BNT162b2 Effectiveness Against Delta and Omicron Variants of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Adolescents Aged 12-17 Years, by Dosing Interval and Duration.

BACKGROUND: Two- and 3-dose BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, including Delta and Omicron variants, was assessed among adolescents in Canada, where first and second doses were spaced longer than the manufacturer-specified 3-week interval. METHODS: Test-negative design estimated VE against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection ≥14 days after vaccination among 12-17-year-olds in Quebec and British Columbia, Canada, between 5 September 2021 and 30 April 2022 (epidemiological weeks 36-17). VE was explored by the interval between first and second doses, time since the second dose, and with a third dose. RESULTS: The VE against Delta was ≥90% until at least 5 months after the second dose. The VE against Omicron decreased from about 65%-75% at 2-3 weeks to ≤50% by the third month after vaccination, restored to approximately 65% by a third dose. Although confidence intervals overlapped, VE against Omicron was about 5%-7% higher (absolute) when first and second doses were spaced ≥8 versus 3-4 weeks apart. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescents, 2 BNT162b2 doses provided strong and sustained protection against Delta but reduced and rapidly waning VE against Omicron. A longer interval between first and second doses and a third dose marginally improved Omicron protection.

Single-Dose Messenger RNA Vaccine Effectiveness Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Healthcare Workers Extending 16 Weeks Postvaccination: A Test-Negative Design From Québec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, first and second doses of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were uniquely spaced 16 weeks apart. We estimated 1- and 2-dose mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) among healthcare workers (HCWs) in Québec, Canada, including protection against varying outcome severity, variants of concern (VOCs), and the stability of single-dose protection up to 16 weeks postvaccination. METHODS: A test-negative design compared vaccination among SARS-CoV-2 test-positive and weekly matched (10:1), randomly sampled, test-negative HCWs using linked surveillance and immunization databases. Vaccine status was defined by 1 dose ≥14 days or 2 doses ≥7 days before illness onset or specimen collection. Adjusted VE was estimated by conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Primary analysis included 5316 cases and 53 160 controls. Single-dose VE was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68%-73%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection; 73% (95% CI, 71%-75%) against illness; and 97% (95% CI, 92%-99%) against hospitalization. Two-dose VE was 86% (95% CI, 81%-90%) and 93% (95% CI, 89%-95%), respectively, with no hospitalizations. VE was higher for non-VOCs than VOCs (73% Alpha) among single-dose recipients but not 2-dose recipients. Across 16 weeks, no decline in single-dose VE was observed, with appropriate stratification based upon prioritized vaccination determined by higher vs lower likelihood of direct patient contact. CONCLUSIONS: One mRNA vaccine dose provided substantial and sustained protection to HCWs extending at least 4 months postvaccination. In circumstances of vaccine shortage, delaying the second dose may be a pertinent public health strategy.

Two-Dose Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Vaccine Effectiveness With Mixed Schedules and Extended Dosing Intervals: Test-Negative Design Studies From British Columbia and Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The Canadian coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) immunization strategy deferred second doses and allowed mixed schedules. We compared 2-dose vaccine effectiveness (VE) by vaccine type (mRNA and/or ChAdOx1), interval between doses, and time since second dose in 2 of Canada's larger provinces. METHODS: Two-dose VE against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or hospitalization among adults ≥18 years, including due to Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants of concern (VOCs), was assessed ≥14 days postvaccination by test-negative design studies separately conducted in British Columbia and Quebec, Canada, between 30 May and 27 November (epi-weeks 22-47) 2021. RESULTS: In both provinces, all homologous or heterologous mRNA and/or ChAdOx1 2-dose schedules were associated with ≥90% reduction in SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization risk for ≥7 months. With slight decline from a peak of >90%, VE against infection was ≥80% for ≥6 months following homologous mRNA vaccination, lower by ∼10% when both doses were ChAdOx1 but comparably high following heterologous ChAdOx1 + mRNA receipt. Findings were similar by age group, sex, and VOC. VE was significantly higher with longer 7-8-week versus manufacturer-specified 3-4-week intervals between mRNA doses. CONCLUSIONS: Two doses of any mRNA and/or ChAdOx1 combination gave substantial and sustained protection against SARS-CoV-2 hospitalization, spanning Delta-dominant circulation. ChAdOx1 VE against infection was improved by heterologous mRNA series completion. A 7-8-week interval between first and second doses improved mRNA VE and may be the optimal schedule outside periods of intense epidemic surge. Findings support interchangeability and extended intervals between SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses, with potential global implications for low-coverage areas and, going forward, for children.

