RESUMEN
We estimated the effectiveness of booster doses of monovalent and bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against Omicron-associated severe outcomes among adults aged ≥50 years in Ontario, Canada. Monovalent and bivalent mRNA COVID-19 booster doses provided similar strong initial protection against severe outcomes. Uncertainty remains around waning of protection from these vaccines.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Ontario/epidemiología , Vacunas Combinadas , COVID-19/prevención & control , Inmunización , ARN MensajeroRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income settings demonstrated efficacy of influenza vaccination during pregnancy against influenza infection among infants <6 months of age. However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from settings with different population characteristics and influenza seasonality remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative study in Ontario, Canada. All influenza virus tests among infants <6 months from 2010 to 2019 were identified and linked with health databases to ascertain information on maternal-infant dyads. VE was estimated from the odds ratio for influenza vaccination during pregnancy among cases versus controls, computed using logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: Among 23 806 infants tested for influenza, 1783 (7.5%) were positive and 1708 (7.2%) were born to mothers vaccinated against influenza during pregnancy. VE against laboratory-confirmed infant influenza infection was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50%-74%). VE was similar by trimester of vaccination (first/second, 66% [95% CI, 40%-80%]; third, 63% [95% CI, 46%-74%]), infant age at testing (0 to <2 months, 63% [95% CI, 46%-75%]; 2 to <6 months, 64% [95% CI, 36%-79%]), and gestational age at birth (≥37 weeks, 64% [95% CI, 50%-75%]; < 37 weeks, 61% [95% CI, 4%-86%]). VE against influenza hospitalization was 67% (95% CI, 50%-78%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination during pregnancy offers effective protection to infants <6 months, for whom vaccines are not currently available.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Vacunación , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Humanos , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Femenino , Embarazo , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la Influenza/inmunología , Ontario/epidemiología , Lactante , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Adulto , Estaciones del Año , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/prevención & control , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/virología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Timely and precise influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates are needed to guide public health messaging and impact vaccine uptake immediately. Using routinely collected laboratory, vaccination and health administrative data from Alberta, Canada, we estimated influenza VE against infection for the 2023/24 season on a near real-time basis, to late December, at 61% (95%â¯CI: 58-64) against influenza A(H1N1), 49% (95%â¯CI: 28-63) against influenza A(H3N2) and 75% (95%â¯CI: 58-85) against influenza B.
Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Datos de Salud Recolectados Rutinariamente , Alberta/epidemiología , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Estaciones del Año , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Canadá , Vacunación , Virus de la Influenza B , Estudios de Casos y ControlesRESUMEN
BackgroundWaning immunity from seasonal influenza vaccination can cause suboptimal protection during peak influenza activity. However, vaccine effectiveness studies assessing waning immunity using vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals are subject to biases.AimWe examined the association between time since vaccination and laboratory-confirmed influenza to assess the change in influenza vaccine protection over time.MethodsUsing linked laboratory and health administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, we identified community-dwelling individuals aged ≥ 6 months who received an influenza vaccine before being tested for influenza by RT-PCR during the 2010/11 to 2018/19 influenza seasons. We estimated the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for laboratory-confirmed influenza by time since vaccination (categorised into intervals) and for every 28 days.ResultsThere were 53,065 individuals who were vaccinated before testing for influenza, with 10,264 (19%) influenza-positive cases. The odds of influenza increased from 1.05 (95%â¯CI: 0.91-1.22) at 42-69 days after vaccination and peaked at 1.27 (95%â¯CI: 1.04-1.55) at 126-153 days when compared with the reference interval (14-41 days). This corresponded to 1.09-times increased odds of influenza every 28 days (aOR = 1.09; 95%â¯CI: 1.04-1.15). Individuals aged 18-64 years showed the greatest decline in protection against influenza A(H1N1) (aORperâ¯28â¯days = 1.26; 95%â¯CI: 0.97-1.64), whereas for individuals aged ≥ 65 years, it was against influenza A(H3N2) (aORperâ¯28â¯days = 1.20; 95%â¯CI: 1.08-1.33). We did not observe evidence of waning vaccine protection for individuals aged < 18 years.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccine protection wanes during an influenza season. Understanding the optimal timing of vaccination could ensure robust protection during seasonal influenza activity.
Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Estaciones del Año , Ontario/epidemiología , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , VacunaciónRESUMEN
We estimated the effectiveness of a fourth dose of messenger RNA coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine against Omicron infections and severe outcomes over time among long-term care residents in Ontario, Canada. Fourth doses provide additional protection against Omicron-related outcomes, but the protection wanes over time, with more waning seen against infection than severe outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Ontario/epidemiología , Cuidados a Largo Plazo , COVID-19/prevención & control , ARN Mensajero , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Randomized trials conducted in low- and middle-income settings demonstrated efficacy of influenza vaccination during pregnancy against influenza infection among infants <6 months of age. However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from settings with different population characteristics and influenza seasonality remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative study in Ontario, Canada. All influenza virus tests among infants <6 months from 2010-2019 were identified and linked with health databases to ascertain information on maternal-infant dyads. VE was estimated from the odds ratio for influenza vaccination during pregnancy among cases versus controls, computed using logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders. RESULTS: Among 23,806 infants tested for influenza, 1,783 (7.5%) were positive and 1,708 (7.2%) were born to mothers vaccinated against influenza during pregnancy. VE against laboratory-confirmed infant influenza infection was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50%-74%). VE was similar by trimester of vaccination (1st/2nd: 66%, 40%-80%; 3rd: 63%, 46%-74%), infant age at testing (0-<2 months: 63%, 46%-75%; 2-<6 months: 64%, 36%-79%), and gestational age at birth (≥37 weeks: 64%, 50%-75%; < 37 weeks: 61%, 4%-86%). VE against influenza hospitalization was 67% (95%CI: 50%-78%). CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination during pregnancy offers effective protection to infants <6 months, for whom vaccines are not currently available.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pregnant women are recommended to receive coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines; however, relative effectiveness of vaccination by pregnancy status is unclear. METHODS: We compared the relative effectiveness of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines according to whether women received both doses while pregnant (n = 7412), 1 dose while pregnant (n = 3538), both doses while postpartum (n = 1856), or both doses while neither pregnant nor postpartum (n = 6687). We estimated risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection starting 14 days after the second dose using Cox regression, reporting hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Second, we examined relative effectiveness of a third (booster) dose while pregnant compared to outside pregnancy. The major circulating variant during the study period was the Delta variant. RESULTS: Fifty-four percent of women received 2 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 16% received 2 doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine, while 30% received 1 dose of both vaccines. Compared to women who received both doses while neither pregnant nor postpartum, the adjusted HR for a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test was similar if the woman received both doses while pregnant (1.04 [95% CI, .94-1.17]), 1 dose while pregnant and 1 dose before or after pregnancy (1.03 [95% CI, .93-1.14]), or both doses while postpartum (0.99 [95% CI, .92-1.07]). The findings were similar for BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech Comirnaty) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna Spikevax), and during Delta- and Omicron-dominant periods. We observed no differences in the relative effectiveness of the booster dose according to pregnancy status. CONCLUSIONS: We observed similar effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection among women regardless of pregnancy status at the time of vaccination.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo , Embarazo , Femenino , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Vacuna BNT162 , Incidencia , Vacunación , ARN Mensajero , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/epidemiología , Complicaciones Infecciosas del Embarazo/prevención & controlRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: We assessed protection from COVID-19 vaccines and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infection against Omicron-associated severe outcomes during successive sublineage-predominant periods. METHODS: We used a test-negative design to estimate protection by vaccines and/or prior infection against hospitalization/death among community-dwelling, PCR-tested adults aged ≥50 years in Ontario, Canada between January 2, 2022 and June 30, 2023. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the relative change in the odds of hospitalization/death with each vaccine dose (2-5) and/or prior PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (compared with unvaccinated, uninfected subjects) up to 15 months since the last vaccination or infection. RESULTS: We included 18,526 cases with Omicron-associated severe outcomes and 90,778 test-negative controls. Vaccine protection was high during BA.1/BA.2 predominance, but was generally <50% during periods of BA.4/BA.5 and BQ/XBB predominance without boosters. A third/fourth dose transiently increased protection during BA.4/BA.5 predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 68%, 95%CI 63%-72%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 80%, 95%CI 77%-83%), but was lower and waned quickly during BQ/XBB predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 59%, 95%CI 48%-67%; 12-month: 49%, 95%CI 41%-56%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 62%, 95%CI 56%-68%, 12-months: 51%, 95%CI 41%-56%). Hybrid immunity conferred nearly 90% protection throughout BA.1/BA.2 and BA.4/BA.5 predominance, but was reduced during BQ/XBB predominance (third-dose, 6-month: 60%, 95%CI 36%-75%; fourth-dose, 6-month: 63%, 95%CI 42%-76%). Protection was restored with a fifth dose (bivalent; 6-month: 91%, 95%CI 79%-96%). Prior infection alone did not confer lasting protection. CONCLUSION: Protection from COVID-19 vaccines and/or prior SARS-CoV-2 infections against severe outcomes is reduced when immune-evasive variants/subvariants emerge and may also wane over time. Our findings support a variant-adapted booster vaccination strategy with periodic review.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A major goal of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of messenger RNA (mRNA) and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in 4 Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021. METHODS: We conducted this multiprovincial, retrospective, test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 2 508 296 tested participants, with 31 776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose and 98% after a second dose against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes, effectiveness was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95% CI, 96%-99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95% CI, 75%-94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95% CI, 91%-99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower 1-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants. CONCLUSIONS: Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccine provide excellent protection against severe outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Colombia Británica , Hospitalización , ARN MensajeroRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Older adults are recommended to receive influenza vaccination annually, and many use statins. Statins have immunomodulatory properties that might modify influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) and alter influenza infection risk. METHODS: Using the test-negative design and linked laboratory and health administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, we estimated VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza among community-dwelling statin users and nonusers aged ≥66 years during the 2010-2011 to 2018-2019 influenza seasons. We also estimated the odds ratio for influenza infection comparing statin users and nonusers by vaccination status. RESULTS: Among persons tested for influenza across the 9 seasons, 54 243 had continuous statin exposure before testing and 48 469 were deemed unexposed. The VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza was similar between statin users and nonusers (17% [95% confidence interval, 13%-20%] and 17% [13%-21%] respectively; test for interaction, P = .87). In both vaccinated and unvaccinated persons, statin users had higher odds of laboratory-confirmed influenza than nonusers (odds ratios for vaccinated and unvaccinated persons 1.15 [95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.21] and 1.15 [1.10-1.20], respectively). These findings were consistent by mean daily dose and statin type. VE did not differ between users and nonusers of other cardiovascular drugs, except for ß-blockers. We did not observe that vaccinated and unvaccinated users of these drugs had increased odds of influenza, except for unvaccinated ß-blocker users. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza VE did not differ between statin users and nonusers. Statin use was associated with increased odds of laboratory-confirmed influenza in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons, but these associations might be affected by residual confounding.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Anciano , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/uso terapéutico , Eficacia de las Vacunas , Vacunación , Ontario/epidemiología , Estaciones del AñoRESUMEN
We compared secondary attack rates in households with B.1.1.7 variant of concern (VOC) versus non-VOC index cases in a matched cohort in Ontario, Canada. The secondary attack rate for VOC index cases was 1.31 times higher than non-VOC index cases. This increase was particularly accentuated for asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , Incidencia , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study was to estimate the rate of workplace outbreak-associated cases of COVID-19 by industry in labour market participants aged 15-69 years who reported working the majority of hours outside the home in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of COVID-19 workplace outbreaks and associated cases reported in Ontario between 1 April 2020 and 31 March 2021. All outbreaks were manually classified into two-digit North American Industry Classification System codes. We obtained monthly denominator estimates from the Statistics Canada Labour Force Survey to estimate the incidence of outbreak-associated cases per 100 000 000 hours among individuals who reported the majority of hours were worked outside the home. We performed this analysis across industries and in three distinct time periods. RESULTS: Overall, 12% of cases were attributed to workplace outbreaks among working-age adults across our study period. While incidence varied across the time periods, the five industries with the highest incidence rates across our study period were agriculture, healthcare and social assistance, food manufacturing, educational services, and transportation and warehousing. CONCLUSIONS: Certain industries have consistently increased the incidence of COVID-19 over the course of the pandemic. These results may assist in ongoing efforts to reduce transmission of COVID-19 by prioritising resources, as well as industry-specific guidance, vaccination and public health messaging.