Prevalence and Clinical Outcomes of Respiratory Syncytial Virus vs Influenza in Adults Hospitalized With Acute Respiratory Illness From a Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Current understanding of severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in adults is limited by clinical underrecognition. We compared the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of RSV infections vs influenza in adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) in a prospective national surveillance network. METHODS: Hospitalized adults who met a standardized ARI case definition were prospectively enrolled across 3 respiratory seasons from hospitals participating across all sites of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (2016-2019). All participants were tested for RSV and influenza using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test associations between laboratory-confirmed infection and characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 10 311 hospitalized adults, 6% tested positive for RSV (n = 622), 18.8% for influenza (n = 1940), and 75.1% negative for RSV and influenza (n = 7749). Congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was more frequent with RSV than influenza (CHF: 37.3% vs 28.8%, P < .0001; COPD: 47.6% vs 35.8%, P < .0001). Patients with RSV more frequently had longer admissions (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.80) for stays >1 week) and mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.09-1.93) compared with influenza but not compared with the influenza-negative group (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, .82-1.28 and OR, 1.17; 95% CI, .91-1.49, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of RSV across 3 seasons was considerable. Our findings suggest that those with RSV have worse outcomes compared with influenza and frequently have cardiopulmonary conditions. This study informs future vaccination strategies and underscores a need for RSV surveillance among adults with severe ARI.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022-23 Influenza Season.