Do intentions lead to action? Results of a longitudinal study assessing determinants of Tdap vaccine uptake during pregnancy in Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, vaccination against pertussis (Tdap) during pregnancy has been recommended since 2018, with suboptimal uptake. We aimed to assess the determinants of intention and uptake of Tdap vaccine among pregnant women in Quebec. METHODS: Participants (< 21 weeks of pregnancy) were recruited in four Quebec regions. Two online surveys were administered during pregnancy (< 21 weeks and > 35 weeks). One measured vaccination intention and the other assessed the actual decision. Questionnaires were informed by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). We used logistic multivariate analysis to identify determinants of Tdap vaccination uptake during pregnancy using responses to both questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 741 women answered the first survey and 568 (76.7%), the second survey. In the first survey most participants intended to receive the Tdap vaccine during their pregnancy (76.3%) and in the second survey, 82.4% reported having been vaccinated against Tdap during their pregnancy. In multivariate analysis, the main determinants of vaccine uptake were: a recommendation from a healthcare provider (OR = 7.6), vaccine intention (OR = 6.12), social norms (or thinking that most pregnant women will be vaccinated (OR = 3.81), recruitment site (OR = 3.61 for General Family Medicine unit) perceived behavioral control (or low perceived barriers to access vaccination services, (OR = 2.32) and anticipated feeling of guilt if not vaccinated (OR = 2.13). Safety concerns were the main reason for not intending or not receiving the vaccine during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: We observed high vaccine acceptance and uptake of pertussis vaccine in pregnancy. The core components of the TPB (intention, social norms and perceived behavioral control) were all predictors of vaccine uptake, but our multivariate analysis also showed that other determinants were influential: being sufficiently informed about Tdap vaccination, not having vaccine safety concerns, and anticipated regret if unvaccinated. To ensure high vaccine acceptance and uptake in pregnancy, strong recommendations by trusted healthcare providers and ease of access to vaccination services remain instrumental.

SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in health care workers from 10 hospitals in Quebec, Canada: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected health care workers. We sought to estimate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence among hospital health care workers in Quebec, Canada, after the first wave of the pandemic and to explore factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity. METHODS: Between July 6 and Sept. 24, 2020, we enrolled health care workers from 10 hospitals, including 8 from a region with a high incidence of COVID-19 (the Montréal area) and 2 from low-incidence regions of Quebec. Eligible health care workers were physicians, nurses, orderlies and cleaning staff working in 4 types of care units (emergency department, intensive care unit, COVID-19 inpatient unit and non-COVID-19 inpatient unit). Participants completed a questionnaire and underwent SARS-CoV-2 serology testing. We identified factors independently associated with higher seroprevalence. RESULTS: Among 2056 enrolled health care workers, 241 (11.7%) had positive SARS-CoV-2 serology. Of these, 171 (71.0%) had been previously diagnosed with COVID-19. Seroprevalence varied among hospitals, from 2.4% to 3.7% in low-incidence regions to 17.9% to 32.0% in hospitals with outbreaks involving 5 or more health care workers. Higher seroprevalence was associated with working in a hospital where outbreaks occurred (adjusted prevalence ratio 4.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.63-6.57), being a nurse or nursing assistant (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.34, 95% CI 1.03-1.74) or an orderly (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.49, 95% CI 1.12-1.97), and Black or Hispanic ethnicity (adjusted prevalence ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.13-1.76). Lower seroprevalence was associated with working in the intensive care unit (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.71) or the emergency department (adjusted prevalence ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.98). INTERPRETATION: Health care workers in Quebec hospitals were at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, particularly in outbreak settings. More work is needed to better understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission dynamics in health care settings.