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Brotes de Enfermedades , Humanos , Incidencia , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
Importance: There is limited comparative epidemiological evidence on outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy; monitoring pregnancy outcomes in large populations is required. Objective: To evaluate peripartum outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using a birth registry linked with the provincial COVID-19 immunization database. All births between December 14, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were included. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccination after pregnancy, and no vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, cesarean delivery (overall and emergency cesarean delivery), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and low newborn 5-minute Apgar score (<7). Linear and robust Poisson regression was used to generate adjusted risk differences (aRDs) and risk ratios (aRRs), respectively, comparing cumulative incidence of outcomes in those who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy with those vaccinated after pregnancy and those with no record of COVID-19 vaccination at any point. Inverse probability of treatment weights were used to adjust for confounding. Results: Among 97â¯590 individuals (mean [SD] age, 31.9 [4.9] years), 22â¯660 (23%) received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy (63.6% received dose 1 in the third trimester; 99.8% received an mRNA vaccine). Comparing those vaccinated during vs after pregnancy (n = 44â¯815), there were no significantly increased risks of postpartum hemorrhage (incidence: 3.0% vs 3.0%; aRD, -0.28 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.59 to 0.03]; aRR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]), chorioamnionitis (0.5% vs 0.5%; aRD, -0.04 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.17 to 0.09]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.70-1.21]), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 32.2%; aRD, -2.73 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -3.59 to -1.88]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]), NICU admission (11.0% vs 13.3%; aRD, -1.89 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -2.49 to -1.30]; aRR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]), or low Apgar score (1.8% vs 2.0%; aRD, -0.31 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -0.56 to -0.06]; aRR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.73-0.97]). Findings were qualitatively similar when compared with individuals who did not receive COVID-19 vaccination at any point (n = 30â¯115). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, compared with vaccination after pregnancy and with no vaccination, was not significantly associated with increased risk of adverse peripartum outcomes. Study interpretation should consider that the vaccinations received during pregnancy were primarily mRNA vaccines administered in the second and third trimester.
Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Corioamnionitis , Enfermedades del Recién Nacido , Hemorragia Posparto , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/efectos adversos , Corioamnionitis/epidemiología , Corioamnionitis/etiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Enfermedades del Recién Nacido/epidemiología , Ontario/epidemiología , Periodo Periparto , Hemorragia Posparto/epidemiología , Hemorragia Posparto/etiología , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Vacunación/efectos adversos , Vacunas Sintéticas , Vacunas de ARNmRESUMEN
We analyzed 21â 676 residual specimens from Ontario, Canada collected March-August 2020 to investigate the effect of antibody decline on SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence estimates. Testing specimens orthogonally using Abbott (anti-nucleocapsid) and Ortho (anti-spike) assays, seroprevalence estimates were 0.4%-1.4%, despite ongoing disease activity. The geometric mean concentration (GMC) of antibody-positive specimens decreased over time (Pâ =â .015), and GMC of antibody-negative specimens increased over time (Pâ =â .0018). Association between the 2 tests decreased each month (Pâ <â .001), suggesting anti-nucleocapsid antibody decline. Lowering Abbott antibody index cutoff from 1.4 to 0.7 resulted in a 16% increase in positive specimens.