THIS REPORT UPDATES THE 2021-22 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES (ACIP) CONCERNING THE USE OF SEASONAL INFLUENZA VACCINES IN THE UNITED STATES: (MMWR Recomm Rep 2021;70[No. RR-5]:1-24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2022-23 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Trivalent influenza vaccines are no longer available, but data that involve these vaccines are included for reference. INFLUENZA VACCINES MIGHT BE AVAILABLE AS EARLY AS JULY OR AUGUST, BUT FOR MOST PERSONS WHO NEED ONLY 1 DOSE OF INFLUENZA VACCINE FOR THE SEASON, VACCINATION SHOULD IDEALLY BE OFFERED DURING SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER. HOWEVER, VACCINATION SHOULD CONTINUE AFTER OCTOBER AND THROUGHOUT THE SEASON AS LONG AS INFLUENZA VIRUSES ARE CIRCULATING AND UNEXPIRED VACCINE IS AVAILABLE. FOR MOST ADULTS (PARTICULARLY ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS) AND FOR PREGNANT PERSONS IN THE FIRST OR SECOND TRIMESTER, VACCINATION DURING JULY AND AUGUST SHOULD BE AVOIDED UNLESS THERE IS CONCERN THAT VACCINATION LATER IN THE SEASON MIGHT NOT BE POSSIBLE. CERTAIN CHILDREN AGED 6 MONTHS THROUGH 8 YEARS NEED 2 DOSES; THESE CHILDREN SHOULD RECEIVE THE FIRST DOSE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER VACCINE IS AVAILABLE, INCLUDING DURING JULY AND AUGUST. VACCINATION DURING JULY AND AUGUST CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR CHILDREN OF ANY AGE WHO NEED ONLY 1 DOSE FOR THE SEASON AND FOR PREGNANT PERSONS WHO ARE IN THE THIRD TRIMESTER IF VACCINE IS AVAILABLE DURING THOSE MONTHS: UPDATES DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT REFLECT DISCUSSIONS DURING PUBLIC MEETINGS OF ACIP THAT WERE HELD ON OCTOBER 20, 2021; JANUARY 12, 2022; FEBRUARY 23, 2022; AND JUNE 22, 2022. PRIMARY UPDATES TO THIS REPORT INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING THREE TOPICS: 1) THE COMPOSITION OF 2022-23 U.S. SEASONAL INFLUENZA VACCINES; 2) UPDATES TO THE DESCRIPTION OF INFLUENZA VACCINES EXPECTED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR THE 2022-23 SEASON, INCLUDING ONE INFLUENZA VACCINE LABELING CHANGE THAT OCCURRED AFTER THE PUBLICATION OF THE 2021-22 ACIP INFLUENZA RECOMMENDATIONS; AND 3) UPDATES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING VACCINATION OF ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS. FIRST, THE COMPOSITION OF 2022-23 U.S. INFLUENZA VACCINES INCLUDES UPDATES TO THE INFLUENZA A(H3N2) AND INFLUENZA B/VICTORIA LINEAGE COMPONENTS. U.S.-LICENSED INFLUENZA VACCINES WILL CONTAIN HA DERIVED FROM AN INFLUENZA A/VICTORIA/2570/2019 (H1N1)PDM09-LIKE VIRUS (FOR EGG-BASED VACCINES) OR AN INFLUENZA A/WISCONSIN/588/2019 (H1N1)PDM09-LIKE VIRUS (FOR CELL CULTURE-BASED OR RECOMBINANT VACCINES); AN INFLUENZA A/DARWIN/9/2021 (H3N2)-LIKE VIRUS (FOR EGG-BASED VACCINES) OR AN INFLUENZA A/DARWIN/6/2021 (H3N2)-LIKE VIRUS (FOR CELL CULTURE-BASED OR RECOMBINANT VACCINES); AN INFLUENZA B/AUSTRIA/1359417/2021 (VICTORIA LINEAGE)-LIKE VIRUS; AND AN INFLUENZA B/PHUKET/3073/2013 (YAMAGATA LINEAGE)-LIKE VIRUS. SECOND, THE APPROVED AGE INDICATION FOR THE CELL CULTURE-BASED INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE, FLUCELVAX QUADRIVALENT (CCIIV4), WAS CHANGED IN OCTOBER 2021 FROM ≥2 YEARS TO ≥6 MONTHS. THIRD, RECOMMENDATIONS FOR VACCINATION OF ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS HAVE BEEN MODIFIED. ACIP RECOMMENDS THAT ADULTS AGED ≥65 YEARS PREFERENTIALLY RECEIVE ANY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING HIGHER DOSE OR ADJUVANTED INFLUENZA VACCINES: QUADRIVALENT HIGH-DOSE INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE (HD-IIV4), QUADRIVALENT RECOMBINANT INFLUENZA VACCINE (RIV4), OR QUADRIVALENT ADJUVANTED INACTIVATED INFLUENZA VACCINE (AIIV4). IF NONE OF THESE THREE VACCINES IS AVAILABLE AT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR VACCINE ADMINISTRATION, THEN ANY OTHER AGE-APPROPRIATE INFLUENZA VACCINE SHOULD BE USED: THIS REPORT FOCUSES ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE USE OF VACCINES FOR THE PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF SEASONAL INFLUENZA DURING THE 2022-23 INFLUENZA SEASON IN THE UNITED STATES. A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND A LINK TO THE MOST RECENT BACKGROUND DOCUMENT CONTAINING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ARE AVAILABLE AT: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Evaluating Potential Impacts of a Preferential Vaccine Recommendation for Adults 65 Years of Age and Older on US Influenza Burden.

BACKGROUND: High-dose, adjuvanted, and recombinant influenza vaccines may offer improved effectiveness among older adults compared with standard-dose, unadjuvanted, inactivated vaccines. However, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) only recently recommended preferential use of these "higher-dose or adjuvanted" vaccines. One concern was that individuals might delay or decline vaccination if a preferred vaccine is not readily available. METHODS: We mathematically model how a recommendation for preferential use of higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines in adults ≥65 years might impact influenza burden in the United States during exemplar "high-" and "low-"severity seasons. We assume higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines are more effective than standard vaccines and that such a recommendation would increase uptake of the former but could cause (i) delays in administration of additional higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines relative to standard vaccines and/or (ii) reductions in overall coverage if individuals only offered standard vaccines forego vaccination. RESULTS: In a best-case scenario, assuming no delay or coverage reduction, a new recommendation could decrease hospitalizations and deaths in adults ≥65 years by 0%-4% compared with current uptake. However, intermediate and worst-case scenarios, with assumed delays of 3 or 6 weeks and/or 10% or 20% reductions in coverage, included projections in which hospitalizations and deaths increased by over 7%. CONCLUSIONS: We estimate that increased use of higher-dose or adjuvanted vaccines could decrease influenza burden in adults ≥65 in the United States provided there is timely and adequate access to these vaccines, and that standard vaccines are administered when they are unavailable.

