Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 29
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Vaccine ; 42(15): 3486-3492, 2024 May 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38704258

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. METHODS: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Vacinação , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Anafilaxia/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/etiologia , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/induzido quimicamente , Incidência , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Mielite Transversa/epidemiologia , Mielite Transversa/etiologia , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos
2.
JAMA ; 331(11): 938-950, 2024 03 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38502075

RESUMO

Importance: In January 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Food and Drug Administration noted a safety concern for ischemic stroke among adults aged 65 years or older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine. Objective: To evaluate stroke risk after administration of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, (2) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine on the same day (concomitant administration), and (3) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: Self-controlled case series including 11 001 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (among 5 397 278 vaccinated individuals). The study period was August 31, 2022, through February 4, 2023. Exposures: Receipt of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (primary) or (2) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine (secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures: Stroke risk (nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, combined outcome of nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke) during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window after vaccination vs the 43- to 90-day control window. Results: There were 5 397 278 Medicare beneficiaries who received either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (median age, 74 years [IQR, 70-80 years]; 56% were women). Among the 11 001 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there were no statistically significant associations between either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine and the outcomes of nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window vs the 43- to 90-day control window (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 0.72-1.12). Among the 4596 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after concomitant administration of either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window for the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.13 [95% CI, 0.05-6.22]) and a statistically significant association between vaccination and transient ischemic attack during the 1- to 21-day risk window for the Moderna mRNA-1273.222 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.06-1.74]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.33 [95% CI, 0.46-6.20]). Among the 21 345 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after administration of a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window (IRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.43-2.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there was no evidence of a significantly elevated risk for stroke during the days immediately after vaccination.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório , AVC Isquêmico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV/efeitos adversos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV/uso terapêutico , Adjuvantes Imunológicos/efeitos adversos , Adjuvantes Imunológicos/uso terapêutico , Vacina BNT162/efeitos adversos , Vacina BNT162/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra COVID-19/uso terapêutico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral Hemorrágico/induzido quimicamente , Acidente Vascular Cerebral Hemorrágico/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral Hemorrágico/etiologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Vacinas contra Influenza/uso terapêutico , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/induzido quimicamente , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/epidemiologia , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/etiologia , Medicare , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinação/métodos , Vacinas Combinadas/efeitos adversos , Vacinas Combinadas/uso terapêutico , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S./estatística & dados numéricos , United States Food and Drug Administration/estatística & dados numéricos , AVC Isquêmico/induzido quimicamente , AVC Isquêmico/epidemiologia , AVC Isquêmico/etiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais
3.
Vaccine ; 42(8): 2004-2010, 2024 Mar 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38388240

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare). RESULTS: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults. CONCLUSION: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Trombocitopenia , Trombose , Adulto , Masculino , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Medicare , Incidência , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Trombocitopenia/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia
4.
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf ; 33(2): e5749, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38362655

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Pharmacy chains can differ with respect to the characteristics of their patient populations as well as their nonprescription products, services, and practices, and thus may serve as a surrogate for potential unmeasured confounding in observational studies of prescription drugs. This study evaluates whether a single-source drug can have different patient outcomes based on the dispensing pharmacy chain. METHODS: Separate analyses for two anticoagulant drugs, rivaroxaban and apixaban, were conducted using Medicare Fee-for-Service claims evaluating the association between dispensing pharmacy chain and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, all-cause mortality, and major GI bleeding. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline covariates across pharmacy chain cohorts, and outcome association was assessed with a Cox Proportional Hazards model. RESULTS: We observed no differences in outcomes across pharmacy chains for apixaban recipients. Rivaroxaban recipients from pharmacy chain C, however, had lower rates of GI bleeding (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-1.00) and ischemic stroke (adjusted HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.87) as compared to chain A in primary analyses with a 3-day grace period. The results moved closer to the null when 14- and 30-day grace periods were implemented. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dispensing pharmacy chains may have the potential to act as a confounder of associations between drug exposure and outcome in some observational studies. Additional studies of potential confounding by pharmacy chain are needed. Further evaluation of potential pharmacy chain effects on safe use would be of value.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , AVC Isquêmico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Rivaroxabana/efeitos adversos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/complicações , Dabigatrana/uso terapêutico , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Medicare , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/induzido quimicamente , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/epidemiologia , AVC Isquêmico/tratamento farmacológico , Piridonas/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos
5.
JAMA ; 331(6): 491-499, 2024 02 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38241060

