Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 42
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Transfusion ; 64(8): 1459-1468, 2024 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38864291

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In May 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released final guidance for blood donor eligibility that recommended the elimination of 3-month deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM) and the related deferral for women who have sex with MSM. In its place, FDA introduced an individual risk assessment policy of asking all presenting blood donors, regardless of sex or gender, if they have had a new partner or more than one sexual partner in the last 3 months and deferring those who also report anal sex (penile-anal intercourse) during this period. We modeled the possible impact of this policy on the US blood donor base. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We developed a computational model to estimate the percentage of blood donors who would be deferred under a policy of individual HIV risk assessment. The model incorporated demographic information about donors and national survey data on HIV risk behaviors and included age and sex distributions and dependencies. RESULTS: Our model estimates that approximately 1.2% of US blood donors would be deferred under the individual HIV risk assessment paradigm. DISCUSSION: The model predicts a relatively minor effect of replacing the time-based deferral for MSM with individual risk-based deferral for sexual behavior. As US blood centers implement this new policy, the effect may be mitigated by donor gains, which warrant further study. The new policy is unlikely to adversely affect the availability of blood and blood components.


Assuntos
Doadores de Sangue , Infecções por HIV , Comportamento Sexual , Humanos , Doadores de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Infecções por HIV/epidemiologia , Infecções por HIV/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Medição de Risco , Adulto , Homossexualidade Masculina , Assunção de Riscos , Seleção do Doador , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem
2.
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
3.
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
4.
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
5.
Am J Med ; 136(10): 1018-1025.e3, 2023 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37454868

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonists prevent cytokine storm in mouse sepsis models. This led to the hypothesis that alpha-1 blockers may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is characterized by hypercytokinemia and progressive respiratory failure. METHODS: We performed an observational case-control study in male Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, with or without benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and treated with alpha-1 receptor blockers or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for outcomes of uncomplicated and severe COVID-19 hospitalization (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death). RESULTS: There were 20,963 cases of hospitalized COVID-19 matched to 101,161 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. In the primary analysis (males with BPH), there was no difference in risk of uncomplicated COVID-19 hospitalization (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.996-1.17) or hospitalization with severe complications (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.08). In the secondary analysis (males with or without BPH), the corresponding aORs were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96-1.09) (uncomplicated) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.91-1.07) (complicated), respectively. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. Of note, there was no difference in risk of severe COVID-19 hospitalization when comparing non-selective vs selective alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.10), higher- vs lower-dose alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.08), or current vs remote alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalent use of alpha-1 receptor blockers was not associated with a protective or harmful effect on risk of uncomplicated or severe hospitalized COVID-19.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Hiperplasia Prostática , Idoso , Humanos , Animais , Camundongos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Medicare , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos alfa
6.
Vaccine X ; 14: 100325, 2023 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37324525

RESUMO

Since the authorization of the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, real-world evidence has indicated its effectiveness in preventing COVID-19 cases. However, increased cases of mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis have been reported, predominantly in young adults and adolescents. The Food and Drug Administration conducted a benefit-risk assessment to inform the review of the Biologics License Application for use of the Moderna vaccine among individuals ages 18 and older. We modeled the benefit-risk per million individuals who receive two complete doses of the vaccine. Benefit endpoints were vaccine-preventable COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths. The risk endpoints were vaccine-related myocarditis/pericarditis cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths. The analysis was conducted on the age-stratified male population due to data signals and previous work showing males to be the main risk group. We constructed six scenarios to evaluate the impact of uncertainty associated with pandemic dynamics, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against novel variants, and rates of vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis cases on the model results. For our most likely scenario, we assumed the US COVID-19 incidence was for the week of December 25, 2021, with a VE of 30% against cases and 72% against hospitalization with the Omicron-dominant strain. Our source for estimating vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rates was FDA's CBER Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) System databases. Overall, our results supported the conclusion that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh its risks. Remarkably, we predicted vaccinating one million 18-25 year-old males would prevent 82,484 cases, 4,766 hospitalizations, 1,144 ICU admissions, and 51 deaths due to COVID-19, comparing to 128 vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis cases, 110 hospitalizations, zero ICU admissions, and zero deaths. Uncertainties in the pandemic trajectory, effectiveness of vaccine against novel variants, and vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rate are important limitations of our analysis. Also, the model does not evaluate potential long-term adverse effects due to either COVID-19 or vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis.