Interpretation of Relative Efficacy and Effectiveness for Influenza Vaccines.

BACKGROUND: Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) are metrics commonly reported to compare absolute VE (aVE) of 2 vaccine products. METHODS: Estimates of rVE for enhanced influenza vaccines (eIV) vs standard inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) have been assessed across different seasons, influenza-specific endpoints, and nonspecific endpoints (eg, all-cause cardiovascular hospitalizations). To illustrate the challenges of comparability across studies, we conducted a scenario analysis to evaluate the effects of varying absolute VE (aVE) of IIV (ie, as compared with placebo) on the interpretation of rVE of eIV vs IIV. RESULTS: We show that estimates of rVE might not be comparable across studies because additional benefits commensurate with a given estimate of rVE are dependent on the aVE for the comparator vaccine, which can depend on factors such as host response to vaccine, virus type, and clinical endpoint evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have implications for interpretation of rVE across studies and for sample size considerations in future trials.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against Acute Respiratory Illness Hospitalizations for Influenza-Associated Pneumonia During the 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 Seasons: US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN).

BACKGROUND: Evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza-associated pneumonia has varied by season, location, and strain. We estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified influenza-associated pneumonia during 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 seasons in the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN). METHODS: Among adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 10 US hospitals for acute respiratory illness (ARI), clinician-investigators used keywords from reports of chest imaging performed during 3 days around hospital admission to assign a diagnosis of "definite/probable pneumonia." We used a test-negative design to estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia, comparing reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza cases with test-negative subjects. Influenza vaccination status was documented in immunization records or self-reported, including date and location. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for age, site, season, calendar-time, and other factors. RESULTS: Of 4843 adults hospitalized with ARI included in the primary analysis, 266 (5.5%) had "definite/probable pneumonia" and confirmed influenza. Adjusted VE against hospitalization for any radiographically confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17-53%); by type/subtype, it was 74% (95% CI, 52-87%) influenza A (H1N1)pdm09, 25% (95% CI, -15% to 50%) A (H3N2), and 23% (95% CI, -32% to 54%) influenza B. Adjusted VE against intensive care for any influenza was 57% (95% CI, 19-77%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination was modestly effective among adults in preventing hospitalizations and the need for intensive care associated with influenza pneumonia. VE was significantly higher against A (H1N1)pdm09 and was low against A (H3N2) and B.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2021-22 Influenza Season.