RESUMO

Importance: Dialysis-dependent patients experience high rates of morbidity from fractures, yet little evidence is available on optimal treatment strategies. Chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder is nearly universal in dialysis-dependent patients, complicating diagnosis and treatment of skeletal fragility. Objective: To examine the incidence and comparative risk of severe hypocalcemia with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates among dialysis-dependent patients treated for osteoporosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of female dialysis-dependent Medicare patients aged 65 years or older who initiated treatment with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates from 2013 to 2020. Clinical performance measures including monthly serum calcium were obtained through linkage to the Consolidated Renal Operations in a Web-Enabled Network database. Exposures: Denosumab, 60 mg, or oral bisphosphonates. Main Outcomes and Measures: Severe hypocalcemia was defined as total albumin-corrected serum calcium below 7.5 mg/dL (1.88 mmol/L) or a primary hospital or emergency department hypocalcemia diagnosis (emergent care). Very severe hypocalcemia (serum calcium below 6.5 mg/dL [1.63 mmol/L] or emergent care) was also assessed. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted cumulative incidence, weighted risk differences, and weighted risk ratios were calculated during the first 12 treatment weeks. Results: In the unweighted cohorts, 607 of 1523 denosumab-treated patients and 23 of 1281 oral bisphosphonate-treated patients developed severe hypocalcemia. The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of severe hypocalcemia was 41.1% with denosumab vs 2.0% with oral bisphosphonates (weighted risk difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 36.3%-41.9%]; weighted risk ratio, 20.7 [95% CI, 13.2-41.2]). The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of very severe hypocalcemia was also increased with denosumab (10.9%) vs oral bisphosphonates (0.4%) (weighted risk difference, 10.5% [95% CI, 8.8%-12.0%]; weighted risk ratio, 26.4 [95% CI, 9.7-449.5]). Conclusions and Relevance: Denosumab was associated with a markedly higher incidence of severe and very severe hypocalcemia in female dialysis-dependent patients aged 65 years or older compared with oral bisphosphonates. Given the complexity of diagnosing the underlying bone pathophysiology in dialysis-dependent patients, the high risk posed by denosumab in this population, and the complex strategies required to monitor and treat severe hypocalcemia, denosumab should be administered after careful patient selection and with plans for frequent monitoring.


Assuntos
Conservadores da Densidade Óssea , Hipocalcemia , Osteoporose , Estados Unidos , Humanos , Idoso , Feminino , Hipocalcemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipocalcemia/sangue , Denosumab/efeitos adversos , Conservadores da Densidade Óssea/efeitos adversos , Cálcio/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Diálise Renal , Medicare , Osteoporose/tratamento farmacológico , Difosfonatos/efeitos adversos
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 73(1): 16-23, 2024 Jan 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38206877

RESUMO

COVID-19 has been associated with an increased risk for thromboembolic events, including ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction. Studies have reported lower rates of COVID-19-related thromboembolic events among persons who received the COVID-19 vaccine compared with persons who did not, but rigorous estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19-related thromboembolic events are lacking. This analysis estimated the incremental benefit of receipt of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine after receiving an original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. To estimate VE of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 dose in preventing thromboembolic events compared with original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses only, two retrospective cohort studies were conducted among Medicare fee-for-service enrollees during September 4, 2022-March 4, 2023. Effectiveness of a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-related thromboembolic events compared with that of original vaccine alone was 47% (95% CI = 45%-49%) among Medicare enrollees aged ≥65 years and 51% (95% CI = 39%-60%) among adults aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease receiving dialysis. VE was similar among Medicare beneficiaries with immunocompromise: 46% (95% CI = 42%-49%) among adults aged ≥65 years and 45% (95% CI = 24%-60%) among those aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease. To help prevent complications of COVID-19, including thromboembolic events, adults should stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccination.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Falência Renal Crônica , Idoso , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Diálise Renal , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medicare , RNA Mensageiro , Vacinas Combinadas
7.
JAMA Health Forum ; 4(12): e234335, 2023 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38153810

RESUMO

This cross-sectional study uses Traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage claims data to evaluate uptake of biosimilars relative to their reference products.