Promoting vaccination in the province of Québec: the PromoVaQ randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination has a huge public health impact. Maintaining vaccine coverage is key to avoid the devastating consequences of resurgence. In the Province of Québec, vaccine coverage in young children are sub-optimal, mostly due to ambivalence toward vaccine safety and efficacy. We previously conducted a regional study in the Québec's Eastern Townships region, the PromoVac Study, to test a new educational intervention, based on motivational interviewing techniques, aimed at promoting infant vaccination. This first study evidenced that the intervention led to a marked increase in mothers' intention to vaccinate, and vaccine coverage in their infants. The current study protocol aims at scaling up these results at a provincial level using a randomized controlled trial design. METHODS: This pragmatic, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial will compare the effectiveness of the motivational interviewing to an educational intervention, including the distribution of an information flyer as standard of care on vaccination coverage in four maternity wards across the Province of Québec (PromovaQ). Adult mothers of children born in participating maternity wards were recruited between March 2014 and February 2015. Vaccination coverage will be assessed at 3-years of age, thus the trial is expected to be completed in March 2019. Statistical analyses will be conducted under the intention-to-treat principle. Vaccine coverage will be analyzed using Chi-squared distribution testing and logistic regression to identify determinant factors. Secondary outcomes will include vaccine hesitation and intention scores, mother's knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about immunization, and psychosocial determinants of intention to vaccinate. DISCUSSION: In the case results of this Provincial RCT be confirmed, serious consideration should then be given by Ministry of Health authorities to the possible implementation of MI-based strategies across provincial maternity wards. To ensure adequate input and secure implementation, study design and results will be reviewed with relevant stakeholders, including the children's families, and provincial and regional decision-makers. Results will be adapted and shared with all stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02666872 (Retrospectively registered as January 28, 2016).

Vaccination Against Influenza in Pregnancy: A Survey of Canadian Maternity Care Providers.

OBJECTIVE: Influenza vaccine uptake among Canadian pregnant individuals is suboptimal. Failure to incorporate vaccination into routine prenatal care and a lack of recommendations from healthcare providers are recognized as barriers to vaccination. The aim of this study was to assess Canadian maternity care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding influenza vaccination in pregnancy. METHODS: A cross-sectional Web-based questionnaire was sent during July and August 2017 to family physicians, obstetricians-gynaecologists, midwives, pharmacists, and nurses who care for pregnant individuals. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to determine variables independently associated with providers' recommendation of the influenza vaccine in pregnancy. RESULTS: The analysis included 1061 providers. Most participants (85%) reported being vaccinated against influenza themselves, and 72% reported recommending the influenza vaccine to all of their pregnant patients during the previous influenza season. Participants' attitudes regarding influenza vaccination during pregnancy were generally positive: 64% strongly agreed that pregnant individuals are at an increased risk of complications from influenza, and 69% strongly agreed that it is safe to vaccinate pregnant individuals against influenza. The main determinants of participants' recommendations for influenza vaccination to all pregnant patients were following official recommendations on influenza vaccination, discussing vaccines with most or all pregnant individuals seen in their practice, and being vaccinated themselves during the previous influenza season. CONCLUSION: Enhancing influenza vaccine uptake in pregnancy is largely dependent on maternity care providers' recommendations. This study provides valuable insight on providers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices.

Promoting vaccination in maternity wards ─ motivational interview technique reduces hesitancy and enhances intention to vaccinate, results from a multicentre non-controlled pre- and post-intervention RCT-nested study, Quebec, March 2014 to February 2015.

