditions, there is no evidence of differences in VE against symptomatic or severe COVID-19 compared with those with non-TIS in the 4 COVID-19 vaccine randomized controlled efficacy trials.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficácia de Vacinas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Feminino , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , Idoso , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
Seasonal influenza is usually considered an acute respiratory infection with a full recovery within a week. In addition to the traditional outcomes, there is now evidence of indirect effects in terms of neurological and functional complications. Major organ systems can be affected, underlining the need for preventative measures against infection. The aim of this podcast, featuring Dr. Ann Falsey, Dr. Stefania Maggi, and Dr. Tor Biering-Sørensen, is to outline influenza complications beyond acute respiratory disease, as well as discussing the need for quality of evidence when evaluating influenza vaccines. Assessing the benefits of vaccination can be challenging. To ensure a high quality of evidence, the innovative randomization of patients within the study design to avoid bias and the assessment of additional outcomes beyond immunogenicity as well as the inclusion of a broad population-including frail or vulnerable individuals-are essential. Studies leveraging nationwide registries such as the DANFLU-2 trial in Denmark highlight the advantages of a digitalized healthcare system for conducting large-scale randomized trials. Furthermore, large-scale trials such as the Gravenstein study have supplied a sizable body of evidence supporting the use of high-dose influenza vaccine in older adults. In conclusion, achieving a high quality of evidence is key for decision-making on seasonal influenza vaccines.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and human metapneumovirus (hMPV) are common respiratory viruses causing similar symptoms. Optimal tools to assess illness severity for these viruses have not been defined. Using the Hospitalized Acute Respiratory Tract Infection (HARTI) study data, we report symptom severity by clinician-rated clinical severity scores (CSS) in adults with influenza, RSV, or hMPV and correlations between CSS and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). METHODS: HARTI was a global epidemiologic study in adults hospitalized with acute respiratory tract infections. Patients were assessed at enrollment within 24 h of admission with CSS and twice during hospitalization with CSS, Respiratory Infection Intensity and Impact Questionnaire™ (RiiQ™), and EQ-5D-5L. Data were summarized descriptively, stratified by pathogen and baseline and hospitalization characteristics. Domain (general, upper respiratory, and lower respiratory) and sign/symptom subscores are presented for CSS; sign/symptom subscores are presented for RiiQ™ results. RESULTS: Data from 635 patients with influenza, 248 with RSV, and 107 with hMPV were included. At enrollment, total CSS and general and lower respiratory signs/symptoms (LRS) scores were higher for RSV and hMPV than influenza. Between-pathogen differences were greatest for LRS scores. Dyspnea, rales/rhonchi, wheezing, and shortness of breath scores trended higher for RSV and hMPV than influenza. RiiQ™ scores for cough, fatigue, and short of breath were strongly correlated with corresponding clinician-rated symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the use of PROs (e.g., the RiiQ™) correlating with clinician assessments to gauge patient well-being and aid patient management by accurately assessing respiratory illness severity due to RSV, hMPV, or influenza.
Assuntos
Hospitalização , Influenza Humana , Metapneumovirus , Infecções por Paramyxoviridae , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial , Infecções Respiratórias , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Humanos , Metapneumovirus/isolamento & purificação , Masculino , Feminino , Infecções Respiratórias/virologia , Infecções Respiratórias/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/virologia , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/complicações , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/virologia , Influenza Humana/complicações , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Adulto , Infecções por Paramyxoviridae/virologia , Infecções por Paramyxoviridae/epidemiologia , Infecções por Paramyxoviridae/complicações , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Vírus Sincicial Respiratório Humano/isolamento & purificação , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , AdolescenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein showed 80·0% vaccine efficacy against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) in older adults during one RSV season. No RSV vaccines have shown three-season efficacy. We aimed to evaluate efficacy of Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein over three RSV seasons. METHODS: CYPRESS was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study done at 40 US clinical research centres wherein adults aged 65 years or older were centrally randomly assigned 1:1 by computer algorithm to receive Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein or placebo (one intramuscular injection) on day 1. Investigators, participants, site personnel, and the sponsor were masked to vaccine allocation, except for individuals involved in preparation of study vaccinations. The primary endpoint (first occurrence of RSV-mediated LRTD meeting one of three case definitions) was previously reported. Here, the predefined exploratory endpoint of vaccine efficacy against RSV-positive LRTD was assessed in the per-protocol efficacy set (all participants randomly assigned and vaccinated without protocol deviations affecting efficacy) through season 1 and from day 365 until the end of season 3. Humoral and cellular immunogenicity was assessed in a subset of randomly assigned and vaccinated participants. The secondary endpoint of safety through the first RSV season was previously reported; follow-up for selected safety outcomes (fatal adverse events, adverse events leading to study discontinuation, serious adverse events, and vaccine-related serious adverse events) until study completion is reported here in all randomly assigned and vaccinated participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03982199 and is complete. FINDINGS: Of 6672 adults screened, 5782 participants (2891 each receiving vaccine or placebo) were enrolled and vaccinated between Aug 5 and Nov 13, 2019. The season 2 per-protocol efficacy set included 2124 vaccine recipients and 2126 placebo recipients (season 3: 864 and 881; across three seasons: 2795 and 2803, respectively). Vaccine efficacy against RSV LRTD was 76·1% (95% CI 26·9-94·2) over seasons 2 and 3 and 78·7% (57·3-90·4) across three seasons. For those in the immunogenicity subset (vaccine n=97; placebo n=98), immune responses remained above baseline for at least 1 year. Serious adverse events occurred in 47 (2·1%) and 12 (1·3%) vaccine recipients and 45 (2·1%) and 10 (1·1%) placebo recipients during seasons 2 and 3, respectively. No treatment-related serious or fatal adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein maintained high efficacy against RSV LRTD in older adults across three RSV seasons. FUNDING: Janssen Vaccines & Prevention.