Assuntos
Medicamentos Biossimilares , Medicare Part C , Estados Unidos , Transporte Biológico
8.
Vaccine ; 41(32): 4666-4678, 2023 07 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37344261

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Our near-real-time safety monitoring of 16 adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination identified potential elevation in risk for six AEs following primary series and monovalent booster dose administration. The crude association with AEs does not imply causality. Accordingly, we conducted robust evaluation of potential associations. METHODS: We conducted two self-controlled case series studies of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) in U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years. Adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated following primary series doses for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), pulmonary embolism (PE), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC); and following monovalent booster doses for AMI, PE, ITP, Bell's Palsy (BP) and Myocarditis/Pericarditis (Myo/Peri). RESULTS: The primary series study included 3,360,981 individuals who received 6,388,542 primary series doses; the booster study included 6,156,100 individuals with one monovalent booster dose. The AMI IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.91 to 1.18) and 1.06 (95 % CI: 1.003 to 1.12), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.01 (95 % CI: 0.82 to 1.26) and 1.05 (95 % CI: 0.998 to 1.11), respectively. The hospital inpatient PE IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.19 (95 % CI: 1.03 to 1.38) and 0.86 (95 % CI: 0.78 to 0.95), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.15 (95 % CI: 0.94 to 1.41) and 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.79 to 0.96), respectively. The studies' results do not support that exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines elevate the risk of ITP, DIC, Myo/Peri, and BP. CONCLUSION: We did not find an increased risk for AMI, ITP, DIC, BP, and Myo/Peri and there was not consistent evidence for PE after exposure to COVID-19 mRNA primary series or monovalent booster vaccines. These results support the favorable safety profile of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines administered in the U.S. elderly population.


Assuntos
Paralisia de Bell , COVID-19 , Paralisia Facial , Infarto do Miocárdio , Miocardite , Pericardite , Embolia Pulmonar , Púrpura Trombocitopênica Idiopática , Trombocitopenia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Humanos , Adulto , Idoso , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Medicare , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , RNA Mensageiro
9.
Transfusion ; 63(3): 516-530, 2023 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36808746

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal patterns of immune globulins (IG) use have not been described in large populations. Understanding IG usage is important given potential supply limitations impacting individuals for whom IG is the sole life-saving/health-preserving therapy. The study describes US IG utilization patterns from 2009 to 2019. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Using IBM MarketScan commercial and Medicare claims data, we examined four metrics overall and by condition-specific categories during 2009-2019: (1) IG administrations per 100,000 person-years, (2) IG recipients per 100,000 enrollees, (3) average annual administrations per recipient, and (4) average annual dose per recipient. RESULTS: In the commercial and Medicare populations respectively: IG administrations per 100,000 person-years increased by 120% (213-470) and 144% (692-1693); IG recipients per 100,000 enrollees grew by 71% (24-42) and 102% (89-179); average annual administrations per recipient rose by 28% (8-10) and 19% (8-9); and average annual dose (grams) per recipient increased by 29% (384-497) and 34% (317-426). IG administrations associated with immunodeficiency (per 100,000 person-years) increased by 154% (from 127 to 321) and 176% (from 365 to 1007). Autoimmune and neurologic conditions were associated with higher annual average administrations and dose than other conditions. DISCUSSION: IG use increased, coinciding with a growth in the IG recipient population in the United States. Several conditions contributed to the trend, with the largest increase observed among immunodeficient individuals. Future investigations should assess changes in the demand for IVIG by disease state or indication and consider treatment effectiveness.