BackgroundMany countries are grappling with growing numbers of parents who delay or refuse recommended vaccinations for their children. This has created a need for strategies to address vaccine hesitancy (VH) and better support parental decision-making regarding vaccination.AimTo assess vaccination intention (VI) and VH among parents who received an individual motivational-interview (MI) based intervention on infant immunisation during post-partum stay at a maternity ward between March 2014 and February 2015.MethodsThis non-controlled pre-/post-intervention study was conducted using the results from parents enrolled in the intervention arm of the PromoVaQ randomised control trial (RCT), which was conducted in four maternity wards across the Province of Quebec. Participants (n = 1,223) completed pre- and post-intervention questionnaires on VI and VH using Opel's score. Pre-/post-intervention measures were compared using McNemar's test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for continuous variables.ResultsPre-intervention: overall VI was 78% and significantly differed across maternity wards (74%, 77%, 84%, 79%, p = 0.02). Post-intervention: VI rose significantly across maternity wards (89%, 85%, 95%, 93%) and the overall increase in VI was 12% (78% vs 90%, p < 0.0001). VH corroborated these observations, pre- vs post-intervention, for each maternity ward (28% vs 16%, 29% vs 21%, 27% vs 17%, 24% vs 13%). Overall, VH was curbed post-intervention by 40% (27% vs 16%; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsCompared with pre-intervention status, participants who received the MI-based intervention on immunisation displayed lower hesitancy and greater intention to vaccinate their infant at 2 months of age.

Impact of vaccine delays at the 2, 4, 6 and 12 month visits on incomplete vaccination status by 24 months of age in Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Timeliness in the administration of recommended vaccines is often evaluated using vaccine delays and provides more information regarding the susceptibility of children to vaccine-preventable diseases compared with vaccine coverage at a given age. The importance of on-time administration of vaccines scheduled at the first visit is well documented, but data are scarce about the impact of vaccine delays at other visits on vaccination status by 24 months of age. Using vaccine delays for the first three doses of DTaP-containing vaccines and for the first dose of measles-containing vaccines as markers of timeliness at the 2, 4, 6 and 12 month visits, we estimated the proportion of incomplete vaccination status by 24 months of age attributable to a vaccine delay at each of these visits. METHODS: We used the data from six cross-sectional coverage surveys conducted in the Province of Quebec from 2006 to 2016 which included 7183 children randomly selected from the universal health insurance database. A vaccine dose was considered delayed if received 30 days or more after the recommended age. The impact of new vaccine delays at each visit on incomplete vaccination status by 24 months of age was estimated with the attributable risk in the population. RESULTS: The proportion of children with vaccine delay was 5.4% at 2 months, 13.3% at 4 months, 23.1% at 6 months and 23.6% at 12 months. Overall, 72.5% of all 2-year-old children with an incomplete status by 24 months were attributable with a vaccine delay, of which 16.1% were attributable with a first vaccine delay at 2 months, 10.6% at 4 months, 14.0% at 6 months and 31.8% at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: While great emphasis has been put on vaccine delays at the first vaccination visit, the prevalence of vaccine delays was greater with later visits and most children with an incomplete vaccination status by 24 months had a vaccine delay occurring during these later visits. Interventions to improve timeliness should address vaccine delays at each visit and not only focus on the first visit.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Vaccine Against Omicron-SARS-CoV-2 Subvariants in Children 5-11 Years of Age in Quebec, Canada, January 2022 to January 2023.

BACKGROUND: In premarketing clinical trials conducted before Omicron emergence, BNT162b2 vaccine efficacy against COVID-19 was 90% in children. We conducted postmarketing evaluation of 1- and 2-dose vaccine effectiveness (VE) against Omicron BA.1, BA.2 and BA.4/5 subvariants in 5- to 11-year olds. METHODS: We estimated VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection using a test-negative design. Specimens collected between January 9, 2022, and January 7, 2023, from children 5-11 years old in Quebec, Canada, and tested by nucleic acid amplification test were eligible. We estimated VE by time since last vaccine dose, interval between doses and by period of Omicron subvariant predominance. RESULTS: A total of 48,826 NAATs were included in overall analysis. From 14-55 to 56-385 days postvaccination, 2-dose VE against symptomatic infection decreased from 68% (95% CI, 62-74) to 25% (95% CI, 11-36). Two-dose VE with restriction to specimens collected from acute care hospitals (emergency rooms or wards) did not decline but was stable at ~40%. VE against symptomatic infection remained comparable at any interval between doses but increased with longer interval among children tested in acute care settings, from 18% (95% CI, -17 to 44) with 21- to 55-day interval to 69% (95% CI, 43-86) with ≥84-day interval. Two-dose VE against symptomatic infection dropped from 70% (95% CI, 63-76) during BA.1, to 32% (95% CI, 13-47) with BA.2 and to nonprotective during BA.4/5 dominance. CONCLUSIONS: In children 5-11 years of age, VE against symptomatic infection was stable at any interval between doses but decreased with time since the last dose and against more divergent omicron subvariants.

