An individual segmented trajectory approach for identifying opioid use patterns using longitudinal dispensing data.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to use electronic opioid dispensing data to develop an individual segmented trajectory approach for identifying opioid use patterns. The resulting opioid use patterns can be used for examining the association between opioid use and drug overdose. METHODS: We retrospectively assembled a cohort of members on long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2019 who were 18 years and older and enrolled in one of three health care systems in the US. We have developed an individual segmented trajectory analysis for identifying various opioid use patterns by scanning over the follow-up and finding distinct opioid use patterns based on variability measured with coefficient of variation and trends of milligram morphine equivalents levels. RESULTS: Among 31, 865 members who were on LTOT between January 1, 2006 and June 30, 2019, 58.3% were female, and the average age was 55.4 years (STD = 15.4). The study population had 152 557 person-years of follow-up, with an average follow-up of 4.4 years per enrollment per person (STD = 3.4). This novel approach identified up to 13 distinct patterns including 88 756 episodes of "stable" pattern (42.1%) with an average follow-up of 11.2 months, 29 140 episodes of "increasing" pattern (13.8%) with an average follow-up of 6.0 months, 13 201 episodes of ≤10% dose reduction (6.3%) with an average follow-up of 10.4 months, 7286 episodes of 11%-20% dose reduction (3.5%) with an average follow-up of 5.3 months, 4457 episodes of 21%-30% dose reduction (2.1%) with an average follow-up of 4.0 months, and 9903 episodes of >30% dose reduction (4.7%) with an average follow-up of 2.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: A novel approach was developed to identify 13 distinct opioid use patterns using each individual's longitudinal dispensing data and these patterns can be used in examining overdose risk during the time that these patterns are ongoing.

Association Between Opioid Dose Reduction Rates and Overdose Among Patients Prescribed Long-Term Opioid Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Tapering long-term opioid therapy is an increasingly common practice, yet rapid opioid dose reductions may increase the risk of overdose. The objective of this study was to compare overdose risk following opioid dose reduction rates of ≤10%, 11% to 20%, 21% to 30%, and >30% per month to stable dosing. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in three health systems in Colorado and Wisconsin. Participants were patients ≥18 years of age prescribed long-term opioid therapy between January 1, 2006, and June 30, 2019. Five opioid dosing patterns and drug overdoses (fatal and nonfatal) were identified using electronic health records, pharmacy records, and the National Death Index. Cox proportional hazard regression was conducted on a propensity score-weighted cohort to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for follow-up periods of 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after a dose reduction. RESULTS: In a cohort of 17 540 patients receiving long-term opioid therapy, 42.7% of patients experienced a dose reduction. Relative to stable dosing, a dose reduction rate of >30% was associated with an increased risk of overdose and the aHR estimates decreased as the follow-up increased; the aHRs for the 1-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups were 5.33 (95% CI, 1.98-14.34), 1.81 (95% CI,1.08-3.03), and 1.49 (95% CI, 0.97-2.27), respectively. The slower tapering rates were not associated with overdose risk. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving long-term opioid therapy exposed to dose reduction rates of >30% per month had increased overdose risk relative to patients exposed to stable dosing. Results support the use of slow dose reductions to minimize the risk of overdose.

COVID-19 Vaccination and Non-COVID-19 Mortality Risk - Seven Integrated Health Care Organizations, United States, December 14, 2020-July 31, 2021.