Assuntos
Imunoglobulina G , Medicare , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudos Retrospectivos
10.
JAMA Intern Med ; 183(1): 40-47, 2023 01 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36469350

RESUMO

Importance: The association of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) use with pneumonia hospitalization in older adults, especially those with underlying medical conditions, is not well described. Objective: To evaluate the association of PCV13 use with pneumonia, non-health care-associated (non-HA) pneumonia, and lobar pneumonia (LP) hospitalization among US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study with time-varying exposure assignment analyzed claims data from US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older enrolled in Parts A/B with a residence in the 50 US states or the District of Columbia by September 1, 2014. New Medicare Parts A/B beneficiaries within 6 months after their 65th birthday were continuously included in the cohort after September 1, 2014, and followed through December 31, 2017. Participants were censored if they died, changed enrollment status, or developed a study outcome. Most of the analyses were conducted from 2018 to 2019, and additional analyses were performed from 2021 to 2022. Exposures: Use of PCV13 vaccination 14 days or more before pneumonia hospitalization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Discrete-time survival models were used to estimate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and number of pneumonia hospitalizations averted through PCV13 use. The adjusted IRR for the association of PCV13 vaccination with pneumonia hospitalization was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE). Results: At the end of follow-up (December 2017), 24 121 625 beneficiaries (13 593 975 women [56.4%]; 418 005 [1.7%] Asian, 1 750 807 [4.8%] Black, 338 044 [1.4%] Hispanic, 111 508 [0.5%] Native American, and 20 700 948 [85.8%] White individuals) were in the cohort; 4 936 185 (20.5%) had received PCV13 only, and 10 646 220 (79.5%) had not received any pneumococcal vaccines. More than half of the beneficiaries in the cohort were younger than 75 years, White, and had either immunocompromising or chronic medical conditions. Coverage with PCV13 increased from 0.8% (September 2014) to 41.5% (December 2017). The VE for PCV13 was estimated at 6.7% (95% CI, 5.9%-7.5%) for pneumonia, 4.7% (95% CI, 3.9%-5.6%) for non-HA pneumonia, and 5.8% (95% CI, 2.6%-8.9%) for LP. From September 2014 through December 2017, an estimated 35 127 pneumonia (95% CI, 33 011-37 270), 24 643 non-HA pneumonia (95% CI, 22 761-26 552), and 1294 LP (95% CI, 797-1819) hospitalizations were averted through PCV13 use. Conclusions and Relevance: The study results suggest that PCV13 use was associated with reduced pneumonia hospitalization among Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older, many of whom had underlying medical conditions. Increased PCV13 coverage and use of recently approved higher-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines may avert additional pneumonia hospitalizations in adults.


Assuntos
Pneumonia Pneumocócica , Streptococcus pneumoniae , Idoso , Humanos , Feminino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Streptococcus pneumoniae/imunologia , Vacinas Conjugadas/uso terapêutico , Vacinas Conjugadas/imunologia , Estudos de Coortes , Eficácia de Vacinas , Medicare , Pneumonia Pneumocócica/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Pneumocócica/prevenção & controle , Pneumonia Pneumocócica/imunologia , Vacinação/métodos , Vacinas Pneumocócicas
11.
Vaccine ; 41(2): 532-539, 2023 01 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36496287