This report updates the 2020-21 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2020;69[No. RR-8]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. During the 2021-22 influenza season, the following types of vaccines are expected to be available: inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4).The 2021-22 influenza season is expected to coincide with continued circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html. Recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19.html, and additional clinical guidance is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/covid-19-vaccines-us.html.Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 28, 2020; February 25, 2021; and June 24, 2021. Primary updates to this report include the following six items. First, all seasonal influenza vaccines available in the United States for the 2021-22 season are expected to be quadrivalent. Second, the composition of 2021-22 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2) components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines), an influenza A/Cambodia/e0826360/2020 (H3N2)-like virus, an influenza B/Washington/02/2019 (Victoria lineage)-like virus, and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Third, the approved age indication for the cell culture-based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), has been expanded from ages ≥4 years to ages ≥2 years. Fourth, discussion of administration of influenza vaccines with other vaccines includes considerations for coadministration of influenza vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines. Providers should also consult current ACIP COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and CDC guidance concerning coadministration of these vaccines with influenza vaccines. Vaccines that are given at the same time should be administered in separate anatomic sites. Fifth, guidance concerning timing of influenza vaccination now states that vaccination soon after vaccine becomes available can be considered for pregnant women in the third trimester. As previously recommended, children who need 2 doses (children aged 6 months through 8 years who have never received influenza vaccine or who have not previously received a lifetime total of ≥2 doses) should receive their first dose as soon as possible after vaccine becomes available to allow the second dose (which must be administered ≥4 weeks later) to be received by the end of October. For nonpregnant adults, vaccination in July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that later vaccination might not be possible. Sixth, contraindications and precautions to the use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 have been modified, specifically with regard to persons with a history of severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to an influenza vaccine. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, LAIV, or RIV of any valency is a precaution to use of ccIIV4. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, ccIIV, or LAIV of any valency is a precaution to use of RIV4. Use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 in such instances should occur in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting under supervision of a provider who can recognize and manage a severe allergic reaction; providers can also consider consulting with an allergist to help identify the vaccine component responsible for the reaction. For ccIIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any ccIIV of any valency or any component of ccIIV4 is a contraindication to future use of ccIIV4. For RIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any RIV of any valency or any component of RIV4 is a contraindication to future use of RIV4. This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2021-22 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu); vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Waning 2-Dose and 3-Dose Effectiveness of mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults During Periods of Delta and Omicron Variant Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, August 2021-January 2022.

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥12 years receive a booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine ≥5 months after completion of a primary mRNA vaccination series and that immunocompromised persons receive a third primary dose.* Waning of vaccine protection after 2 doses of mRNA vaccine has been observed during the period of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance† (1-5), but little is known about durability of protection after 3 doses during periods of Delta or SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant predominance. A test-negative case-control study design using data from eight VISION Network sites§ examined vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years at various time points after receipt of a second or third vaccine dose during two periods: Delta variant predominance and Omicron variant predominance (i.e., periods when each variant accounted for ≥50% of sequenced isolates).¶ Persons categorized as having received 3 doses included those who received a third dose in a primary series or a booster dose after a 2 dose primary series (including the reduced-dosage Moderna booster). The VISION Network analyzed 241,204 ED/UC encounters** and 93,408 hospitalizations across 10 states during August 26, 2021-January 22, 2022. VE after receipt of both 2 and 3 doses was lower during the Omicron-predominant than during the Delta-predominant period at all time points evaluated. During both periods, VE after receipt of a third dose was higher than that after a second dose; however, VE waned with increasing time since vaccination. During the Omicron period, VE against ED/UC visits was 87% during the first 2 months after a third dose and decreased to 66% among those vaccinated 4-5 months earlier; VE against hospitalizations was 91% during the first 2 months following a third dose and decreased to 78% ≥4 months after a third dose. For both Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, VE was generally higher for protection against hospitalizations than against ED/UC visits. All eligible persons should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations to best protect against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and ED/UC visits.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza-Associated Hospitalizations Among Adults, 2018-2019, US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network.