By September 21, 2021, an estimated 182 million persons in the United States were fully vaccinated against COVID-19.* Clinical trials indicate that Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson; Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccines are effective and generally well tolerated (1-3). However, daily vaccination rates have declined approximately 78% since April 13, 2021†; vaccine safety concerns have contributed to vaccine hesitancy (4). A cohort study of 19,625 nursing home residents found that those who received an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) had lower all-cause mortality than did unvaccinated residents (5), but no studies comparing mortality rates within the general population of vaccinated and unvaccinated persons have been conducted. To assess mortality not associated with COVID-19 (non-COVID-19 mortality) after COVID-19 vaccination in a general population setting, a cohort study was conducted during December 2020-July 2021 among approximately 11 million persons enrolled in seven Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) sites.§ After standardizing mortality rates by age and sex, this study found that COVID-19 vaccine recipients had lower non-COVID-19 mortality than did unvaccinated persons. After adjusting for demographic characteristics and VSD site, this study found that adjusted relative risk (aRR) of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.38-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.34 (95% CI = 0.33-0.36) after dose 2. The aRRs of non-COVID-19 mortality for the Moderna vaccine were 0.34 (95% CI = 0.32-0.37) after dose 1 and 0.31 (95% CI = 0.30-0.33) after dose 2. The aRR after receipt of the Janssen vaccine was 0.54 (95% CI = 0.49-0.59). There is no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients. This finding reinforces the safety profile of currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States.

Association Between Estimated Cumulative Vaccine Antigen Exposure Through the First 23 Months of Life and Non-Vaccine-Targeted Infections From 24 Through 47 Months of Age.

Importance: Some parents are concerned that multiple vaccines in early childhood could weaken their child's immune system. Biological data suggest that increased vaccine antigen exposure could increase the risk for infections not targeted by vaccines. Objective: To examine estimated cumulative vaccine antigen exposure through the first 23 months of life in children with and without non-vaccine-targeted infections from 24 through 47 months of age. Design, Setting, and Participants: A nested case-control study was conducted in 6 US health care organizations participating in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. Cases were identified by International Classification of Diseases codes for infectious diseases in the emergency department and inpatient medical settings and then validated by medical record review. Cases of non-vaccine-targeted infection were matched to controls by age, sex, health care organization site, and chronic disease status. Participants were children ages 24 through 47 months, born between January 1, 2003, and September 31, 2013, followed up until December 31, 2015. Exposures: Cumulative vaccine antigen exposure, estimated by summing the number of antigens in each vaccine dose received from birth through age 23 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: Non-vaccine-targeted infections, including upper and lower respiratory infections and gastrointestinal infections, from 24 through 47 months of age, and the association between these infections and estimated cumulative vaccine exposure from birth through 23 months. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate matched odds ratios representing the odds of non-vaccine-targeted infections for every 30-unit increase in estimated cumulative number of antigens received. Results: Among the 944 patients (193 cases and 751 controls), the mean (SD) age was 32.5 (6.3) months, 422 (45%) were female, and 61 (7%) had a complex chronic condition. Through the first 23 months, the estimated mean (SD) cumulative vaccine antigen exposure was 240.6 (48.3) for cases and 242.9 (51.1) for controls. The between-group difference for estimated cumulative antigen exposure was -2.3 (95% CI, -10.1 to 5.4; P = .55). Among children with vs without non-vaccine-targeted infections from 24 through 47 months of age, the matched odds ratio for estimated cumulative antigen exposure through age 23 months was not significant (matched odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.07). Conclusions and Relevance: Among children from 24 through 47 months of age with emergency department and inpatient visits for infectious diseases not targeted by vaccines, compared with children without such visits, there was no significant difference in estimated cumulative vaccine antigen exposure through the first 23 months of life.

