Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 during the Omicron wave: Results of a longitudinal serosurvey in Québec, Canada.

OBJECTIVES: Conventional serological approaches lack sensitivity for the detection of recent SARS-CoV-2 infections in vaccinated individuals, as these individuals exhibit a blunted anti-nucleocapsid (N) response. This limitation was recently addressed by the development of a "ratio-based approach", which compares longitudinally collected specimens. Here, we used this approach to estimate the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and reinfection in Québec (Canada) during the Omicron wave. METHODS: Consenting plasma donors were included if they donated plasma before December 15, 2021 and during six consecutive periods of ~ 3 months between December 15, 2021 and July 7, 2023 (study period). Anti-N levels were measured with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and seroconversion was characterized by a ratio of ≥ 1.5 between the optical density of two consecutive samples. RESULTS: Among the 254 donors, the adjusted proportion of donors (95% confidence interval [CI]) with a new infection ranged between 18.1% (13.2‒23.0) and 24.2% (18.8‒29.7) over Periods 1-5 and fell to 7.9% (4.9‒11.0) during Period 6. During the study period, the proportion of newly infected donors decreased among those aged < 60 (Period 1 = 31.6%, Period 5 = 4.4%), but increased among those aged ≥ 70 (Period 1 = 0.3%, Period 6 = 10.3%). Throughout the study period, 72 (28.3%) reinfections occurred, including two seroconversion events in a single donor. Overall, 87.4% (95% CI = 82.7‒91.2) were infected by SARS-CoV-2 at least once during the study period. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of the Québec population may have been infected during the Omicron wave. This longitudinal survey demonstrates the usefulness of the "ratio-based approach" for identifying both new infections and reinfections in a vaccinated population.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIFS: Les approches sérologiques classiques démontrent un manque de sensibilité pour la détection des infections récentes par le SRAS-CoV-2 chez les personnes vaccinées, car ces dernières présentent une réponse anti-nucléocapside (N) peu élevée. Cette limitation a été récemment surmontée suite au développement d'une « approche basée sur les ratios ¼, qui compare des échantillons collectés de manière longitudinale. Nous avons utilisé cette approche pour estimer l'incidence de l'infection et de la réinfection par le SRAS-CoV-2 au Québec (Canada) pendant la vague Omicron. MéTHODES: Les donneurs de plasma consentants étaient inclus dans l'étude s'ils avaient donné du plasma avant le 15 décembre 2021 et pendant six périodes consécutives de 2 à 3 mois entre le 15 décembre 2021 et le 7 juillet 2023 (période d'étude). Les taux d'anti-N ont été mesurés par ELISA et la séroconversion a été caractérisée par un rapport ≥ 1,5 entre la densité optique de deux échantillons consécutifs. RéSULTATS: Parmi les 254 donneurs, le risque ajusté (IC 95 %) d'infection a varié entre 18,1 % (13,2‒23,0) et 24,2 % (18,8‒29,7) au cours des périodes 1 à 5 et a chuté à 7,9 % (4,9‒11,0) au cours de la période 6. Au cours de la période d'étude, le risque d'infection a diminué chez les donneurs âgés de moins de 60 ans (période 1 = 31,6 %, période 5 = 4,4 %), mais a augmenté chez ceux âgés de ≥ 70 ans (période 1 = 0,3 %, période 6 = 10,3 %). Tout au long de la période d'étude, 72 (28,3 %) réinfections se sont produites (c'est-à-dire deux événements de séroconversion chez un même donneur). Dans l'ensemble, 87,4 % (IC 95 % = 82,7‒91,2) ont été infectés par le SRAS-CoV-2 au moins une fois au cours de la période d'étude. CONCLUSION: La grande majorité de la population québécoise pourrait avoir été infectée lors de la vague Omicron. Cette enquête longitudinale démontre l'utilité de l'approche basée sur les ratios pour identifier les nouvelles infections et les réinfections dans une population vaccinée.

mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety among older adults from the Canadian National Vaccine Safety Network.

This study examined short-to-medium term safety of COVID-19 vaccines among adults aged ≥65 years using the Canadian National Vaccine Safety Network active safety surveillance data. Both vaccinated and unvaccinated older adult participants recruited from seven provinces and territories were included in the analysis. Safety was assessed at 7 days after COVID-19 vaccination (dose 1, 2 and 3), and 7 months after dose 1. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between BNT162b2/mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines and two short-term health events: 1) health event preventing daily activities and/or required medical consultation, 2) serious health events resulting in an emergency department visit and/or hospitalization within 7 days following each dose. We also assessed the rates of serious health events for the period between dose 1 and 2, and 7-months following dose 1. Between December 2020 and February 2022, a total of 173,038, 104,452, and 13,970 older adults completed dose 1, dose 2, and dose 3 surveys, respectively. The control survey was completed by 2,955 unvaccinated older adults. Health events occurred more frequently among recipients after dose 2 homologous mRNA-1273 (adjusted odds ratio [95 % confidence interval]: 2.91 [2.24-3.79]) and dose two heterologous (BNT162b2 followed by mRNA-1273): 1.50 [1.12-2.02] compared to unvaccinated counterparts. There was no difference in event rates after any dose of BNT162b2 and unvaccinated participants. The rates of serious health events following COVID-19 vaccination were very low (≤0.3 %) across all vaccine products and doses, and were not higher compared to unvaccinated controls, and were not associated with an emergency department visit or hospitalization within 7 days following vaccination. Reported symptoms were self-limited and rarely required medical assessment. Our findings further strengthen the current evidence that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are safe and can be used to inform older adults about expected adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination.