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as elderly persons age 65 years and older who can benefit greatly from vaccination. We present new findings from a nationally representative early warning system that may expand the safety knowledge base to further public trust and inform decision making on vaccine safety by government agencies, healthcare providers, interested stakeholders, and the public. METHODS: We evaluated 14 outcomes of interest following COVID-19 vaccination using the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data covering 30,712,101 elderly persons. The CMS data from December 11, 2020 through Jan 15, 2022 included 17,411,342 COVID-19 vaccinees who received a total of 34,639,937 doses. We conducted weekly sequential testing and generated rate ratios (RR) of observed outcome rates compared to historical (or expected) rates prior to COVID-19 vaccination. FINDINGS: Four outcomes met the threshold for a statistical signal following BNT162b2 vaccination including pulmonary embolism (PE; RR = 1.54), acute myocardial infarction (AMI; RR = 1.42), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC; RR = 1.91), and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP; RR = 1.44). After further evaluation, only the RR for PE still met the statistical threshold for a signal; however, the RRs for AMI, DIC, and ITP no longer did. No statistical signals were identified following vaccination with either the mRNA-1273 or Ad26 COV2.S vaccines. INTERPRETATION: This early warning system is the first to identify temporal associations for PE, AMI, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination in the elderly. Because an early warning system does not prove that the vaccines cause these outcomes, more robust epidemiologic studies with adjustment for confounding, including age and nursing home residency, are underway to further evaluate these signals. FDA strongly believes the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks of COVID-19 infection.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Púrpura Trombocitopênica Idiopática , Idoso , Humanos , Vacina de mRNA-1273 contra 2019-nCoV , Ad26COVS1 , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Medicare , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos
12.
Vaccine ; 41(2): 333-353, 2023 01 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36404170

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative conducts active surveillance of adverse events of special interest (AESI) after COVID-19 vaccination. Historical incidence rates (IRs) of AESI are comparators to evaluate safety. METHODS: We estimated IRs of 17 AESI in six administrative claims databases from January 1, 2019, to December 11, 2020: Medicare claims for adults ≥ 65 years and commercial claims (Blue Health Intelligence®, CVS Health, HealthCore Integrated Research Database, IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Database, Optum pre-adjudicated claims) for adults < 65 years. IRs were estimated by sex, age, race/ethnicity (Medicare), and nursing home residency (Medicare) in 2019 and for specific periods in 2020. RESULTS: The study included >100 million enrollees annually. In 2019, rates of most AESI increased with age. However, compared with commercially insured adults, Medicare enrollees had lower IRs of anaphylaxis (11 vs 12-19 per 100,000 person-years), appendicitis (80 vs 117-155), and narcolepsy (38 vs 41-53). Rates were higher in males than females for most AESI across databases and varied by race/ethnicity and nursing home status (Medicare). Acute myocardial infarction (Medicare) and anaphylaxis (all databases) IRs varied by season. IRs of most AESI were lower during March-May 2020 compared with March-May 2019 but returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. However, rates of Bell's palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy, and hemorrhagic/non-hemorrhagic stroke remained lower in multiple databases after May 2020, whereas some AESI (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation) exhibited higher rates after May 2020 compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: AESI background rates varied by database and demographics and fluctuated in March-December 2020, but most returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. It is critical to standardize demographics and consider seasonal and other trends when comparing historical rates with post-vaccination AESI rates in the same database to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , COVID-19 , Narcolepsia , Adulto , Masculino , Feminino , Humanos , Idoso , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Medicare , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle
13.
J Infect Dis ; 225(4): 567-577, 2022 02 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34618896

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: We evaluated prevaccine pandemic period COVID-19 death risk factors among nursing home (NH) residents. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study covering Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years residing in US NHs, we estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regressions. RESULTS: Among 608251 elderly NH residents, 57398 (9.4%) died of COVID-19-related illness 1 April to 22 December 2020; 46.9% (26893) of these deaths occurred without prior COVID-19 hospitalizations. We observed a consistently increasing age trend for COVID-19 deaths. Racial/ethnic minorities shared similarly high risk of NH COVID-19 deaths with whites. NH facility characteristics for-profit ownership and low health inspection ratings were associated with higher death risk. Resident characteristics (male [HR, 1.69], end-stage renal disease [HR, 1.42], cognitive impairment [HR, 1.34], and immunocompromised status [HR, 1.20]) were death risk factors. Other individual-level characteristics were less predictive of death than in community-dwelling population. CONCLUSIONS: Low NH health inspection ratings and private ownership contributed to COVID-19 death risks. Nearly half of NH COVID-19 deaths occurred without prior COVID-19 hospitalization and older residents were less likely to get hospitalized with COVID-19. No substantial differences were observed by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status for NH COVID-19 deaths.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Casas de Saúde , Idoso , COVID-19/mortalidade , Hospitalização , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
14.
Vaccine ; 39(41): 6095-6103, 2021 10 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34507857