Validation of Health Event Capture in the Marshfield Epidemiologic Study Area.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, health event capture is broadly defined as the degree to which a group of people use a particular provider network as their primary source of health care services. The Marshfield Epidemiologic Study Area (MESA) is a valuable resource for population-based health research, but the completeness of health event capture has not been validated in recent years. Our objective was to determine the current level of outpatient and inpatient health event capture by Marshfield Clinic (MC) facilities and affiliated hospitals for people living within MESA. DESIGN: A stratified sample survey with strata defined by MESA region (Central or North) and age group (<18 years or ≥18 years). SETTING: 24 ZIP codes in central and northern Wisconsin, USA. PARTICIPANTS: 2,485 individuals participated of the 4,313 sampled cohort members residing in MESA Central (N=61,041) and MESA North (N=25,906) on February 22, 2011. METHODS: A health care utilization survey was mailed to a random sample stratified by age group and MESA region. Telephone interviews were attempted for nonrespondents. The survey requested information on sources of outpatient care and overnight hospital admissions. Population proportions representing health event capture metrics and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with analytic weights applied to account for the survey design. RESULTS: Among those with an outpatient visit during the past 24 months, the most recent visit of an estimated 93% (95% CI, 91% - 94%) was at a MC facility. The most recent admission of an estimated 93% (95% CI, 90% - 96%) of those hospitalized in the past 24 months was at a hospital affiliated with MC. The proportion admitted to MC affiliated hospitals was higher for residents of MESA Central (97%) compared to MESA North (83%). CONCLUSION: A high proportion of outpatient visits and inpatient admissions in MESA Central and MESA North are accessible in the MC electronic health record. This pattern of high health event capture has been demonstrated since the inception of MESA in 1991. The results from this study validate and support the continued use of MESA for population-based epidemiologic and clinical research.

Impact of repeated vaccination on vaccine effectiveness against influenza A(H3N2) and B during 8 seasons.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that influenza vaccination in the previous season may influence the effectiveness of current-season vaccination, but this has not been assessed in a single population over multiple years. METHODS: Patients presenting with acute respiratory illness were prospectively enrolled during the 2004-2005 through 2012-2013 influenza seasons. Respiratory swabs were tested for influenza and vaccination dates obtained from a validated registry. Vaccination status was determined for the current, previous, and prior 5 seasons. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated for participants aged ≥9 years using logistic regression models with an interaction term for vaccination history. RESULTS: There were 7315 enrollments during 8 seasons; 1056 (14%) and 650 (9%) were positive for influenza A(H3N2) and B, respectively. Vaccination during current only, previous only, or both seasons yielded similar protection against H3N2 (adjusted VE range, 31%-36%) and B (52%-66%). In the analysis using 5 years of historical vaccination data, current season VE against H3N2 was significantly higher among vaccinated individuals with no prior vaccination history (65%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 36%-80%) compared with vaccinated individuals with a frequent vaccination history (24%; 95% CI, 3%-41%; P = .01). VE against B was 75% (95% CI, 50%-87%) and 48% (95% CI, 29%-62%), respectively (P = .05). Similar findings were observed when analysis was restricted to adults 18-49 years. CONCLUSIONS: Current- and previous-season vaccination generated similar levels of protection, and vaccine-induced protection was greatest for individuals not vaccinated during the prior 5 years. Additional studies are needed to understand the long-term effects of annual vaccination.

Ligand concentration regulates the pathways of coupled protein folding and binding.

Coupled ligand binding and conformational change plays a central role in biological regulation. Ligands often regulate protein function by modulating conformational dynamics, yet the order in which binding and conformational change occurs are often hotly debated. Here we show that the "conformational selection versus induced fit" distinction on which this debate is based is a false dichotomy because the mechanism depends on ligand concentration. Using the binding of pyrophosphate (PPi) to Bacillus subtilis RNase P protein as a model, we show that coupled reactions are best understood as a change in flux between competing pathways with distinct orders of binding and conformational change. The degree of partitioning through each pathway depends strongly on PPi concentration, with ligand binding redistributing the conformational ensemble toward the folded state by both increasing folding rates and decreasing unfolding rates. These results indicate that ligand binding induces marked and varied changes in protein conformational dynamics, and that the order of binding and conformational change is ligand concentration dependent.

Signal detection of adverse events with imperfect confirmation rates in vaccine safety studies using self-controlled case series design.