7.
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
8.
AAPS J ; 25(1): 24, 2023 02 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36759415

RESUMO

The US FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) is responsible for the regulation of biologically derived products. FDA has established Advisory Committees (AC) as vehicles to seek external expert advice on scientific and technical matters related to the development and evaluation of products regulated by the agency. We aimed to identify and evaluate common topics discussed in CBER AC meetings during the regulatory decision-making process for biological products and medical devices. We analyzed the content of 119 CBER-led AC meetings between 2009 and 2021 listed on the FDA AC webpage. We reviewed publicly available meeting materials such as briefing documents, summaries, and transcripts. Using a structured review codebook based on FDA benefit-risk guidance, we identified important considerations within the benefit-risk dimensions discussed at the AC meetings: therapeutic context, benefit, risk and risk management, and benefit-risk trade-off, where evidence and uncertainty are critical parts of the FDA benefit-risk framework. Based on a detailed review of 24 topics discussed in 23 selected AC meetings conducted between 2016 and 2021, the two most frequently discussed considerations were "Uncertainty about assessment of the safety profile" and "Uncertainty about assessment of the benefit based on clinical trial data" (16/24 times each) as defined in our codebook. Most of the reviewed meetings discussed Investigational New Drug or Biologics License Applications of products. This review could help sponsors better plan and design studies by contextualizing how the benefit-risk dimensions were embedded in the AC discussions and the considerations that went into the final AC recommendations.


Assuntos
Comitês Consultivos , Produtos Biológicos , Estados Unidos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Gestão de Riscos , Incerteza , United States Food and Drug Administration
9.
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
10.
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
11.
Vaccine ; 40(19): 2781-2789, 2022 04 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35370016

RESUMO

Since authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA (Comirnaty), real-world evidence has indicated the vaccines are effective in preventing COVID-19 cases and related hospitalizations and deaths. However, increased cases of myocarditis/pericarditis have been reported in the United States associated with vaccination, particularly in adolescents and young adults. FDA conducted a benefit-risk assessment to determine whether the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks among various age (16-17, 18-24, 25-29) and sex (M/F) subgroups being considered for approved use of the vaccine. We conducted a simulation study with sensitivity analysis of the benefits and risks of the vaccine across possible pandemic scenarios. The model results show benefits outweigh the risks for all scenarios including the high-risk subgroup, males 16-17 years old. Our worst-case scenario used sex and age subgroup-specific incidences for COVID-19 cases (47-98 per million per day) and hospitalizations (1-4 per million per day) which are the US COVID-19 incidences as of July 10, 2021, vaccine efficacy of 70% against COVID-19 cases and 80% against hospitalization, and unlikely, pessimistic, non-zero vaccine-attributable myocarditis death rate. For males 16-17 years old, the model predicts prevented COVID cases, hospitalizations, ICUs, and deaths of 13577, 127, 41, and 1, respectively; while the predicted ranges for excess myocarditis/pericarditis cases, hospitalizations, and deaths attributable to the vaccine are [98-196], [98-196], and 0, respectively, for the worst-case scenario. Considering the different clinical implications of hospitalization due to COVID-19 infection versus vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis cases, we determine the benefits still outweigh the risks even for this high-risk subgroup. Our results demonstrate that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh its risks for all age and sex subgroups we analyze in this study. Uncertainties exist in this assessment as both benefits and risks of vaccination may change with the continuing evolution of the pandemic.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Miocardite , Pericardite , Adolescente , Adulto , Vacina BNT162 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Miocardite/epidemiologia , Miocardite/etiologia , Pericardite/epidemiologia , RNA Mensageiro , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
12.
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
13.
JAMA Intern Med ; 181(12): 1623-1630, 2021 12 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34724025

RESUMO

Importance: Guillain-Barré syndrome can be reported after vaccination. This study assesses the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after administration of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV or Shingrix), which is administered in 2 doses 2 to 6 months apart. Objective: Use Medicare claims data to evaluate risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome following vaccination with zoster vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series cohort study included 849 397 RZV-vaccinated and 1 817 099 zoster vaccine live (ZVL or Zostavax)-vaccinated beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Self-controlled analyses included events identified from 2 113 758 eligible RZV-vaccinated beneficiaries 65 years or older. We compared the relative risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after RZV vs ZVL, followed by claims-based and medical record-based self-controlled case series analyses to assess risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during a postvaccination risk window (days 1-42) compared with a control window (days 43-183). In self-controlled analyses, RZV vaccinees were observed from October 1, 2017, to February 29, 2020. Patients were identified in the inpatient, outpatient procedural (including emergency department), and office settings using Medicare administrative data. Exposures: Vaccination with RZV or ZVL vaccines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Guillain-Barré syndrome was identified in Medicare administrative claims data, and cases were assessed through medical record review using the Brighton Collaboration case definition. Results: Amongst those who received RZV vaccinees, the mean age was 74.8 years at first dose, and 58% were women, whereas among those who received the ZVL vaccine, the mean age was 74.3 years, and 60% were women. In the cohort analysis we detected an increase in risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome among RZV vaccinees compared with ZVL vaccinees (rate ratio [RR], 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.41; P = .047). In the self-controlled analyses, we observed 24 and 20 cases during the risk and control period, respectively. Our claims-based analysis identified an increased risk in the risk window compared with the control window (RR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.53-5.27; P = .001), with an attributable risk of 3 per million RZV doses (95% CI, 0.62-5.64). Our medical record-based analysis confirmed this increased risk (RR, 4.96; 95% CI, 1.43-17.27; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this case series cohort study indicate a slightly increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the 42 days following RZV vaccination in the Medicare population, with approximately 3 excess Guillain-Barré syndrome cases per million vaccinations. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this risk, while considering the benefit of decreasing the risk of herpes zoster and its complications through an efficacious vaccine, as risk-benefit balance remains in favor of vaccination.


Assuntos
Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/induzido quimicamente , Vacina contra Herpes Zoster/efeitos adversos , Herpes Zoster/prevenção & controle , Medicare/economia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Vacinas Sintéticas/efeitos adversos , Idoso , Análise Custo-Benefício , Feminino , Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação/economia
14.
J Gen Intern Med ; 36(12): 3802-3809, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34599472

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are theoretical concerns that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) could increase the risk of severe Covid-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine if ACEIs and ARBs are associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization overall, or hospitalization involving intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. DESIGN: Observational case-control study. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 66 years with hypertension, treated with ACEIs, ARBs, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), or thiazide diuretics. MAIN MEASURES: Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of Covid-19 hospitalization, or hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. RESULTS: A total of 35,300 cases of hospitalized Covid-19 were matched to 228,228 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. The median age of cases was 79 years, 57.4% were female, and the median duration of hospitalization was 8 days (interquartile range 5-12). ACEIs and ARBs were associated with a slight reduction in Covid-19 hospitalization risk compared with treatment with other first-line antihypertensives (OR for ACEIs 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98; OR for ARBs 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.97). Similar results were obtained for hospitalizations involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. There were no meaningful differences in risk for ACEIs compared with ARBs. In an analysis restricted to monotherapy with a first-line agent, CCBs were associated with a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization compared with ACEIs (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14), ARBs (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15), or thiazide diuretics (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19). CONCLUSIONS: ACEIs and ARBs were not associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization or with hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. The finding of a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization with CCBs was unexpected and could be due to residual confounding.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Hipertensão , Idoso , Antagonistas de Receptores de Angiotensina , Inibidores da Enzima Conversora de Angiotensina/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Feminino , Hospitalização , Humanos , Hipertensão/tratamento farmacológico , Hipertensão/epidemiologia , Medicare , Sistema Renina-Angiotensina , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
15.
Vaccine ; 39(28): 3666-3677, 2021 06 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34088506