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Vaccine use during pregnancy affects maternal and infant health. Many women do not receive vaccines recommended during pregnancy; conversely, inadvertent exposure to vaccines contraindicated or not recommended during pregnancy may occur. We assessed exposure to two recommended vaccines and two vaccines not recommended during pregnancy among privately and Medicaid-insured women in the United States. METHODS: This study includes a retrospective cohort of pregnancies in women aged 12-55 years resulting in live birth, spontaneous abortion, or stillbirth identified in the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial, Blue Health Intelligence® (BHI®) Commercial, and IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid Databases from August 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. Gestational age at vaccination was determined using a validated algorithm. We examined vaccines (1) recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis [Tdap]; inactivated influenza) and (2) not recommended (human papillomavirus [HPV]) or contraindicated (measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR]). RESULTS: We identified 496,771 (MarketScan Commercial), 858,961 (BHI), and 289,573 (MarketScan Medicaid) pregnancies (approximately 75% aged 20-34 years). Across these three databases, 52.1%, 50.3%, and 31.3% of pregnancies, respectively, received Tdap, most often at a gestational age of 28 weeks, and influenza vaccination occurred in 32.1%, 30.8%, and 18.0% of pregnancies, respectively. HPV vaccination occurred in < 0.2% of pregnancies, mostly in the first trimester among women aged 12-19 years, and MMR was administered in < 0.1% of pregnancies. Use of other contraindicated vaccines per ACIP (e.g., varicella, live attenuated influenza) was rare. CONCLUSION: Maternal vaccination with ACIP-recommended vaccines was suboptimal among privately and Medicaid-insured patients, with lower vaccination coverage among Medicaid-insured pregnancies than their privately insured counterparts. Inadvertent exposure to contraindicated vaccines during pregnancy was rare. This study evaluated only vaccinations reimbursed among insured populations and may have limited generalizability to uninsured populations.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Difteria, Tétano e Coqueluche Acelular , Vacinas contra Influenza , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Medicaid , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Gravidez , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos , Vacinação , Cobertura Vacinal , Adulto Jovem
15.
Vaccine ; 39(38): 5368-5375, 2021 09 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34384636

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a rare, serious allergic reaction. Its identification in large healthcare databases can help better characterize this risk. OBJECTIVE: To create an ICD-10 anaphylaxis algorithm, estimate its positive predictive values (PPVs) in a post-vaccination risk window, and estimate vaccination-attributable anaphylaxis rates in the Medicare Fee For Service (FFS) population. METHODS: An anaphylaxis algorithm with core and extended portions was constructed analyzing ICD-10 anaphylaxis claims data in Medicare FFS from 2015 to 2017. Cases of post-vaccination anaphylaxis among Medicare FFS beneficiaries were then identified from October 1, 2015 to February 28, 2019 utilizing vaccine relevant anaphylaxis ICD-10 codes. Information from medical records was used to determine true anaphylaxis cases based on the Brighton Collaboration's anaphylaxis case definition. PPVs were estimated for incident anaphylaxis and the subset of vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis within a 2-day post-vaccination risk window. Vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis rates in Medicare FFS were also estimated. RESULTS: The study recorded 66,572,128 vaccinations among 21,685,119 unique Medicare FFS beneficiaries. The algorithm identified a total of 190 suspected anaphylaxis cases within the 2-day post-vaccination window; of these 117 (62%) satisfied the core algorithm, and 73 (38%) additional cases satisfied the extended algorithm. The core algorithm's PPV was 66% (95% CI [56%, 76%]) for identifying incident anaphylaxis and 44% (95% CI [34%, 56%]) for vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis. The vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis incidence rate after any vaccination was 0.88 per million doses (95% CI [0.67, 1.16]). CONCLUSION: The ICD-10 claims algorithm for anaphylaxis allows the assessment of anaphylaxis risk in real-world data. The algorithm revealed vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis is rare among vaccinated Medicare FFS beneficiaries.