The Vaccine Safety Datalink project captures electronic health record data including vaccinations and medically attended adverse events on 8.8 million enrollees annually from participating managed care organizations in the United States. While the automated vaccination data are generally of high quality, a presumptive adverse event based on diagnosis codes in automated health care data may not be true (misclassification). Consequently, analyses using automated health care data can generate false positive results, where an association between the vaccine and outcome is incorrectly identified, as well as false negative findings, where a true association or signal is missed. We developed novel conditional Poisson regression models and fixed effects models that accommodate misclassification of adverse event outcome for self-controlled case series design. We conducted simulation studies to evaluate their performance in signal detection in vaccine safety hypotheses generating (screening) studies. We also reanalyzed four previously identified signals in a recent vaccine safety study using the newly proposed models. Our simulation studies demonstrated that (i) outcome misclassification resulted in both false positive and false negative signals in screening studies; (ii) the newly proposed models reduced both the rates of false positive and false negative signals. In reanalyses of four previously identified signals using the novel statistical models, the incidence rate ratio estimates and statistical significances were similar to those using conventional models and including only medical record review confirmed cases.

National Analysis of Clinical Outcomes Associated With Cirrhotic Blunt Trauma Patients Undergoing Emergency Laparotomy Versus Non-operative Management: A Propensity Case-Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to evaluate clinical outcomes among severely injured trauma patients presenting with isolated blunt abdominal solid organ injuries with a pre-diagnosis of liver cirrhosis (LC) undergoing emergency laparotomy vs nonoperative management (NOM). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Program Participant Use File (ACS-TQIP-PUF) dataset from 2017 to 2021. Adults (≥18 years) with a pre-existing diagnosis of LC who presented with severe blunt (ISS ≥ 16) isolated solid organ abdominal injuries and underwent laparotomy or NOM were included. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit length of stay (ICU-LOS), and in-hospital complications such as acute renal failure and deep vein thrombosis. RESULTS: 929 patients were included in this analysis, with 355 undergoing laparotomy and 574 managed nonoperatively. Laparotomy patients suffered greater in-hospital mortality (n = 186, 52.3% vs n = 115, 20.0%; P < .01), required significantly more blood within 4 hours (8.9 units vs 4.3 units, P < .01), and had a significantly longer ICU-LOS (10.2 days vs 6.7 days, P < .01). In the 1:1 propensity score matched analysis of 556 matched patients, in-hospital mortality was greater for laparotomy patients (52.3% vs 20.0%, P < .01). CONCLUSION: Laparotomy was associated with significantly higher in-hospital mortality in propensity-matched trauma patients, longer ICU-LOS, and more blood products given at 4 hours compared to NOM. These findings illustrate that NOM may be a safe approach in managing severely injured trauma patients with isolated blunt abdominal solid organ injuries and a pre-diagnosis of LC.

Long-term Neutralizing Antibody Levels Against Measles and Rubella Viruses Among Adults With 3 Doses of Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine.

Background: A third dose of measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR) may be administered for various reasons, but data on long-term immunity are limited. We assessed neutralizing antibody levels against measles and rubella among adults up to 11 years after receipt of a third MMR dose. Methods: In this longitudinal study, healthy adults who received a third MMR dose as young adults (ages 18-28 years) were recalled around 5 years and 9-11 years after the third dose. Measles and rubella antibody levels were assessed by plaque-reduction and immunocolorimetric neutralization assays, respectively. Antibody concentrations <120 mIU/mL and <10 U/mL were considered potentially susceptible to measles and rubella, respectively. Geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) over time were estimated from generalized estimating equation models. Results: Approximately 5 and 9-11 years after receipt of the third dose, 405 and 304 adults were assessed, respectively. Measles GMC was 428 mIU/mL (95% CI, 392-468 mIU/mL) 5 years postvaccination, declining to 381 mIU/mL (95% CI, 339-428 mIU/mL) 11 years postvaccination. At the last follow-up visit (9-11 years postvaccination), 10% of participants were potentially susceptible to measles infection. Rubella GMCs were stable throughout the follow-up period (63 U/mL to 65 U/mL); none of the participants was susceptible to rubella at the last follow-up visit. Conclusions: Eleven years after receiving a third MMR dose, measles and rubella neutralizing antibody levels remained high in adults. However, on the basis of waning antibody levels, some adults may become susceptible to measles infection over time despite receipt of 3 vaccine doses.

Mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination: A self-controlled case series study.