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.

Comparison of risk factors for human metapneumovirus and respiratory syncytial virus disease severity in young children.

BACKGROUND: Human metapneumovirus (hMPV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are leading pediatric pathogens. However, risk factors for severe hMPV disease remain unknown. We comparatively assessed environmental, host, and viral determinants for severe hMPV and RSV infections. METHODS: We studied a prospective cohort of >1000 children aged <3 years hospitalized in or presenting to a pediatric clinic for acute respiratory infection. We collected clinical data at enrollment and 1-month follow-up and tested nasopharyngeal secretions for respiratory viruses. Disease severity was defined as hospitalization and was also assessed with a severity score (1 point/variable) calculated on the basis of fraction of inhaled O(2) ≥ 30%, hospitalization >5 days, and pediatric intensive care unit admission. RESULTS: hMPV was identified in 58 of 305 outpatient children (19.0%) and 69 of 734 hospitalized children (9.4%), second only to RSV (48.2% and 63.6%, respectively). In multivariate regression analysis of hMPV cases, age <6 months and household crowding were associated with hospitalization. Among hospitalized patients, risk factors for severe hMPV disease were female sex, prematurity, and genotype B infection. Age <6 months, comorbidities, and household crowding were risk factors for RSV hospitalization; breast-feeding and viral coinfection were protective. Age <6 months and prematurity were associated with severe RSV cases among hospitalized children. CONCLUSIONS: hMPV and RSV severity risk factors may differ slightly. These findings will inform hMPV prevention strategies.