Assuntos
Anafilaxia , Vacinas , Idoso , Algoritmos , Anafilaxia/induzido quimicamente , Anafilaxia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Classificação Internacional de Doenças , Medicare , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinas/efeitos adversos
16.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(6): 941-948, 2021 09 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33580242

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Shingrix (recombinant zoster vaccine) was licensed to prevent herpes zoster, dispensed as 2 doses given 2-6 months apart among adults aged ≥50 years. Clinical trials yielded efficacy of >90% for confirmed herpes zoster, but post-market performance has not been evaluated. Efficacy of a single dose and a delayed second dose and efficacy among persons with autoimmune or immunosuppressive conditions have not been studied. We aimed to assess post-market vaccine effectiveness of Shingrix. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study among Medicare Part D community-dwelling beneficiaries aged >65 years. Herpes zoster was identified using a medical office visit diagnosis with treatment, and postherpetic neuralgia was identified using a validated algorithm. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to improve cohort balance and marginal structural models to estimate hazard ratios. RESULTS: We found a vaccine effectiveness of 70.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.6-71.5) and 56.9% (95% CI, 55.0-58.8) for 2 and 1 doses, respectively. The 2-dose vaccine effectiveness was not significantly lower for beneficiaries aged >80 years, for second doses received at ≥180 days, or for individuals with autoimmune conditions. The vaccine was also effective among individuals with immunosuppressive conditions. Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against postherpetic neuralgia was 76.0% (95% CI, 68.4-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: This large real-world observational study of the effectiveness of Shingrix demonstrates the benefit of completing the 2-dose regimen. Second doses administered beyond the recommended 6 months did not impair effectiveness. Our effectiveness estimates were lower than the clinical trials estimates, likely due to differences in outcome specificity.


Assuntos
Vacina contra Herpes Zoster , Herpes Zoster , Neuralgia Pós-Herpética , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos de Coortes , Herpes Zoster/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Medicare , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neuralgia Pós-Herpética/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos
17.
J Infect Dis ; 223(6): 945-956, 2021 03 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33325510

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The current study was performed to evaluate risk factors for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries during the pandemic's early phase. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study covering Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, we separated out elderly residents in nursing homes (NHs) and those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) from the primary study population of individuals age ≥65 years. Outcomes included COVID-19 hospital encounters and COVID-19-associated deaths. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) using logistic regression. RESULTS: We analyzed 25 333 329 elderly non-NH beneficiaries without ESRD, 653 966 elderly NH residents, and 292 302 patients with ESRD. COVID-related death rates (per 10 000) were much higher among elderly NH residents (275.7) and patients with ESRD (60.8) than in the primary study population (5.0). Regression-adjusted clinical predictors of death among the primary population included immunocompromised status (OR, 1.43), frailty index conditions such as cognitive impairment (3.16), and other comorbid conditions, including congestive heart failure (1.30). Demographic-related risk factors included male sex (OR, 1.77), older age (3.09 for 80- vs 65-year-olds), Medicaid dual-eligibility status (2.17), and racial/ethnic minority. Compared with whites, ORs were higher for blacks (2.47), Hispanics (3.11), and Native Americans (5.82). Results for COVID-19 hospital encounters were consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Frailty, comorbid conditions, and race/ethnicity were strong risk factors for COVID-19 hospitalization and death among the US elderly.


Assuntos
COVID-19/mortalidade , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Etnicidade , Feminino , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Grupos Minoritários , Casas de Saúde , Pandemias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2/isolamento & purificação , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
18.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e4251-e4259, 2021 12 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33211809