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies found no-increased mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination, residual confounding bias might have impacted the findings. Using a modified self-controlled case series (SCCS) design, we assessed the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes after primary series COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We analyzed all deaths between December 14, 2020, and August 11, 2021, among individuals from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink sites. Demographic characteristics of deaths in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines and unvaccinated individuals were reported. We conducted SCCS analyses by vaccine type and death outcomes and reported relative incidences (RI). The observation period for death spanned from the dates of emergency use authorization to the end of the study period (August 11, 2021) without censoring the observation period upon death. We pre-specified a primary risk interval of 28-day and a secondary risk interval of 14-day after each vaccination dose. Adjusting for seasonality in mortality analyses is crucial because death rates vary over time. Deaths among unvaccinated individuals were included in SCCS analyses to account for seasonality by incorporating calendar month in the models. RESULTS: For Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), RIs of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes were below 1 and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) excluded 1 across both doses and both risk intervals. For Moderna (mRNA-1273), RI point estimates of all outcomes were below 1, although the 95 % CIs of two RI estimates included 1: cardiac-related (RI = 0.78, 95 % CI, 0.58-1.04) and non-COVID-19 cardiac-related mortality (RI = 0.80, 95 % CI, 0.60-1.08) 14 days after the second dose in individuals without pre-existing cancer and heart disease. For Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S), RIs of four cardiac-related death outcomes ranged from 0.94 to 0.98 for the 14-day risk interval, and 0.68 to 0.72 for the 28-day risk interval and 95 % CIs included 1. CONCLUSION: Using a modified SCCS design and adjusting for temporal trends, no-increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes among recipients of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.

Post-COVID conditions following COVID-19 vaccination: a retrospective matched cohort study of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

COVID-19 vaccinations protect against severe illness and death, but associations with post-COVID conditions (PCC) are less clear. We aimed to evaluate the association between prior COVID-19 vaccination and new-onset PCC among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection across eight large healthcare systems in the United States. This retrospective matched cohort study used electronic health records (EHR) from patients with SARS-CoV-2 positive tests during March 2021-February 2022. Vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 cases were matched on location, test date, severity of acute infection, age, and sex. Vaccination status was ascertained using EHR and integrated data on externally administered vaccines. Adjusted relative risks (RRs) were obtained from Poisson regression. PCC was defined as a new diagnosis in one of 13 PCC categories 30 days to 6 months following a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The study included 161,531 vaccinated COVID-19 cases and 161,531 matched unvaccinated cases. Compared to unvaccinated cases, vaccinated cases had a similar or lower risk of all PCC categories except mental health disorders (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10). Vaccination was associated with ≥10% lower risk of sensory (RR: 0.90, 0.86-0.95), circulatory (RR: 0.88, 0.83-0.94), blood and hematologic (RR: 0.79, 0.71-0.89), skin and subcutaneous (RR: 0.69, 0.66-0.72), and non-specific COVID-19 related disorders (RR: 0.53, 0.51-0.56). In general, associations were stronger at younger ages but mostly persisted regardless of SARS-CoV-2 variant period, receipt of ≥3 vs. 1-2 vaccine doses, or time since vaccination. Pre-infection vaccination was associated with reduced risk of several PCC outcomes and hence may decrease the long-term consequences of COVID-19.

Influenza vaccination is not associated with detection of noninfluenza respiratory viruses in seasonal studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: The test-negative control study design is the basis for observational studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE). Recent studies have suggested that influenza vaccination increases the risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infection. Such an effect could create bias in VE studies using influenza-negative controls. We investigated the association between influenza infection, vaccination, and detection of other respiratory viruses among children <5 years old and adults ≥50 years old with acute respiratory illness who participated in seasonal studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness. METHODS: Nasal/nasopharyngeal samples collected from 2004­2005 through 2009­2010 were tested for 19 respiratory virus targets using a multiplex reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) platform. Vaccination status was determined using a validated registry. Adjusted odds ratios for influenza and vaccination status were calculated using three different control groups: influenza-negative, other respiratory virus positive, and pan-negative. RESULTS: Influenza was detected in 12% of 2010 children and 20% of 1738 adults. Noninfluenza respiratory viruses were detected in 70% of children and 38% of adults without influenza. The proportion vaccinated did not vary between virus-positive controls and pan-negative controls in children (P = .62) or adults (P = .33). Influenza infection was associated with reduced odds of vaccination, but adjusted odds ratios differed by no more than 0.02 when the analysis used influenza-negative or virus-positive controls. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination was not associated with detection of noninfluenza respiratory viruses. Use of influenza-negative controls did not generate a biased estimate of vaccine effectiveness due to an effect of vaccination on other respiratory virus infections.