Effectiveness of previous infection-induced and vaccine-induced protection against hospitalisation due to omicron BA subvariants in older adults: a test-negative, case-control study in Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Older adults (aged ≥60 years) were prioritised for COVID-19 booster vaccination due to severe outcome risk, but the risk for this group is also affected by previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. We estimated vaccine effectiveness against omicron-associated hospitalisation in older adults by previously documented infection, time since last immunological event, and age group. METHODS: This was a population-based test-negative case-control study done in Quebec, Canada, during BA.1 dominant (December, 2021, to March, 2022), BA.2 dominant (April to June, 2022), and BA.4/5 dominant (July to November, 2022) periods using provincial laboratory, immunisation, hospitalisation, and chronic disease surveillance databases. We included older adults (aged ≥60 years) with symptoms associated with COVID-19 who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in acute-care hospitals. Cases were defined as patients who were hospitalised for COVID-19 within 14 days after testing positive; controls were patients who tested negative. Analyses spanned 3-14 months after last vaccine dose or previous infection. Logistic regression models compared COVID-19 hospitalisation risk by mRNA vaccine dose and previous infection versus unvaccinated and infection-naive participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 26, 2021, and Nov 5, 2022, we included 174 819 specimens (82 870 [47·4%] from men and 91 949 [52·6%] from women; from 8455 cases and 166 364 controls), taken from 2951 cases and 48 724 controls in the BA.1 period; 1897 cases and 41 702 controls in the BA.2 period; and 3607 cases and 75 938 controls in the BA.4/5 period. In participants who were infection naive, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation improved with dose number, consistent with a shorter median time since last dose, but decreased with more recent omicron subvariants. Four-dose vaccine effectiveness was 96% (95% CI 93-98) during the BA.1 period, 84% (81-87) during the BA.2 period, and 68% (63-72) during the BA.4/5 period. Regardless of dose number (two to five doses) or timing since previous infection, hybrid protection was more than 90%, persisted for at least 6-8 months, and did not decline with age. INTERPRETATION: Older adults with both previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and two or more vaccine doses appear to be well protected for a prolonged period against hospitalisation due to omicron subvariants, including BA.4/5. Ensuring that older adults who are infection naive remain up to date with vaccination might reduce COVID-19 hospitalisations most efficiently. FUNDING: Ministère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux du Québec. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Protection against omicron (B.1.1.529) BA.2 reinfection conferred by primary omicron BA.1 or pre-omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection among health-care workers with and without mRNA vaccination: a test-negative case-control study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on vaccine-induced or infection-induced (hybrid or natural) immunity against omicron (B.1.1.529) subvariant BA.2, particularly in comparing the effects of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection with the same or different genetic lineage. We aimed to estimate the protection against omicron BA.2 associated with previous primary infection with omicron BA.1 or pre-omicron SARS-CoV-2, among health-care workers with and without mRNA vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative case-control study among health-care workers aged 18 years or older who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 in Quebec, Canada, between March 27 and June 4, 2022, when BA.2 was the predominant variant and was presumptively diagnosed with a positive test result. We identified cases (positive test during study period) and controls (negative test during study period) using the provincial laboratory database that records all nucleic acid amplification testing for SARS-CoV-2 in Quebec, and used the provincial immunisation registry to determine vaccination status. Logistic regression models compared the likelihood of BA.2 infection or reinfection (second positive test ≥30 days after primary infection) among health-care workers who had previous primary infection and none to three mRNA vaccine doses versus unvaccinated health-care workers with no primary infection. FINDINGS: 258 007 SARS-CoV-2 tests were done during the study period. Among those with a valid result and that met the inclusion criteria, there were 37 732 presumed BA.2 cases (2521 [6·7%] reinfections following pre-omicron primary infection and 659 [1·7%] reinfections following BA.1 primary infection) and 73 507 controls (7360 [10·0%] had pre-omicron primary infection and 12 315 [16·8%] had BA.1 primary infection). Pre-omicron primary infection was associated with a 38% (95% CI 19-53) reduction in BA.2 infection risk, with higher BA.2 protection among those who had also received one (56%, 95% CI 47-63), two (69%, 64-73), or three (70%, 66-74) mRNA vaccine doses. Omicron BA.1 primary infection was associated with greater protection against BA.2 infection (risk reduction of 72%, 95% CI 65-78), and protection was increased further among those who had received two doses of mRNA vaccine (96%, 95-96), but was not improved with a third dose (96%, 95-97). INTERPRETATION: Health-care workers who had received two doses of mRNA vaccine and had previous BA.1 infection were subsequently well protected for a prolonged period against BA.2 reinfection, with a third vaccine dose conferring no improvement to that hybrid protection. If this protection also pertains to future variants, there might be limited benefit from additional vaccine doses for people with hybrid immunity, depending on timing and variant. FUNDING: Ministère de la Santé et des Services Sociaux du Québec.

The number needed to vaccinate to prevent infant pertussis hospitalization and death through parent cocoon immunization.

BACKGROUND: Parental immunization has been recommended as a "cocoon" strategy to prevent serious pertussis outcomes in early infancy. We illustrate the high number needed to vaccinate (NNV) for this program based on recent epidemiologic data from the provinces of Québec and British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: Surveillance trends were summarized for the period 1990-2010. Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality data were compiled from 2000 to 2009. The proportion of infant pertussis attributed to a parent was estimated at 35%, explored up to 55%. Adult vaccine efficacy (VE) was estimated at 85%. The NNV was calculated as [2 parents/(parent-attributable infant risk × parent VE)]. To capture at least 1 recent cyclical peak, NNV was derived for the period 2005-2009 and explored for peak/trough years. RESULTS: Substantial decline has occurred in pertussis incidence across all age groups including infants, reaching a 20-year nadir in 2010 in both provinces. For the period 2005-2009, the risk of infant hospitalization and ICU admission was 57 and 7, respectively, per 100 000 in Québec and 33 and 7, respectively, per 100 000 in BC. In both provinces the risk of infant pertussis-related death over that period was <0.5 per 100 000. The NNV for parental immunization was at least 1 million to prevent 1 infant death, approximately 100 000 for ICU admission, and >10 000 for hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of low pertussis incidence, the parental cocoon program is inefficient and resource intensive for the prevention of serious outcomes in early infancy. Regions contemplating the cocoon program should consider the NNV based on local epidemiology.

