Selective under-representation of Pacific peoples in population estimates for health indicator measurements in Aotearoa New Zealand misinforms policy making.

BACKGROUND: The Census of Populations and Dwellings' is the five yearly population count of Aotearoa New Zealand. Best available populations (BAP) are subnational projections based on census data and demographic assumptions developed for healthcare planning and funding allocation but are also used as the denominator for health indicator monitoring. Pacific people are systematically undercounted, but the impact on health statistics is not well studied. For COVID-19 vaccination coverage, health service user (HSU) data were considered a more reliable denominator than BAP but introduced new biases. We aimed to understand how the choice of denominator population impacts estimates of population size and health system performance for Pacific people at a local level. METHODS: We described how declining census response rates affected population data quality. We compared BAP and HSU data at district level. For the indicators 'access to primary care' and 'cervical cancer screening uptake' we replaced currently used BAP denominators with HSU and examined the impact for different ethnic groups in different geographic districts. RESULTS: Overall Census 2018 response declined by 10%, but for Maori and Pacific people by 21% and 23%, respectively. This inequitably affected BAP accuracy. Census undercount was highest in the district with the largest Pacific populations, where HSU exceeded BAP most. Notably, 'access to primary care' for Pacific people in this district consistently exceeds 100%. Using BAP, both health indicators are currently estimated as highest for Pacific people compared to other ethnic groups, but when based on HSU, they dropped to lowest. Similar, but less pronounced trends occurred in other districts. Changes in trends over time for both indicators coincided mostly with adjustments in BAP, rather than changes in the numerators. CONCLUSIONS: The current use of BAP denominators for health statistics does not enable reliable monitoring of key health indicators for Pacific people. HSU denominators are also unsuitable for monitoring health. Exploring the feasibility of a real-time population register is strongly recommended as a new, transparent, way of obtaining more reliable, timely population data to guide policymaking and underpin a more equitable health system under the health reforms. Meanwhile, reporting of ethnic specific outcomes need to include a clear assessment of the potential for bias due to inaccurate population estimates.

Immunogenicity of Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Followed by J&J Adenovirus COVID-19 Vaccination in Two Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

Individuals with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have significant immune disfunction, often further disrupted by treatment. While currently available COVID-19 vaccinations are highly effective in immunocompetent individuals, they are often poorly immunogenic in CLL patients. It is important to understand the role a heterologous boost would have in patients who did not respond to the initial two-dose mRNA vaccine series. SARS-CoV-2 specific immune responses, including antibodies and memory B-cells, CD4 and CD8 T-cells were assessed prior to vaccination, as well as postinitial vaccination series and post-third dose in two subjects. One subject seroconverted, had RBD-specific memory B-cells and spike-specific CD4 T-cells while the other did not. Both subjects had a spike-specific CD8 T-cell response after the original mRNA vaccination series that was further boosted after the third dose or remained stable. The results of this study, however small, are especially promising to CLL individuals who did not seroconvert following the initial mRNA vaccination series.

Immunogenicity of Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccination followed by J&J adenovirus COVID-19 vaccination in two CLL patients.

IMPORTANCE: Individuals with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia have significant immune disfunction, often further disrupted by treatment. While currently available COVID-19 vaccinations are highly effective in immunocompetent individuals, they are often poorly immunogenic in CLL patients. It is important to understand the role heterologous boost would have in patients who did not respond to the recommended two-dose mRNA vaccine series with a SARS-CoV-2 specific immune response. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the immune response of two CLL patients who failed to seroconvert after initial mRNA vaccine series following a third, heterologous, COVID-19 vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S. DESIGN: Two subjects with CLL were enrolled in an IRB-approved observational longitudinal cohort study of the immune response to COVID-19 vaccination. After enrollment, they received a third vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S. Blood was drawn prior to original vaccination series, four weeks after mRNA vaccination, and again four weeks after third vaccination. SETTING: Eligible subjects were approached by oncologist overseeing CLL treatment and informed about study, at time of enrollment subjects consented to join the cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen subjects enrolled in the larger CLL cohort study, of whom two subjects received a third COVID-19 vaccination and were included in this analysis. Subject 1 is CLL treatment naive, while Subject 2 is currently on active treatment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: SARS-CoV-2 specific immune response, including plasma antibodies, memory B-cells, CD4 and CD8 T-cells were assessed prior to vaccination (baseline) as well as post vaccination series and post third dose. RESULTS: Of the two subjects who received Ad26.COV2.S doses, Subject 1 seroconverted, had RBD-specific memory B-cells as well as spike-specific CD4 T-cells while Subject 2 did not. Both subjects had a spike-specific CD8 T-cell response after original mRNA vaccination series that was further boosted after third dose (Subject 1), or remained stable (Subject 2). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this study, however small, is especially promising to CLL individuals who did not seroconvert following initial mRNA vaccination series. Especially those that are treatment naive, not currently in active treatment, or who may consider vaccination before beginning active treatment.