We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among adults during the 2018-2019 influenza season. Adults admitted with acute respiratory illness to 14 hospitals of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) and testing positive for influenza were cases; patients testing negative were controls. VE was estimated using logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting. We analyzed data from 2863 patients with a mean age of 63 years. Adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalization was 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25%-68%). Adjusted VE against influenza A(H3N2) virus-associated hospitalization was -2% (95% CI, -65% to 37%) and differed significantly by age, with VE of -130% (95% CI, -374% to -27%) among adults 18 to ≤56 years of age. Although vaccination halved the risk of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalizations, it conferred no protection against influenza A(H3N2)-associated hospitalizations. We observed negative VE for young and middle-aged adults but cannot exclude residual confounding as a potential explanation.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against Hospitalization in the United States, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality and stresses hospital resources during periods of increased circulation. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization in the United States. METHODS: We included adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 14 hospitals and tested for influenza viruses by reserve-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in test-positive influenza cases vs test-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. VE was stratified by age and major circulating influenza types along with A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 3116 participants were included, including 18% (n = 553) influenza-positive cases. Median age was 63 years. Sixty-seven percent (n = 2079) received vaccination. Overall adjusted VE against influenza viruses was 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27%-52%). VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses was 40% (95% CI, 24%-53%) and 33% against B viruses (95% CI, 0-56%). Of the 2 major A(H1N1)pdm09 subgroups (representing 90% of sequenced H1N1 viruses), VE against one group (5A + 187A,189E) was 59% (95% CI, 34%-75%) whereas no VE was observed against the other group (5A + 156K) (-1% [95% CI, -61% to 37%]). CONCLUSIONS: In a primarily older population, influenza vaccination was associated with a 41% reduction in risk of hospitalized influenza illness.

Low Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against A(H3N2)-Associated Hospitalizations in 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 of the Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN).

BACKGROUND: The 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 influenza seasons were notable for the high number of hospitalizations for influenza A(H3N2) despite vaccine and circulating strain match. METHODS: We evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization in the test-negative HAIVEN study. Nasal-throat swabs were tested by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for influenza and VE was determined based on odds of vaccination by generalized estimating equations. Vaccine-specific antibody was measured in a subset of enrollees. RESULTS: A total of 6129 adults were enrolled from 10 hospitals. Adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 22.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3% to 35.0%), pooled across both years and 49.4% (95% CI, 34.3% to 61.1%) against B/Yamagata. In 2017-2018, the A(H3N2) VE point estimate for the cell-based vaccine was 43.0% (95% CI, -36.3% to 76.1%; 56 vaccine recipients) compared to 24.0% (95% CI, 3.9% to 39.9%) for egg-based vaccines. Among 643 with serology data, hemagglutinin antibodies against the egg-based A(H3N2) vaccine strain were increased in influenza-negative individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Low VE for the A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 vaccine virus in both A(H3N2) seasons emphasizes concerns for continued changes in H3N2 antigenic epitopes, including changes that may impact glycosylation and ultimately reduce VE.

Modeling the Impacts of Clinical Influenza Testing on Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates.

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design studies for evaluating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) enroll patients with acute respiratory infection. Enrollment typically occurs before influenza status is determined, resulting in over-enrollment of influenza-negative patients. With availability of rapid and accurate molecular clinical testing, influenza status could be ascertained before enrollment, thus improving study efficiency. We estimate potential biases in VE when using clinical testing. METHODS: We simulate data assuming 60% vaccinated, 25% of those vaccinated are influenza positive, and VE of 50%. We show the effect on VE in 5 scenarios. RESULTS: Vaccine effectiveness is affected only when clinical testing preferentially targets patients based on both vaccination and influenza status. Vaccine effectiveness is overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 39% of vaccinated influenza-positive patients and 24% of others. VE is also overestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 8% of unvaccinated influenza-positive patients and 27% of others. Vaccine effectiveness is underestimated by 10% if nontesting occurs in 32% of unvaccinated influenza-negative patients and 18% of others. CONCLUSIONS: Although differential clinical testing by vaccine receipt and influenza positivity may produce errors in estimated VE, bias in testing would have to be substantial and overall proportion of patients tested would have to be small to result in a meaningful difference in VE.

Waning Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza-Associated Hospitalizations Among Adults, 2015-2016 to 2018-2019, United States Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network.

We observed decreased effectiveness of influenza vaccine with increasing time since vaccination for prevention of influenza A(H3N2), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and influenza B/Yamagata-associated hospitalizations among adults. Maximum vaccine effectiveness (VE) was observed shortly after vaccination, followed by an absolute decline in VE of about 8%-9% per month postvaccination.

Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccine for Preventing Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Hospitalizations in Immunocompromised Adults.

BACKGROUND: Yearly influenza immunization is recommended for immunocompromised (IC) individuals, although immune responses are lower than that for the nonimmunocompromised and the data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the IC is scarce. We evaluated VE against influenza-associated hospitalization among IC adults. METHODS: We analyzed data from adults ≥ 18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) during the 2017-2018 influenza season at 10 hospitals in the United States. IC adults were identified using prespecified case definitions using electronic medical record data. VE was evaluated with a test-negative case-control design using multivariable logistic regression with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza as the outcome and vaccination status as the exposure, adjusting for age, enrolling site, illness onset date, race, days from onset to specimen collection, self-reported health, and self-reported hospitalizations. RESULTS: Of 3524 adults hospitalized with ARI, 1210 (34.3%) had an immunocompromising condition. IC adults were more likely to be vaccinated than non-IC (69.5% vs 65.2%) and less likely to have influenza (22% vs 27.8%). The mean age did not differ among IC and non-IC (61.4 vs 60.8 years of age). The overall VE against influenza hospitalization, including immunocompetent adults, was 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21-44). VE among IC vs non-IC adults was lower at 5% (95% CI, -29% to 31%) vs 41% (95% CI, 27-52) (P < .05 for interaction term). CONCLUSIONS: VE in 1 influenza season was very low among IC individuals. Future efforts should include evaluation of VE among the different immunocompromising conditions and whether enhanced vaccines improve the suboptimal effectiveness among the immunocompromised.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Versus Influenza in Hospitalized Adult Patients in the United States: Differences in Demographic and Severity Indicators.

BACKGROUND: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is frequently compared with influenza. The Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) conducts studies on the etiology and characteristics of U.S. hospitalized adults with influenza. It began enrolling patients with COVID-19 hospitalizations in March 2020. Patients with influenza were compared with those with COVID-19 in the first months of the U.S. epidemic. METHODS: Adults aged ≥ 18 years admitted to hospitals in 4 sites with acute respiratory illness were tested by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing COVID-19. Demographic and illness characteristics were collected for influenza illnesses during 3 seasons 2016-2019. Similar data were collected on COVID-19 cases admitted before June 19, 2020. RESULTS: Age groups hospitalized with COVID-19 (n = 914) were similar to those admitted with influenza (n = 1937); 80% of patients with influenza and 75% of patients with COVID-19 were aged ≥50 years. Deaths from COVID-19 that occurred in younger patients were less often related to underlying conditions. White non-Hispanic persons were overrepresented in influenza (64%) compared with COVID-19 hospitalizations (37%). Greater severity and complications occurred with COVID-19 including more ICU admissions (AOR = 15.3 [95% CI: 11.6, 20.3]), ventilator use (AOR = 15.6 [95% CI: 10.7, 22.8]), 7 additional days of hospital stay in those discharged alive, and death during hospitalization (AOR = 19.8 [95% CI: 12.0, 32.7]). CONCLUSIONS: While COVID-19 can cause a respiratory illness like influenza, it is associated with significantly greater severity of illness, longer hospital stays, and higher in-hospital deaths.