A scan statistic for identifying optimal risk windows in vaccine safety studies using self-controlled case series design.

In the examination of the association between vaccines and rare adverse events after vaccination in postlicensure observational studies, it is challenging to define appropriate risk windows because prelicensure RCTs provide little insight on the timing of specific adverse events. Past vaccine safety studies have often used prespecified risk windows based on prior publications, biological understanding of the vaccine, and expert opinion. Recently, a data-driven approach was developed to identify appropriate risk windows for vaccine safety studies that use the self-controlled case series design. This approach employs both the maximum incidence rate ratio and the linear relation between the estimated incidence rate ratio and the inverse of average person time at risk, given a specified risk window. In this paper, we present a scan statistic that can identify appropriate risk windows in vaccine safety studies using the self-controlled case series design while taking into account the dependence of time intervals within an individual and while adjusting for time-varying covariates such as age and seasonality. This approach uses the maximum likelihood ratio test based on fixed-effects models, which has been used for analyzing data from self-controlled case series design in addition to conditional Poisson models.

Safety signal identification for COVID-19 bivalent booster vaccination using tree-based scan statistics in the Vaccine Safety Datalink.

BACKGROUND: Traditional active vaccine safety monitoring involves pre-specifying health outcomes and biologically plausible outcome-specific time windows of concern, limiting the adverse events that can be evaluated. In this study, we used tree-based scan statistics to look broadly for >60,000 possible adverse events after bivalent COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees aged ≥5 years receiving Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent COVID-19 vaccine through November 2022 were followed for 56 days post-vaccination. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within the hierarchical ICD-10-CM diagnosis code "tree" and temporally within post-vaccination follow-up. The conditional self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic was used, conditioning on total number of cases of each diagnosis and total number of cases of any diagnosis occurring during the scanning risk window across the entire tree. P = 0.01 was the pre-specified cut-off for statistical significance. RESULTS: Analysis included 352,509 doses of Moderna and 979,189 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent vaccines. After Moderna vaccination, no statistically significant clusters were found. After Pfizer-BioNTech, there were clusters of unspecified adverse events (Days 1-3, p = 0.0001-0.0007), influenza (Days 35-56, p = 0.0001), cough (Days 44-55, p = 0.0002), and COVID-19 (Days 52-56, p = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: For Pfizer-BioNTech only, we detected clusters of: (1) unspecified adverse effects, as have been observed in other vaccine studies using this method, and (2) respiratory disease toward the end of follow-up. The respiratory clusters were likely due to overlap of follow-up with the spread of respiratory syncytial virus, influenza, and COVID-19, i.e., confounding by seasonality. The untargeted nature of the method and its inherent adjustment for the many diagnoses and risk intervals evaluated are unique advantages. Limitations include susceptibility to time-varying confounding, lower statistical power for assessing risks of specific outcomes than in traditional studies targeting fewer outcomes, and the possibility of missing adverse events not strongly clustered in time or within the "tree."

A broad assessment of covid-19 vaccine safety using tree-based data-mining in the vaccine safety datalink.