Higher risk of measles when the first dose of a 2-dose schedule of measles vaccine is given at 12-14 months versus 15 months of age.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, >750 cases of measles were reported in Quebec, Canada, where a routine 2-dose measles immunization schedule, in which measles vaccine is given at 12 and 18 months of age, had been in effect since 1996. Effectiveness of this schedule was assessed during a high school outbreak. METHODS: Cases were identified by passive followed by active surveillance. Classical cases met the national surveillance definition; attenuated cases showed clinical signs and high measles-specific immunoglobulin G but did not fulfill all classical criteria. Immunization status was ascertained from written records, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated as 1 - [(risk of measles in vaccinated individuals)/(risk in unvaccinated individuals)] × 100%. RESULTS: Among 1306 students, 110 measles cases were identified; 98 were classical cases, and 12 were attenuated cases. The attack rates among unvaccinated and fully vaccinated students were 82% and 4.8%, respectively. The VE among 2-dose recipients was 95.5% against classical and 94.2% against all (classical + attenuated) measles. Among 2-dose recipients, attack rates with first immunization at 12 and ≥15 months of age were 5.8% and 2.0%, respectively, with corresponding VE values of 93.0% and 97.5%. The risk of measles in 2-dose recipients was significantly (3-4-fold) higher when vaccine was first administered at 12 months of age, compared with ≥15 months of age (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Despite compliance with the recommended 2-dose measles immunization schedule, 6% of high school students were susceptible during this outbreak. Residual susceptibility was 2-4-fold higher among 2-dose recipients who had received the first dose of vaccine prior to 15 months of age. If confirmed in other settings, these results suggest that administration of the first dose of measles vaccine before 15 months of age may not be optimal for measles elimination efforts.

Seroconversion to seasonal influenza viruses after A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection, Quebec, Canada.

We looked for cross-reactive antibodies in 122 persons with paired serum samples collected during the 2009 pandemic of influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09. Eight (12%) of 67 persons with A(H1N1)pdm09 infection confirmed by reverse transcription PCR and/or serology also seroconverted to the seasonal A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1) virus, compared with 1 (2%) of 55 A(H1N1)pdm09-negative persons (p<0.05).

Impact of the first vaccine dose on COVID-19 and its complications in long-term care facilities and private residences for seniors in Québec, Canada.

Background: Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and private residences for seniors (PRSs) were given priority for vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Given the shortage of vaccine in the winter of 2021, the Comité sur l'immunisation du Québec recommended postponing the administration of second doses to ensure more rapid and widespread administration of first doses. The objective of this study was to measure the impact of first-dose vaccination on 1) the incidence of cases and complications in LTCFs and PRSs and 2) the frequency of outbreaks in LTCFs. Methods: In this ecological study, COVID-19 incidence and complications in residents of LTCFs and PRSs in Québec were compared with the general (community) population at a point in time when there was still only limited eligibility for vaccination. Results: After vaccination in LTCFs, the incidence rate of COVID-19 decreased by 92% compared with 49% in the community, and deaths decreased by 95%. By six weeks post-vaccination, almost no facility reported five or more cases per 100 beds per week. The incidence rate decreased by 91% in PRSs compared with 2% in the community. Hospitalizations and deaths in PRSs decreased by 94% and 90%, respectively. Conclusion: As a result of 1) vaccination of residents with one dose, 2) natural immunity already acquired in LTCFs and PRSs, 3) vaccination of healthcare workers and 4) other non-pharmaceutical prevention measures implemented, the circulation of the coronavirus in these settings was largely interrupted.

Estimated Protection of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection Against Reinfection With the Omicron Variant Among Messenger RNA-Vaccinated and Nonvaccinated Individuals in Quebec, Canada.