RESUMO
Background: Immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is now widespread; however, the degree of cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and endemic, seasonal human coronaviruses (HCoVs) remains unclear. Methods: SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV cross-immunity was evaluated in adult participants enrolled in a US sub-study in the phase III, randomized controlled trial (NCT04516746) of AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) primary-series vaccination for one-year. Anti-HCoV spike-binding antibodies against HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-OC43, and HCoV-NL63 were evaluated in participants following study dosing and, in the AZD1222 group, after a non-study third-dose booster. Timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion (assessed via anti-nucleocapsid antibody levels) and incidence of COVID-19 were evaluated in those who received AZD1222 primary-series by baseline anti-HCoV titers. Results: We evaluated 2,020/21,634 participants in the AZD1222 group and 1,007/10,816 in the placebo group. At the one-year data cutoff (March 11, 2022) mean duration of follow up was 230.9 (SD: 106.36, range: 1-325) and 94.3 (74.12, 1-321) days for participants in the AZD1222 (n = 1,940) and placebo (n = 962) groups, respectively. We observed little elevation in anti-HCoV humoral titers post study-dosing or post-boosting, nor evidence of waning over time. The occurrence and timing of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion and incidence of COVID-19 were not largely impacted by baseline anti-HCoV titers. Conclusion: We found limited evidence for cross-immunity between SARS-CoV-2 and HCoVs following AZD1222 primary series and booster vaccination. Susceptibility to future emergence of novel coronaviruses will likely persist despite a high prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 immunity in global populations.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Imunidade Humoral , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/imunologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/imunologia , Adulto , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Masculino , Feminino , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Imunidade Humoral/efeitos dos fármacos , Reações Cruzadas/imunologia , Estações do Ano , Adulto Jovem , Vacinação , Método Duplo-CegoRESUMO
Importance: SARS-CoV-2 viral load (VL) in the nasopharynx is difficult to quantify and standardize across settings, but it may inform transmission potential and disease severity. Objective: To characterize VL at COVID-19 diagnosis among previously uninfected and unvaccinated individuals by evaluating the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with VL, as well as the ability of VL to predict severe disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary cross-protocol analysis used individual-level data from placebo recipients from 4 harmonized, phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials sponsored by Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax. Participants were SARS-CoV-2 negative at baseline and acquired COVID-19 during the blinded phase of the trials. The setting included the US, Brazil, South Africa, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Chile, and Mexico; start dates were July 27, 2020, to December 27, 2020; data cutoff dates were March 26, 2021, to July 30, 2021. Statistical analysis was performed from November 2022 to June 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Linear regression was used to assess the association of demographic and clinical characteristics, viral variant, and trial with polymerase chain reaction-measured log10 VL in nasal and/or nasopharyngeal swabs taken at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis. Results: Among 1667 participants studied (886 [53.1%] male; 995 [59.7%] enrolled in the US; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [14.7] years; 204 [12.2%] aged 65 years or older; 196 [11.8%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 150 [9%] Black or African American, 1112 [66.7%] White; 762 [45.7%] Hispanic or Latino), median (IQR) log10 VL at diagnosis was 6.18 (4.66-7.12) log10 copies/mL. Participant characteristics and viral variant explained only 5.9% of the variability in VL. The independent factor with the highest observed differences was trial: Janssen participants had 0.54 log10 copies/mL lower mean VL vs Moderna participants (95% CI, 0.20 to 0.87 log10 copies/mL lower). In the Janssen study, which captured the largest number of COVID-19 events and variants and used the most intensive post-COVID surveillance, neither VL at diagnosis nor averaged over days 1 to 28 post diagnosis was associated with COVID-19 severity. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of placebo recipients from 4 randomized phase 3 trials, high variability was observed in SARS-CoV-2 VL at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, and only a fraction was explained by individual participant characteristics or viral variant. These results suggest challenges for future studies of interventions seeking to influence VL and elevates the importance of standardized methods for specimen collection and viral load quantitation.