Safety of Direct Drug Provocation for the Evaluation of Penicillin Allergy in Low-Risk Adults.

BACKGROUND: About 10% of patients have a penicillin allergy label, but less than 5% of them are actually allergic. Unnecessary penicillin avoidance is associated with serious medical consequences. Given the growing number of these labels, it is imperative that our diagnostic strategy for penicillin allergy be as efficient as possible. The validity of traditionally used skin tests (STs) has been questioned, whereas drug provocation testing (DPT), the criterion standard, without previous ST appears very safe in most cases. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of direct DPT without consideration for ST results and the validity of ST in the diagnosis of penicillin allergy. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study without a control group, we recruited patients consulting an allergist for penicillin allergy. Patients underwent ST followed by DPT regardless of ST results. Patients with anaphylaxis to penicillin within the past 5 years or a severe delayed reaction were excluded, as were those with significant cardiorespiratory comorbidity. RESULTS: None of the 1002 recruited patients had a serious reaction to DPT. Ten (1.0%) had a mild immediate reaction, of whom only 1 (0.1%) was considered likely IgE-mediated. The positive and negative predictive values of ST for an immediate reaction were 3.6% and 99.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a low-risk adult population reporting penicillin allergy, ST has very poor positive predictive value. Direct DPT without ST is safe and appears to be an ideal diagnostic strategy to remove penicillin allergy labels that could be implemented in first-line practice.

A multiprovincial retrospective analysis of the incidence of myocarditis or pericarditis after mRNA vaccination compared to the incidence after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Objective: To compare myocarditis/pericarditis risk after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination versus SARS-CoV-2 infection, and to assess if myocarditis/pericarditis risk varies by vaccine dosing interval. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we used linked databases in Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia between January 26, 2020, and September 9, 2021. We included individuals aged 12 or above who received an mRNA vaccine as the second dose or were SARS-CoV-2-positive by RT-PCR. The outcome was hospitalization/emergency department visit for myocarditis/pericarditis within 21 days of exposure. We calculated age- and sex-stratified incidence ratios (IRs) of myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA vaccination versus SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also calculated myocarditis/pericarditis incidence by vaccine type, homologous/heterologous schedule, and dosing interval. We pooled province-specific estimates using meta-analysis. Results: Following 18,860,817 mRNA vaccinations and 860,335 SARS-CoV-2 infections, we observed 686 and 160 myocarditis/pericarditis cases, respectively. Myocarditis/pericarditis incidence was lower after vaccination than infection (IR [BNT162b2/SARS-CoV-2], 0.14; 95%CI, 0.07-0.29; IR [mRNA-1273/SARS-CoV-2], 0.28; 95%CI, 0.20-0.39). Within the vaccinated cohort, myocarditis/pericarditis incidence was lower with longer dosing intervals; IR (56 or more days/15-30 days) was 0.28 (95%CI, 0.19-0.41) for BNT162b2 and 0.26 (95%CI, 0.18-0.38) for mRNA-1273. Conclusion: Myocarditis/pericarditis risk was lower after mRNA vaccination than SARS-CoV-2 infection, and with longer intervals between primary vaccine doses.

Revaccination outcomes among adolescents and adults with suspected hypersensitivity reactions following COVID-19 vaccination: A Canadian immunization research network study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination has been associated with anaphylaxis and hypersensitivity reactions. Infectious disease physicians and allergists in the Canadian Special Immunization Clinic (SIC) Network developed guidance for evaluating patients with adverse events following immunization (AEFI) including suspected hypersensitivity. This study evaluated management and adverse event recurrence following subsequent COVID-19 vaccinations. METHODS: Individuals aged 12 years and older enrolled at participating SICs before February 28, 2023 who were referred for suspected or diagnosed hypersensitivity reaction following COVID-19 vaccination, or for prevaccination assessment of suspected allergy to a COVID-19 vaccine component were included. De-identified clinical assessments and revaccination data, captured in a centralized database, were analyzed. The Brighton Collaboration case definition (BCCD) for anaphylaxis (2023 version) was applied. RESULTS: The analysis included 206 participants from 13 sites: 26 participants referred for pre-vaccination assessment and 180 participants referred for adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination (15/180 [8.3%] with BCCD confirmed anaphylaxis, 84 [46.7%] with immediate hypersensitivity symptoms not meeting BCCD, 33 [18.3%] with other diagnosed hypersensitivity reactions, and 48 [26.7%] participants with a final diagnosis of non-hypersensitivity AEFI). Among participants referred for AEFIs following COVID-19 vaccination, 166/180 (92.2%) were recommended for COVID-19 revaccination after risk assessment, of whom 158/166 (95.2%) were revaccinated (all with a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine). After revaccination, 1/15 (6.7%) participants with prior anaphylaxis, 1/77 (1.3%) with immediate hypersensitivity not meeting criteria for anaphylaxis and 1/24 (4.2%) with other physician diagnosed hypersensitivity developed recurrent AEFI symptoms that met the BCCD for anaphylaxis. All 26 participants referred pre-vaccination, including 9 (34.6%) with history of polyethylene glycol-asparaginase reactions, were vaccinated without occurrence of immediate hypersensitivity symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals in this national cohort who experienced a hypersensitivity event following COVID-19 vaccination and were referred for specialist review were revaccinated without AEFI recurrence, suggesting that specialist evaluation can facilitate safe revaccination.