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Antivirales/sangre , Anticuerpos Antivirales/inmunología , COVID-19/sangre , COVID-19/inmunología , Proteínas de la Nucleocápside de Coronavirus/inmunología , SARS-CoV-2/inmunología , Prueba Serológica para COVID-19/métodos , Canadá , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Fosfoproteínas/inmunología , Estudios Seroepidemiológicos , Glicoproteína de la Espiga del Coronavirus/inmunologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In September 2009, a live attenuated herpes zoster vaccine (ZVL) became available in Canada. Beginning in September 2016, ZVL was made available to all Ontario residents aged 65-70 through a publicly funded immunization program. We assessed the impact of ZVL availability and its subsequent public funding on herpes zoster burden in this population. METHODS: A population-based study of Ontario residents aged 65-70 between January 2005 and September 2018. We used interventional autoregressive integrated moving average models to examine the impact of ZVL market availability and the publicly funded ZVL program on monthly incidence rate of medically attended herpes zoster, defined as an outpatient visit for herpes zoster with a prescription for a herpes zoster antiviral dispensed ≤5 days before or after the visit, or a herpes zoster-related emergency department (ED) visit or hospitalization. In secondary analyses, we examined impacts on any herpes zoster-related ED visits and hospitalizations. RESULTS: We found no association between ZVL market availability and monthly incidence of herpes zoster (Pâ =â .32) or monthly rates of ED visits and hospitalizations (Pâ =â .88). Conversely, the introduction of publicly funded ZVL reduced the monthly rate of medically attended herpes zoster by 19.1% (from 4.8 to 3.8 per 10â 000 population; Pâ <â .01) and herpes zoster-related ED visits and hospitalizations by 38.2% (from 1.7 to 1.0 per 10â 000 population; Pâ <â .05). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a publicly funded immunization program for herpes zoster was associated with reduced disease burden and related acute healthcare service use.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna contra el Herpes Zóster , Herpes Zóster , Anciano , Costo de Enfermedad , Herpes Zóster/epidemiología , Herpes Zóster/prevención & control , Humanos , Programas de Inmunización , Ontario/epidemiología , VacunaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Within-household transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has been identified as one of the main sources of spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after lockdown restrictions and self-isolation guidelines are implemented. Secondary attack rates among household contacts are estimated to be 5-10 times higher than among non-household contacts, but it is unclear which individuals are more prone to transmit infection within their households. METHODS: Using address matching, a cohort was assembled of all individuals with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 residing in private households in Ontario, Canada. Descriptive analyses were performed to compare characteristics of cases in households that experienced secondary transmission versus those that did not. Logistic regression models were fit to determine index case characteristics and neighborhood characteristics associated with transmission. RESULTS: Between January and July 2020, there were 26 714 individuals with COVID-19 residing in 21 226 households. Longer testing delays (≥5 vs 0 days; odds ratio [OR], 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.53-3.60) and male gender (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.18-1.38) were associated with greater odds of household secondary transmission, while being a healthcare worker (OR, .56; 95% CI, .50-.62) was associated with lower odds of transmission. Neighborhoods with larger average family size and a higher proportion of households with multiple persons per room were also associated with greater odds of transmission. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for individuals to get tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection as soon as symptoms appear, and to isolate away from household contacts; this is particularly important in neighborhoods with large family sizes and/or crowded households.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Estudios de Cohortes , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Composición Familiar , Humanos , Masculino , Ontario/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Older adults are at increased risk of mortality from influenza infections. We estimated influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mortality following laboratory-confirmed influenza. METHODS: Using a test-negative design study and linked laboratory and health administrative databases in Ontario, Canada, we estimated VE against all-cause mortality following laboratory-confirmed influenza for community-dwelling adults aged >65 years during the 2010-2011 to 2015-2016 influenza seasons. RESULTS: Among 54 116 older adults tested for influenza across the 6 seasons, 6837 died within 30 days of specimen collection. Thirteen percent (925 individuals) tested positive for influenza, and 50.6% were considered vaccinated for that season. Only 23.2% of influenza test-positive cases had influenza recorded as their underlying cause of death. Before and after multivariable adjustment, we estimated VE against all-cause mortality following laboratory-confirmed influenza to be 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8%-30%) and 20% (95% CI, 7%-30%), respectively. This estimate increased to 34% after correcting for influenza vaccination exposure misclassification. We observed significant VE against deaths following influenza confirmation during 2014-2015 (VEâ =â 26% [95% CI, 5%-42%]). We also observed significant VE against deaths following confirmation of influenza A/H1N1 and A/H3N2, and against deaths with COPD as the underlying cause. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the importance of influenza vaccination in older adults, who account for most influenza-associated deaths annually.