Importance: The Omicron variant is phylogenetically and antigenically distinct from earlier SARS-CoV-2 variants and the original vaccine strain. Protection conferred by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection against Omicron reinfection, with and without vaccination, requires quantification. Objective: To estimate the protection against Omicron reinfection and hospitalization conferred by prior heterologous non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or up to 3 doses of an ancestral, Wuhan-like messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This test-negative, population-based case-control study was conducted between December 26, 2021, and March 12, 2022, and included community-dwelling individuals aged 12 years or older who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the province of Quebec, Canada. Exposures: Prior laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection with or without mRNA vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 reinfection and associated hospitalization, presumed to be associated with the Omicron variant according to genomic surveillance. The odds of prior infection with or without vaccination were compared for case participants with Omicron infection and associated hospitalizations vs test-negative control participants. Estimated protection was derived as 1 - the odds ratio, adjusted for age, sex, testing indication, and epidemiologic week. Analyses were stratified by severity and time since last non-Omicron infection or vaccine dose. Results: This study included 696 439 individuals (224 007 case participants and 472 432 control participants); 62.2% and 63.9% were female and 87.4% and 75.5% were aged 18 to 69 years, respectively. Prior non-Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected for 9505 case participants (4.2%) and 29 712 control participants (6.3%). Among nonvaccinated individuals, prior non-Omicron infection was associated with a 44% reduction (95% CI, 38%-48%) in Omicron reinfection risk, which decreased from 66% (95% CI, 57%-73%) at 3 to 5 months to 35% (95% CI, 21%-47%) at 9 to 11 months postinfection and was below 30% thereafter. The more severe the prior infection, the greater the risk reduction. Estimated protection (95% CI) against Omicron infection was consistently significantly higher among vaccinated individuals with prior infection compared with vaccinated infection-naive individuals, with 65% (63%-67%) vs 20% (16%-24%) for 1 dose, 68% (67%-70%) vs 42% (41%-44%) for 2 doses, and 83% (81%-84%) vs 73% (72%-73%) for 3 doses. For individuals with prior infection, estimated protection (95% CI) against Omicron-associated hospitalization was 81% (66%-89%) and increased to 86% (77%-99%) with 1, 94% (91%-96%) with 2, and 97% (94%-99%) with 3 mRNA vaccine doses, without signs of waning. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that vaccination with 2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses among individuals with prior heterologous SARS-CoV-2 infection provided the greatest protection against Omicron-associated hospitalization. In the context of program goals to prevent severe outcomes and preserve health care system capacity, a third mRNA vaccine dose may add limited protection in twice-vaccinated individuals with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Safe vaccination of patients with egg allergy with an adjuvanted pandemic H1N1 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Because influenza vaccine contains some residual egg protein, there is a theoretic risk of anaphylaxis when vaccinating patients with egg allergy. The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of anaphylaxis in children with egg allergy administered an adjuvanted monovalent 2009 pandemic influenza A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (Arepanrix; GlaxoSmithKline, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada). METHODS: Patients with confirmed egg allergy with a history of respiratory or cardiovascular reactions after egg ingestion were vaccinated in 2 divided doses (10% and 90%) administered at a 30-minute interval, whereas children with other types of egg-induced allergic reactions were vaccinated with a single dose. All patients remained under observation for 60 minutes after vaccination. A 24-hour follow-up telephone call was made to detect any delayed reaction. The main outcome was the occurrence of an anaphylactic reaction according to criteria specified by the Brighton Collaboration. RESULTS: Among the 830 patients with confirmed egg allergy, only 9% required the vaccine to be administered in divided doses. No patient had an anaphylactic reaction. Nine patients had minor allergic symptoms treated with an antihistamine (1 in the 60 minutes after vaccination and 8 in the following 23 hours), and 3 others received salbutamol (1 in the first 60 minutes after vaccination). Further vaccination of more than 3600 other children with reported egg allergy caused no anaphylaxis based on the criteria of the Brighton Collaboration, although 2 patients received epinephrine for symptoms compatible with allergy. CONCLUSION: Although anaphylaxis after influenza immunization is a theoretic risk, vaccination of patients with egg allergy with an adjuvanted monovalent pH1N1 influenza vaccine resulted in no cases of anaphylaxis and on that basis appears safe.