Relative and Absolute Effectiveness of High-Dose and Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccine Against Influenza-Related Hospitalization Among Older Adults-United States, 2015-2017.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality in older adults. High-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV), with increased antigen content compared to standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV), is licensed for use in people aged ≥65 years. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of HD-IIV and SD-IIV for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness were enrolled in an observational vaccine effectiveness study at 8 hospitals in the United States Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network during the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 influenza seasons. Enrolled patients were tested for influenza, and receipt of influenza vaccine by type was recorded. Effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using a test-negative design (comparing odds of influenza among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients). Relative effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 1487 enrolled patients aged ≥65 years, 1107 (74%) were vaccinated; 622 (56%) received HD-IIV, and 485 (44%) received SD-IIV. Overall, 277 (19%) tested positive for influenza, including 98 (16%) who received HD-IIV, 87 (18%) who received SD-IIV, and 92 (24%) who were unvaccinated. After adjusting for confounding variables, effectiveness of SD-IIV was 6% (95% confidence interval [CI] -42%, 38%) and that of HD-IIV was 32% (95% CI -3%, 54%), for a relative effectiveness of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV of 27% (95% CI -1%, 48%). CONCLUSIONS: During 2 US influenza seasons, vaccine effectiveness was low to moderate for prevention of influenza hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years. High-dose vaccine offered greater effectiveness. None of these findings were statistically significant.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Inpatient and Outpatient Settings in the United States, 2015-2018.

BACKGROUND: Demonstration of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalized illness in addition to milder outpatient illness may strengthen vaccination messaging. Our objective was to compare patient characteristics and VE between United States (US) inpatient and outpatient VE networks. METHODS: We tested adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI) for influenza within 1 outpatient-based and 1 hospital-based VE network from 2015 through 2018. We compared age, sex, and high-risk conditions. The test-negative design was used to compare vaccination odds in influenza-positive cases vs influenza-negative controls. We estimated VE using logistic regression adjusting for site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, peak influenza activity, time to testing from, season (overall VE), and underlying conditions. VE differences (ΔVE) were assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) determined through bootstrapping with significance defined as excluding the null. RESULTS: The networks enrolled 14 573 (4144 influenza-positive) outpatients and 6769 (1452 influenza-positive) inpatients. Inpatients were older (median, 62 years vs 49 years) and had more high-risk conditions (median, 4 vs 1). Overall VE across seasons was 31% (95% CI, 26%-37%) among outpatients and 36% (95% CI, 27%-44%) among inpatients. Strain-specific VE (95% CI) among outpatients vs inpatients was 37% (25%-47%) vs 53% (37%-64%) against H1N1pdm09; 19% (9%-27%) vs 23% (8%-35%) against H3N2; and 46% (38%-53%) vs 46% (31%-58%) against B viruses. ΔVE was not significant for any comparison across all sites. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatients and outpatients with ARI represent distinct populations. Despite comparatively poor health among inpatients, influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations.

Incorporating Real-time Influenza Detection Into the Test-negative Design for Estimating Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness: The Real-time Test-negative Design (rtTND).

With rapid and accurate molecular influenza testing now widely available in clinical settings, influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies can prospectively select participants for enrollment based on real-time results rather than enrolling all eligible patients regardless of influenza status, as in the traditional test-negative design (TND). Thus, we explore advantages and disadvantages of modifying the TND for estimating VE by using real-time, clinically available viral testing results paired with acute respiratory infection eligibility criteria for identifying influenza cases and test-negative controls prior to enrollment. This modification, which we have called the real-time test-negative design (rtTND), has the potential to improve influenza VE studies by optimizing the case-to-test-negative control ratio, more accurately classifying influenza status, improving study efficiency, reducing study cost, and increasing study power to adequately estimate VE. Important considerations for limiting biases in the rtTND include the need for comprehensive clinical influenza testing at study sites and accurate influenza tests.