BACKGROUND: Except for spontaneous reporting systems, vaccine safety monitoring generally involves pre-specifying health outcomes and post-vaccination risk windows of concern. Instead, we used tree-based data-mining to look more broadly for possible adverse events after Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: Vaccine Safety Datalink enrollees receiving ≥1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine in 2020-2021 were followed for 70 days after Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna and 56 days after Janssen vaccination. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the post-vaccination follow-up period. We used the self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic and TreeScan software. Monte Carlo simulation was used to estimate p-values; p = 0.01 was the pre-specified cut-off for statistical significance of a cluster. RESULTS: There were 4.1, 2.6, and 0.4 million Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Janssen vaccinees, respectively. Clusters after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccination included: (1) unspecified adverse effects, (2) common vaccine reactions, such as fever, myalgia, and headache, (3) myocarditis/pericarditis, and (4) less specific cardiac or respiratory symptoms, all with the strongest clusters generally after Dose 2; and (5) COVID-19/viral pneumonia/sepsis/respiratory failure in the first 3 weeks after Dose 1. Moderna results were similar but without a significant myocarditis/pericarditis cluster. Further investigation suggested the fifth signal group was a manifestation of mRNA vaccine effectiveness after the first 3 weeks. Janssen vaccinees had clusters of unspecified or common vaccine reactions, gait/mobility abnormalities, and muscle weakness. The latter two were deemed to have arisen from confounding related to practices at one site. CONCLUSIONS: We detected post-vaccination clusters of unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine reactions, and, for the mRNA vaccines, chest pain and palpitations, as well as myocarditis/pericarditis after Pfizer-BioNTech Dose 2. Unique advantages of this data mining are its untargeted nature and its inherent adjustment for the multiplicity of diagnoses and risk intervals scanned.

Tree-based data mining for safety assessment of first COVID-19 booster doses in the Vaccine Safety Datalink.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) has been performing safety surveillance for COVID-19 vaccines since their earliest authorization in the United States. Complementing its real-time surveillance for pre-specified health outcomes using pre-specified risk intervals, the VSD conducts tree-based data-mining to look for clustering of a broad range of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination. This study's objective was to use this untargeted, hypothesis-generating approach to assess the safety of first booster doses of Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), Moderna (mRNA-1273), and Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S) COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: VSD enrollees receiving a first booster of COVID-19 vaccine through April 2, 2022 were followed for 56 days. Incident diagnoses in inpatient or emergency department settings were analyzed for clustering within both the hierarchical ICD-10-CM code structure and the follow-up period. The self-controlled tree-temporal scan statistic was used, conditioning on the total number of cases for each diagnosis. P-values were estimated by Monte Carlo simulation; p = 0.01 was pre-specified as the cut-off for statistical significance of clusters. RESULTS: More than 2.4 and 1.8 million subjects received Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna boosters after an mRNA primary series, respectively. Clusters of urticaria/allergy/rash were found during Days 10-15 after the Moderna booster (p = 0.0001). Other outcomes that clustered after mRNA boosters, mostly with p = 0.0001, included unspecified adverse effects, common vaccine-associated reactions like fever and myalgia, and COVID-19. COVID-19 clusters were in Days 1-10 after booster receipt, before boosters would have become effective. There were no noteworthy clusters after boosters following primary Janssen vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: In this untargeted data-mining study of COVID-19 booster vaccination, a cluster of delayed-onset urticaria/allergy/rash was detected after the Moderna booster, as has been reported after Moderna vaccination previously. Other clusters after mRNA boosters were of unspecified or common adverse effects and COVID-19, the latter evidently reflecting immunity to COVID-19 after 10 days.