Asunto(s)
Subtipo H1N1 del Virus de la Influenza A , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Anciano , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Humanos , Subtipo H3N2 del Virus de la Influenza A , Virus de la Influenza B , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Laboratorios , Ontario/epidemiología , Estaciones del Año , VacunaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nonpharmaceutical interventions remain the primary means of controlling severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) until vaccination coverage is sufficient to achieve herd immunity. We used anonymized smartphone mobility measures to quantify the mobility level needed to control SARS-CoV-2 (i.e., mobility threshold), and the difference relative to the observed mobility level (i.e., mobility gap). METHODS: We conducted a time-series study of the weekly incidence of SARS-CoV-2 in Canada from Mar. 15, 2020, to Mar. 6, 2021. The outcome was weekly growth rate, defined as the ratio of cases in a given week versus the previous week. We evaluated the effects of average time spent outside the home in the previous 3 weeks using a log-normal regression model, accounting for province, week and mean temperature. We calculated the SARS-CoV-2 mobility threshold and gap. RESULTS: Across the 51-week study period, a total of 888 751 people were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Each 10% increase in the mobility gap was associated with a 25% increase in the SARS-CoV-2 weekly case growth rate (ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.20-1.29). Compared to the prepandemic baseline mobility of 100%, the mobility threshold was highest in the summer (69%; interquartile range [IQR] 67%-70%), and dropped to 54% in winter 2021 (IQR 52%-55%); a mobility gap was present in Canada from July 2020 until the last week of December 2020. INTERPRETATION: Mobility strongly and consistently predicts weekly case growth, and low levels of mobility are needed to control SARS-CoV-2 through spring 2021. Mobility measures from anonymized smartphone data can be used to guide provincial and regional loosening and tightening of physical distancing measures.
Asunto(s)
Prueba de COVID-19/tendencias , COVID-19/prevención & control , Transmisión de Enfermedad Infecciosa/prevención & control , COVID-19/epidemiología , Canadá/epidemiología , Femenino , Predicción , Humanos , Incidencia , Análisis de Series de Tiempo Interrumpido , Masculino , Distanciamiento Físico , Salud Pública , Cuarentena/tendenciasRESUMEN
BackgroundSerosurveys for SARS-CoV-2 aim to estimate the proportion of the population that has been infected.AimThis observational study assesses the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Ontario, Canada during the first pandemic wave.MethodsUsing an orthogonal approach, we tested 8,902 residual specimens from the Public Health Ontario laboratory over three time periods during March-June 2020 and stratified results by age group, sex and region. We adjusted for antibody test sensitivity/specificity and compared with reported PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases.ResultsAdjusted seroprevalence was 0.5% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.1-1.5) from 27 March-30 April, 1.5% (95% CI: 0.7-2.2) from 26-31 May, and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.8-1.3) from 5-30 June 2020. Adjusted estimates were highest in individuals aged ≥ 60 years in March-April (1.3%; 95% CI: 0.2-4.6), in those aged 20-59 years in May (2.1%; 95% CI: 0.8-3.4) and in those aged ≥ 60 years in June (1.6%; 95% CI: 1.1-2.1). Regional seroprevalence varied, and was highest for Toronto in March-April (0.9%; 95% CI: 0.1-3.1), for Toronto in May (3.2%; 95% CI: 1.0-5.3) and for Toronto (1.5%; 95% CI: 0.9-2.1) and Central East in June (1.5%; 95% CI: 1.0-2.0). We estimate that COVID-19 cases detected by PCR in Ontario underestimated SARS-CoV-2 infections by a factor of 4.9.ConclusionsOur results indicate low population seroprevalence in Ontario, suggesting that public health measures were effective at limiting the spread of SARS-CoV-2 during the first pandemic wave.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Humanos , Ontario/epidemiología , Pandemias , Estudios SeroepidemiológicosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Annual influenza immunization is recommended for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by all major COPD clinical practice guidelines. We sought to determine the seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations among older adults with COPD. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative study of influenza VE in community-dwelling older adults with COPD in Ontario, Canada using health administrative data and respiratory specimens collected from patients tested for influenza during the 2010-11 to 2015-16 influenza seasons. Influenza vaccination was ascertained from physician and pharmacist billing claims. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio of influenza vaccination in people with, compared to those without, laboratory-confirmed influenza. RESULTS: Receipt of seasonal influenza vaccine was associated with an adjusted 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15%-27%) reduction in laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalization. Adjustment for potential misclassification of vaccination status increased this to 43% (95% CI, 35%-52%). Vaccine effectiveness was not found to vary by patient- or influenza-related variables. CONCLUSIONS: During the studied influenza seasons, influenza vaccination was at least modestly effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations in people with COPD. The imperfect effectiveness emphasizes the need for better influenza vaccines and other preventive strategies.