Waning of Influenza Vaccine Protection: Exploring the Trade-offs of Changes in Vaccination Timing Among Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: In recent studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE), lower effectiveness with increasing time since vaccination was observed, raising the question of optimal vaccination timing. We sought to evaluate the estimated number of influenza-associated hospitalizations among older adults due to potential changes in vaccination timing. METHODS: Using empirical data and a health state transition model, we estimated change in influenza-associated hospitalizations predicted to occur among the US population aged ≥65 years if vaccination were delayed until October 1. We assumed the vaccination timing, coverage, and effectiveness observed in 2012-2013 as a prototypical influenza season, approximately 7% monthly waning of VE, and that between 0% and 50% of individuals who usually get vaccinated earlier than October failed to get vaccinated. We also assessed change in influenza-associated hospitalizations if vaccination uptake shifted substantially toward August and September. RESULTS: In a typical season, delaying vaccination until October increased influenza hospitalizations if more than 14% of older adults usually vaccinated in August and September failed to get vaccinated. The consequences of delayed vaccination depended heavily on influenza season timing, rate of waning, and overall VE. A shift toward vaccination in August and September led to, on average, an increase in influenza-associated hospitalizations, but this result was also sensitive to influenza season timing. CONCLUSIONS: Consequences of delayed vaccination varied widely. Uncertainties about vaccine waning and effects of a delay on vaccine coverage suggest it is premature to change current vaccine recommendations, although it may be prudent to prevent a substantial shift toward early vaccination.

Waning of Measured Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Over Time: The Potential Contribution of Leaky Vaccine Effect.

BACKGROUND: Several observational studies have shown decreases in measured influenza vaccine effectiveness (mVE) during influenza seasons. One study found decreases of 6-11%/month during the 2011-2012 to 2014-2015 seasons. These findings could indicate waning immunity but could also occur if vaccine effectiveness is stable and vaccine provides partial protection in all vaccinees ("leaky") rather than complete protection in a subset of vaccinees. Since it is unknown whether influenza vaccine is leaky, we simulated the 2011-2012 to 2014-2015 influenza seasons to estimate the potential contribution of leaky vaccine effect to the observed decline in mVE. METHODS: We used available data to estimate daily numbers of vaccinations and infections with A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B viruses. We assumed that vaccine effect was leaky, calculated mVE as 1 minus the Mantel-Haenszel relative risk of vaccine on incident cases, and determined the mean mVE change per 30 days since vaccination. Because change in mVE was highly dependent on infection rates, we performed simulations using low (15%) and high (31%) total (including symptomatic and asymptomatic) seasonal infection rates. RESULTS: For the low infection rate, decreases (absolute) in mVE per 30 days after vaccination were 2% for A/H1N1 and 1% for A/H3N2and B viruses. For the high infection rate, decreases were 5% for A/H1N1, 4% for A/H3, and 3% for B viruses. CONCLUSIONS: The leaky vaccine bias could account for some, but probably not all, of the observed intraseasonal decreases in mVE. These results underscore the need for strategies to deal with intraseasonal vaccine effectiveness decline.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the Inpatient Setting: Evaluation of Potential Bias in the Test-Negative Design by Use of Alternate Control Groups.

The test-negative design is validated in outpatient, but not inpatient, studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness. The prevalence of chronic pulmonary disease among inpatients can lead to nonrepresentative controls. Test-negative design estimates are biased if vaccine administration is associated with incidence of noninfluenza viruses. We evaluated whether control group selection and effects of vaccination on noninfluenza viruses biased vaccine effectiveness in our study. Subjects were enrolled at the University of Michigan and Henry Ford hospitals during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 influenza seasons. Patients presenting with acute respiratory infection were enrolled and tested for respiratory viruses. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using 3 control groups: negative for influenza, positive for other respiratory virus, and pan-negative individuals; it was also estimated for other common respiratory viruses. In 2014-2015, vaccine effectiveness was 41.1% (95% CI: 1.7, 64.7) using influenza-negative controls, 24.5% (95% CI: -42.6, 60.1) using controls positive for other virus, and 45.8% (95% CI: 5.7, 68.9) using pan-negative controls. In 2015-2016, vaccine effectiveness was 68.7% (95% CI: 44.6, 82.5) using influenza-negative controls, 63.1% (95% CI: 25.0, 82.2) using controls positive for other virus, and 71.1% (95% CI: 46.2, 84.8) using pan-negative controls. Vaccination did not alter odds of other respiratory viruses. Results support use of the test-negative design among inpatients.