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50 000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the United States, overwhelmingly among individuals aged ≥65 years. Although vaccination is the primary prevention tool, investigations have shown low vaccine effectiveness (VE) in recent years, particularly among the elderly. We analyzed the relative VE (RVE) of all influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years to prevent influenza hospital encounters during the 2019-2020 season. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using Poisson regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Exposures included egg-based high-dose trivalent (HD-IIV3), egg-based adjuvanted trivalent (aIIV3), egg-based standard dose (SD) quadrivalent (IIV4), cell-based SD quadrivalent (cIIV4), and recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccines. RESULTS: We studied 12.7 million vaccinated beneficiaries. Following IPTW, cohorts were well balanced for all covariates and health-seeking behavior indicators. In the adjusted analysis, RIV4 (RVE, 13.3%; 95% CI, 7.4-18.9%), aIIV3 (RVE, 8.2%; 95% CI, 4.2-12.0%), and HD-IIV3 (RVE, 6.8%; 95% CI, 3.3-10.1%) were significantly more effective in preventing hospital encounters than the reference egg-based SD IIV4, while cIIV4 was not significantly more effective than IIV4 (RVE, 2.8%; 95% CI, -2.8%, 8.2%). Our results were consistent across all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In this influenza B-Victoria and A(H1N1)-dominated season, RIV4 was moderately more effective than other vaccines, while HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 were more effective than the IIV4 vaccines, highlighting the contributions of antigen amount and adjuvant use to VE. Egg adaptation likely did not substantially affect our RVE evaluation. Our findings, specific to the 2019-2020 season, should be evaluated in other studies using virological case confirmation.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Idoso , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Medicare , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados
19.
J Infect Dis ; 222(2): 278-287, 2020 06 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32100009

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Studies among individuals ages ≥65 years have found a moderately higher relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) for the high-dose (HD) influenza vaccine compared with standard-dose (SD) products for most seasons. Studies during the A(H3N2)-dominated 2017-2018 season showed slightly higher RVE for the cell-cultured vaccine compared with SD egg-based vaccines. We investigated the RVE of influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries ages ≥65 years during the 2018-2019 season. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using inverse probability of treatment weighting and Poisson regression to evaluate RVE in preventing influenza hospital encounters. RESULTS: Among 12 777 214 beneficiaries, the egg-based adjuvanted (RVE, 7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9%-11.4%) and HD (RVE, 4.9%; 95% CI, 1.7%-8.1%) vaccines were marginally more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccines. The cell-cultured quadrivalent vaccine was not significantly more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccine (RVE, 2.5%; 95% CI, -2.4% to 7.3%). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find major effectiveness differences between licensed vaccines used among the elderly during the 2018-2019 season. Consistent with prior research, we found that the egg-based adjuvanted and HD vaccines were slightly more effective than the egg-based quadrivalent vaccines.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Adjuvantes Imunológicos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Feminino , Hospitalização , Humanos , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/imunologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Medicare , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos , Vacinas Combinadas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Combinadas/imunologia , Vacinas Sintéticas/administração & dosagem , Vacinas Sintéticas/imunologia
20.
Diabetes Care ; 43(4): 785-792, 2020 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32075848

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether initiation of insulin glargine (glargine), compared with initiation of NPH or insulin detemir (detemir), was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer in women with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a retrospective new-user cohort study of female Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years initiating glargine (203,159), detemir (67,012), or NPH (47,388) from September 2006 to September 2015, with follow-up through May 2017. Weighted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for incidence of breast cancer according to ever use, cumulative duration of use, cumulative dose of insulin, length of follow-up time, and a combination of dose and length of follow-up time. RESULTS: Ever use of glargine was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer compared with NPH (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.88-1.06) or detemir (HR 0.98; 95% CI 0.92-1.05). No increased risk was seen with glargine use compared with either NPH or detemir by duration of insulin use, length of follow-up, or cumulative dose of insulin. No increased risk of breast cancer was observed in medium- or high-dose glargine users compared with low-dose users. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, glargine use was not associated with an increased risk of breast cancer compared with NPH or detemir in female Medicare beneficiaries.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/etiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Insulina Detemir/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina/efeitos adversos , Insulina Isófana/efeitos adversos , Fatores Etários , Idade de Início , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Estudos de Coortes , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Incidência , Insulina Detemir/administração & dosagem , Insulina Glargina/administração & dosagem , Insulina Isófana/administração & dosagem , Medicare/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA