Relative Effectiveness of BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and Ad26.COV2.S Vaccines and Homologous Boosting in Preventing COVID-19 in Adults in the US.

Background: Few head-to-head comparisons have been performed on the real-world effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster vaccines. We evaluated the relative effectiveness (rVE) of a primary series of mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S and a homologous mRNA booster against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19. Methods: A data set linking primary care electronic medical records with medical claims data was used for this retrospective cohort study of US patients age ≥18 years vaccinated with a primary series between February and October 2021 (Part 1) and a homologous mRNA booster between October 2021 and January 2022 (Part 2). Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were derived from 1:1 matching adjusted across potential covariates. rVE was (1 - HRadjusted) × 100. Additional analysis was performed across regions and age groups. Results: Following adjustment, Part 1 rVE for mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 was 23% (95% CI, 22%-25%), 23% (95% CI, 22%-25%), and 19% (95% CI, 14%-24%), while the rVE for mRNA-1273 vs Ad26.COV2.S was 50% (95% CI, 48%-51%), 50% (95% CI, 48%-52%), and 57% (95% CI, 53%-61%) against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19, respectively. The adjusted rVE in Part 2 for mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 was 14% (95% CI, 10%-18%), 13% (95% CI, 8%-17%), and 19% (95% CI, 1%-34%) against any medically attended, outpatient, and hospitalized COVID-19, respectively. rVE against medically attended COVID-19 was higher in adults age ≥65 years (35%; 95% CI, 24%-47%) than in those age 18-64 years (13%; 95% CI, 9%-17%) after the booster. Conclusions: In this study, mRNA-1273 was more effective than BNT162b2 or Ad26.COV2.S following a primary series during the Delta-dominant period and more effective than BNT162b2 as a booster during the Omicron-dominant period.

Effectiveness of a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 against COVID-19 among older adults in the United States: Interim results from an observational cohort study.

We evaluated relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of 4- vs. 3-dose mRNA-1273 against SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 hospitalization and death in immunocompetent adults aged ≥50 years at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. We included 178,492 individuals who received a fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and 178,492 randomly selected 3-dose recipients who were matched to 4-dose recipients by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and third dose date. Adjusted 4- vs. 3-dose rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 hospitalization, and COVID-19 hospitalization death were 25.9 % (23.5 %, 28.2 %), 67.3 % (58.7 %, 74.1 %), and 72.5 % (-35.9 %, 95.2 %), respectively. Adjusted rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection ranged between 19.8 % and 39.1 % across subgroups. Adjusted rVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization decreased 2-4 months after the fourth dose. Four mRNA-1273 doses provided significant protection against COVID-19 outcomes compared with 3 doses, consistent in various subgroups of demographic and clinical characteristics, although rVE varied and waned over time.

Effectiveness of mRNA-1273 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 omicron subvariants BA.1, BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5.

Studies have reported reduced natural SARS-CoV-2 infection- and vaccine-induced neutralization against omicron BA.4/BA.5 compared with earlier omicron subvariants. This test-negative case-control study evaluates mRNA-1273 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against infection and hospitalization with omicron subvariants. The study includes 30,809 SARS-CoV-2 positive and 92,427 SARS-CoV-2 negative individuals aged ≥18 years tested during 1/1/2022-6/30/2022. While 3-dose VE against BA.1 infection is high and wanes slowly, VE against BA.2, BA.2.12.1, BA.4, and BA.5 infection is initially moderate to high (61.0%-90.6% 14-30 days post third dose) and wanes rapidly. The 4-dose VE against infection with BA.2, BA.2.12.1, and BA.4 ranges between 64.3%-75.7%, and is low (30.8%) against BA.5 14-30 days post fourth dose, disappearing beyond 90 days for all subvariants. The 3-dose VE against hospitalization for BA.1, BA.2, and BA.4/BA.5 is 97.5%, 82.0%, and 72.4%, respectively; 4-dose VE against hospitalization for BA.4/BA.5 is 88.5%. Evaluation of the updated bivalent booster is warranted.

Registration of Observational Studies: perspectives from an industry-based epidemiology group.

Registration of randomized clinical trials has become standard practice and is enforced through publication policies and governmental regulations. However, the registration of observational studies remains controversial. In this commentary, we propose that a compromise can be reached on which observation should be registered based on study design and study intent.

Evaluation of Cardiovascular Disease Risk in HIV-1-Infected Patients Treated with Darunavir.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk associated with darunavir treatment and examined the demographic/clinical characteristics of darunavir users based on data from Janssen-sponsored clinical trials, post-marketing pharmacovigilance databases, and administrative claims databases. METHODS: First, selected CVD events [myocardial infarction, stroke, sudden death, invasive cardiovascular procedures (coronary artery angioplasty or bypass, or carotid endarterectomy)] were analyzed in 19 Janssen-sponsored phase 2-4 studies (incidence rates estimated from pooled data; 95% confidence intervals derived from Poisson distribution). Second, analyses were conducted to identify spontaneously reported CVD events in post-marketing pharmacovigilance databases and evaluate disproportional reporting of CVD events for darunavir (using Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean scores). Third, baseline demographic/clinical characteristics of human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1)-infected patients in general and new users of darunavir and atazanavir were explored using three US administrative claims databases. RESULTS: Among 19 Janssen-sponsored clinical trials (treatment durations ≤ 6 years), the CVD event rate (95% CI) per 1000 person-years (pooled population; n = 5713) was 6.15 (2.91-11.89), and was lower for patients who used once-daily darunavir/ritonavir 800/100 mg [0.71 (0.16-3.05); n = 1326] versus twice-daily darunavir/ritonavir 600/100 mg [9.21 (4.94-16.04); n = 3058]. Trend analysis of post-marketing pharmacovigilance data showed that cumulative CVD event reporting rates for darunavir users (any dose) generally declined over time. Spontaneously reported CVD events were not disproportionately reported with darunavir versus other protease inhibitors. Compared with the general HIV-1-infected population and atazanavir users, higher proportions of darunavir users were male, older, and had comorbidities associated with CVD risk based on results from US administrative claims databases. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive review of Janssen-sponsored clinical trial, post-marketing, and epidemiological data does not suggest that CVD should be considered an important risk for users of darunavir.

Correction to: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Disease Risk in HIV­1-Infected Patients Treated with Darunavir.

In the original publication of the article, Table 2 has been published incorrectly.

Use of doripenem and risk of seizure and renal impairment in US hospitalized patients: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: A large retrospective database study was conducted to assess the incidence rate of treatment-emergent renal impairment/failure, seizure, and hemolytic anemia in doripenem and imipenem intravenous (IV)-exposed patients treated for complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) and complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in US hospitals. METHODS: Using the Premier Perspective™ Database (PPD), which maintains hospital discharge records for over 309 million patients, the incidence rate of treatment-emergent renal impairment/failure, seizure, and hemolytic anemia in the doripenem-treated compared with imipenem IV-treated population was examined. RESULTS: The unadjusted doripenem rate ratio (RR) for renal impairment/failure relative to imipenem IV was 1.13 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.21; p < 0.0001]. The unadjusted doripenem rate ratio for seizure relative to imipenem IV was 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-1.05; p = 0.07). In the comparative safety analysis, adjusted incidence rates of renal impairment/failure between doripenem-exposed patients and a propensity score-matched comparator cohort of imipenem IV-exposed patients showed no statistically significant difference in cUTI [RR = 1.02; 95% CI 0.93-1.12; p = 0.71] or cIAI (RR = 1.17; 95% CI 1.00-1.36; p = 0.05). Likewise, there was no statistically significant difference in adjusted incidence rates for seizures in doripenem-treated versus matched imipenem-treated patients for cUTI (RR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.41-1.14; p = 0.15) or cIAI (RR = 0.45; 95% CI 0.15-1.41; p = 0.17). No hemolytic anemia events were observed in this study. CONCLUSIONS: In this large retrospective cohort study of US hospitalized patients, no statistically significant differences in the adjusted relative rates of renal impairment/failure and seizure were observed between doripenem and a propensity score-matched comparator cohort of imipenem IV patients in the treatment of cUTI and cIAI.

Objective measurement of patient's dental anxiety by galvanic skin reaction.

The purpose of this study was to determine if anxiety can be measured objectively by skin conductance of a weak electric current. Three measurements were taken. First, a standardized dental-anxiety questionnaire was given to determine anxiety. Second, galvanic skin conductance was measured. Third, polygraph responses were recorded to three key questions from the questionnaire. Questionnaire scores of these key questions were used to create two groups: anxious and not-anxious. The three key questions were subjected to polygraph verification. In the first analysis patients were excluded if the polygraph test disclosed lying on any of the three key questions. The second analysis excluded liars on a question-by-question basis. The third analysis disregarded the polygraph. A statistically significant correlation was found between skin conductance and dental anxiety in all cases. Data seem to indicate that fear of injection is the most anxiety-producing aspect of modern dentistry.

Assessing the risk of birth defects associated with antiretroviral exposure during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine teratogenic risk of antiretroviral (ARV) drugs. STUDY DESIGN: The Antiretroviral Pregnancy Registry (APR) monitors prenatal exposures to ARV drugs and pregnancy outcome through a prospective exposure-registration cohort. Statistical inference uses exact methods for binomial proportions. RESULTS: Through July 2003, APR has monitored 3583 live births exposed to ARV. Among 1391 first trimester exposures, there were 38 birth defects, prevalence of 2.7% (95% CI 1.9-3.7), not significantly higher than the CDC's population surveillance rate, 3.1 per 100 live births (95% CI 3.1-3.2). For lamivudine, nelfinavir, nevirapine, stavudine, and zidovudine, sufficient numbers of live births (>200) following first-trimester exposures have been monitored to allow detection of a 2-fold increase in risk of birth defects overall; no increases have been detected. CONCLUSION: APR data demonstrate no increase in prevalence of birth defects overall or among women exposed to lamivudine, nelfinavir, nevirapine, stavudine, and zidovudine.