Association Between Aluminum Exposure From Vaccines Before Age 24 Months and Persistent Asthma at Age 24 to 59 Months.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between cumulative aluminum exposure from vaccines before age 24 months and persistent asthma at age 24 to 59 months. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Vaccination histories were used to calculate cumulative vaccine-associated aluminum in milligrams (mg). The persistent asthma definition required one inpatient or 2 outpatient asthma encounters, and ≥2 long-term asthma control medication dispenses. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association between aluminum exposure and asthma incidence, stratified by eczema presence/absence. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) per 1 mg increase in aluminum exposure were calculated, adjusted for birth month/year, sex, race/ethnicity, VSD site, prematurity, medical complexity, food allergy, severe bronchiolitis, and health care utilization. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 326,991 children, among whom 14,337 (4.4%) had eczema. For children with and without eczema, the mean (standard deviation [SD]) vaccine-associated aluminum exposure was 4.07 mg (SD 0.60) and 3.98 mg (SD 0.72), respectively. Among children with and without eczema, 6.0% and 2.1%, respectively, developed persistent asthma. Among children with eczema, vaccine-associated aluminum was positively associated with persistent asthma (aHR 1.26 per 1 mg increase in aluminum, 95% CI 1.07, 1.49); a positive association was also detected among children without eczema (aHR 1.19, 95% CI 1.14, 1.25). CONCLUSION: In a large observational study, a positive association was found between vaccine-related aluminum exposure and persistent asthma. While recognizing the small effect sizes identified and the potential for residual confounding, additional investigation of this hypothesis appears warranted.

Effectiveness of first and second COVID-19 mRNA vaccine monovalent booster doses during a period of circulation of Omicron variant sublineages: December 2021-July 2022.

Background: US recommendations for COVID-19 vaccine boosters have expanded in terms of age groups covered and numbers of doses recommended, whereas evolution of Omicron sublineages raises questions about ongoing vaccine effectiveness. Methods: We estimated effectiveness of monovalent COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccination versus two-dose primary series during a period of Omicron variant virus circulation in a community cohort with active illness surveillance. Hazard ratios comparing SARS-CoV-2 infection between booster versus primary series vaccinated individuals were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models with time-varying booster status. Models were adjusted for age and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. The effectiveness of a second booster among adults ≥50 years of age was similarly estimated. Results: The analysis included 883 participants ranging in age, from 5 to >90 years. Relative effectiveness was 51% (95% CI: 34%, 64%) favoring the booster compared with primary series vaccination and did not vary by prior infection status. Relative effectiveness was 74% (95% CI: 57%, 84%) at 15 to 90 days after booster receipt, but declined to 42% (95% CI: 16%, 61%) after 91 to 180 days, and to 36% (95% CI: 3%, 58%) after 180 days. The relative effectiveness of a second booster compared to a single booster was 24% (95% CI: -40% to 61%). Conclusions: An mRNA vaccine booster dose added significant protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection, but protection decreased over time. A second booster did not add significant protection for adults ≥50 years of age. Uptake of recommended bivalent boosters should be encouraged to increase protection against Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages.

A safety study evaluating non-COVID-19 mortality risk following COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: The safety of COVID-19 vaccines plays an important role in addressing vaccine hesitancy. We conducted a large cohort study to evaluate the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality after COVID-19 vaccination while adjusting for confounders including individual-level demographics, clinical risk factors, health care utilization, and community-level socioeconomic risk factors. METHODS: The retrospective cohort study consisted of members from seven Vaccine Safety Datalink sites from December 14, 2020 through August 31, 2021. We conducted three separate analyses for each of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US. Crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates were reported by vaccine type, age, sex, and race/ethnicity. The counting process model for survival analyses was used to analyze non-COVID-19 mortality where a new observation period began when the vaccination status changed upon receipt of the first dose and the second dose. We used calendar time as the basic time scale in survival analyses to implicitly adjust for season and other temporal trend factors. A propensity score approach was used to adjust for the potential imbalance in confounders between the vaccinated and comparison groups. RESULTS: For each vaccine type and across age, sex, and race/ethnicity groups, crude non-COVID-19 mortality rates among COVID-19 vaccinees were lower than those among comparators. After adjusting for confounders with the propensity score approach, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were 0.46 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.49) after dose 1 and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.46-0.50) after dose 2 of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 0.41 (95% CI, 0.39-0.44) after dose 1 and 0.38 (95% CI, 0.37-0.40) after dose 2 of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.51-0.59) after receipt of Ad26.COV2.S. CONCLUSION: While residual confounding bias remained after adjusting for several individual-level and community-level risk factors, no increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality among recipients of three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.