RESUMO

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a devastating impact on global health, and has resulted in an unprecedented, international collaborative effort to develop vaccines to control the outbreak, protect human lives, and avoid further social and economic disruption. Mass vaccination campaigns are underway in multiple countries and are expected worldwide once more vaccine becomes available. Some early candidate vaccines use novel platforms, such as mRNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles, and relatively new platforms, such as replication-deficient viral vectors. While these new vaccine platforms hold promise, limited safety data in humans are available. Serious health outcomes linked to vaccinations are rare, and some outcomes may occur incidentally in the vaccinated population. Knowledge of background incidence rates of these medical conditions is a critical component of vaccine safety monitoring to aid in the assessment of adverse events temporally associated with vaccination and to put these events into context with what would be expected due to chance alone. A list of 22 potential adverse events of special interest (AESI), including neurologic, autoimmune, and cardiovascular disorders, was compiled by subject matter experts at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The most recently available U.S. background rates for these medical conditions, overall and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (when available), were sourced from reported statistics (data published by medical panels/ associations or federal government reports), and literature reviews in PubMed. This review provides estimates of background incidence rates for medical conditions that may be monitored or studied as AESI during safety surveillance and research for COVID-19 vaccines and other new vaccines.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Humanos , Incidência , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Vacinação , 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.
CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol ; 10(4): 286-290, 2021 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33608998

RESUMO

As part of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) VI commitments, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) and Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) are conducting a model-informed drug development (MIDD) pilot program. Sponsor(s) who apply and are selected will be granted meetings that aim to facilitate the application of MIDD approaches throughout the product development lifecycle and the regulatory process. Due to their complex mechanisms of action and limited clinical experience, cell and gene therapies have the potential to benefit from the application of MIDD methods, which may facilitate their safety and efficacy evaluations. Leveraging data that are generated from all stages of drug development into appropriate modeling and simulation techniques that inform decisions remains challenging. Additional discussions regarding the application of quantitative modeling approaches to drug development decisions, such as through the MIDD pilot program, may be crucial for both the sponsor(s) and regulatory review teams. Here, we share some perspectives on the opportunities and challenges for utilizing MIDD approaches for product review, which we hope will encourage investigators to publish their experiences and application of MIDD in gene therapy product development.


Assuntos
Desenvolvimento de Medicamentos/legislação & jurisprudência , Terapia Genética/métodos , Imunoterapia Adotiva/efeitos adversos , Simulação por Computador , Dependovirus/química , Dependovirus/metabolismo , Humanos , Imunoterapia Adotiva/métodos , Modelos Biológicos , Terapia Viral Oncolítica/efeitos adversos , Terapia Viral Oncolítica/métodos , Farmacocinética , Projetos de Pesquisa , Segurança , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica/estatística & dados numéricos , Resultado do Tratamento
18.
J Infect Dis ; 223(3): 416-425, 2021 02 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33137184

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) identified a statistical signal for an increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) in days 1-42 after 2018-2019 high-dose influenza vaccine (IIV3-HD) administration. We evaluated the signal using Medicare. METHODS: We conducted early- and end-of-season claims-based self-controlled risk interval analyses among Medicare beneficiaries ages ≥65 years, using days 8-21 and 1-42 postvaccination as risk windows and days 43-84 as control window. The VSD conducted chart-confirmed analyses. RESULTS: Among 7 453 690 IIV3-HD vaccinations, we did not detect a statistically significant increased GBS risk for either the 8- to 21-day (odds ratio [OR], 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99-3.44) or 1- to 42-day (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.78-2.18) risk windows. The findings from the end-of-season analyses were fully consistent with the early-season analyses for both the 8- to 21-day (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.92-2.91) and 1- to 42-day (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.70-1.79) risk windows. The VSD's chart-confirmed analysis, involving 646 996 IIV3-HD vaccinations, with 1 case each in the risk and control windows, yielded a relative risk of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.06-15.99). CONCLUSIONS: The Medicare analyses did not exclude an association between IIV3-HD and GBS, but it determined that, if such a risk existed, it was similar in magnitude to prior seasons. Chart-confirmed VSD results did not confirm an increased risk of GBS.


Assuntos
Síndrome de Guillain-Barré/etiologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare , Razão de Chances , Medição de Risco , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos , Vacinação/efeitos adversos
19.
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
20.
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
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA