Indirect effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in the pre-omicron and omicron periods: a nation-wide test-negative case-control study in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Mass COVID-19 immunisation campaigns altered the pandemic's progress by protecting the vaccine recipient and reducing transmission. However, evidence for indirect vaccine effectiveness (IVE) is limited due to the difficulties of ascertaining this type of protection. METHODS: Using linked national Brazilian databases, we adapted the test-negative design to evaluate the IVE against symptomatic infection. We analysed data from January 1-December 1, 2021 (Pre-Omicron) and January 1-April 30, 2022 (Omicron BA.1 and BA.2). We compared the probability of testing positive across various levels of second ancestral-strain monovalent COVID-19 vaccine dose coverage, including only unvaccinated individuals in the main analysis and both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in additional analyses. Sensitivity analysis focused on children under 12, who did not have access to COVID-19 vaccines during the pre-omicron-period. FINDINGS: We included 11,039,315 unvaccinated individuals tested during the pre-omicron study period. IVE was minimal until 30% vaccination coverage (<10%), then it follows a dose-dependent pattern, peaking at 37.7(95%CI:32-42.8) at 70% coverage. For children under 12, IVE peaked at 59.8%(95%CI:52.7-65.9) at 70% coverage. During Omicron-period, IVE remained constant at about 5% across all comparisons. INTERPRETATION: Our findings confirm that high vaccination coverage using vaccines that prevent infection indirectly protects the community. However, IVE was substantially higher during the pre-Omicron period.

Effectiveness of EV-A71 Vaccine and Its Impact on the Incidence of Hand, Foot and Mouth Disease: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination is a highly effective strategy for the prevention of enterovirus A71 (EV-A71)-hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD). Three inactivated EV-A71 vaccines in China have demonstrated remarkable efficacy against EV-A71-HFMD during clinical trials, exhibiting vaccine effectiveness (VE) exceeding 90% and few adverse events (AEs). However, the effectiveness of vaccines in the real world and its impact on the epidemiological characteristics of HFMD after the use of EV-A71 inactivated vaccine are uncertain. METHODS: The odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence (CI) were used as the effect estimates of the meta-analysis in the test-negative design (TND), and the OR was used to calculate VE: VE = (1 - OR) × 100%. RESULTS: According to the literature search strategy, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science (including Chinese Science Citation Database and MEDLINE), and Embase, and 18 records were ultimately included in this study. Subsequently, the overall VE and 95% CI of different vaccine doses were analyzed, with the one-dose vaccine at 66.9% (95% CI: 45.2-80.0%) and the two-dose vaccine at 84.2% (95% CI: 79.4-87.9%). Additionally, the most reported AEs were mild general reactions without any rare occurrences. Simultaneously, the widespread use of the EV-A71 vaccine would lead to a reduction in both the incidence of EV-A71-associated HFMD and severe cases caused by EV-A71. CONCLUSION: The administration of the two-dose EV-A71 vaccine is highly effective in preventing HFMD in the real world, and the widespread use of the EV-A71 vaccine leads to a reduction in the incidence of EV-A71-associated HFMD and that of severe cases caused by EV-A71. The findings suggest that administering the two-dose EV-A71 inactivated vaccine to children aged 6 months to 71 months can be effective in preventing EV-A71-associated HFMD, highlighting the need for developing a multivalent HFMD vaccine for preventing cases not caused by EV-A71.

Population-Based Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Infection in Southern China, 2023-2024 Season.

Background: In China, the 2022-2023 influenza season began earlier and was characterized by higher levels of influenza activity and co-circulation of various respiratory pathogens compared with seasons before the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Timely and precise estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against infections can be used to guide public health measures. Methods: A test-negative study was conducted to estimate IVE against laboratory-confirmed influenza using data from the CHinese Electronic health Records Research in Yinzhou (CHERRY) study that prospectively integrated laboratory, vaccination, and health administrative data in Yinzhou, southern China. We included patients who presented influenza-like illness and received nucleic acid tests and/or antigen tests between October 2023 and March 2024. Estimates of IVE were adjusted for age, gender, month of specimen submitted, chronic comorbidities, and hospitalization status. Results: A total of 205 028 participants, including 96 298 influenza cases (7.6% vaccinated) and 108 730 influenza-negative controls (13.4% vaccinated), were eligible for this analysis. The estimates of IVE were 49.4% (95% CI, 47.8%-50.9%), 41.9% (95% CI, 39.8%-44.0%), and 59.9% (95% CI, 57.9%-61.9%) against overall influenza, influenza A, and influenza B, respectively. A lower IVE was observed for individuals aged 7-17 years (38.6%), vs 45.8% for 6 months-6 years, 46.7% for 18-64 years, and 46.1% for ≥65 years. Vaccination reduced the risk of infection by 44.4% among patients with chronic comorbidities. IVEs varied by epidemic weeks with the changes in influenza activity levels and the switch of dominant influenza strains. Conclusions: Influenza vaccination in the 2023-2024 season was protective against infection for the entire population.

Effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine in children during the 2023/24 season: The first season after relaxation of intensive COVID-19 measures.

BACKGROUND: The annual administration of the influenza vaccine is the most effective method for preventing influenza. We have evaluated the effectiveness of the inactivated influenza vaccine in children aged 6 months to 15 years across the seasons from 2013/2014 to 2022/2023. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the inactivated influenza vaccine in the 2023/2024 season, the first year following the easing of strict COVID-19 measures, and possibly the last season when only the inactivated vaccine is available on the market. METHODS: Adjusted vaccine effectiveness for the 2023/2024 season was assessed using a test-negative case-control design, with results based on polymerase chain reaction and rapid influenza diagnostic tests. Vaccine effectiveness was calculated by influenza type and patient hospitalization/outpatient status. RESULTS: A total of 1832 children were recruited. The inactivated influenza vaccine was effective in preventing both symptomatic influenza A and B in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Overall vaccine effectiveness for influenza A was 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23%-69%, n = 930) in inpatient settings and 54% (95%CI, 27%-71%, n = 559) in outpatient settings. For influenza B, effectiveness was 60% (95%CI, 22%-79%, n = 859) in inpatient settings and 56% (95%CI, 26%-74%, n = 558) in outpatient settings. Analysis suggested that administering two doses enhanced effectiveness specifically against influenza B. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate influenza vaccine effectiveness in children after the relaxation of strict COVID-19 measures in Japan (2023/2024). We recommend the current inactivated vaccine for preventing both influenza A and B in children, with consideration for the potential use of two doses to enhance effectiveness against influenza B.

Severity-dependent test-seeking behaviors and test-negative designs: impact on estimated vaccine effectiveness and utility of analytic and design choices.

Test-negative designs are increasingly used to evaluate vaccine effectiveness because of desirable properties like reduced confounding due to healthcare-seeking behaviors and lower cost compared to other study designs. An individual's decision to seek care often depends on their disease severity, with severe disease more likely to be captured than mild disease. As many vaccines likely attenuate disease severity, this phenomenon generally results in an upward-biased estimate of vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease. To address the resulting bias, analytic solutions like adjusting for or matching on severity have been suggested. In this paper, we examine the performance of the test-negative design under different vaccine effects on disease severity and the utility of adjusting or matching on severity. We further consider the implications of studies that focus only on milder disease by restricting recruitment to outpatient settings. Through an analytic framework and simulations accompanied by a real-world example, we demonstrate that, when vaccination attenuates disease severity, the magnitude of bias is influenced by the degree of under-ascertainment of mild disease relative to severe disease. When vaccination does not attenuate disease severity, bias is not present. We further show that analytic fixes negligibly impact bias and that outpatient-only studies frequently produce downward-biased estimates.

Potential Biases in Test-Negative Design Studies of COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Arising from the Inclusion of Asymptomatic Individuals.

The test-negative design (TND) is a popular method for evaluating vaccine effectiveness (VE). A "classical" TND study includes symptomatic individuals tested for the disease targeted by the vaccine to estimate VE against symptomatic infection. However, recent applications of the TND have attempted to estimate VE against infection by including all tested individuals, regardless of their symptoms. In this article, we use directed acyclic graphs and simulations to investigate potential biases in TND studies of COVID-19 VE arising from the use of this "alternative" approach, particularly when applied during periods of widespread testing. We show that the inclusion of asymptomatic individuals can potentially lead to collider stratification bias, uncontrolled confounding by health and healthcare-seeking behaviors (HSBs), and differential outcome misclassification. While our focus is on the COVID-19 setting, the issues discussed here may also be relevant in the context of other infectious diseases. This may be particularly true in scenarios where there is either a high baseline prevalence of infection, a strong correlation between HSBs and vaccination, different testing practices for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, or settings where both the vaccine under study attenuates symptoms of infection and diagnostic accuracy is modified by the presence of symptoms.

Effectiveness of Updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB and BA.2.86/JN.1 Lineage Hospitalization and a Comparison of Clinical Severity-IVY Network, 26 Hospitals, October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024.

BACKGROUND: Assessing variant-specific COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and severity can inform public health risk assessments and decisions about vaccine composition. BA.2.86 and its descendants, including JN.1 (referred to collectively as "JN lineages"), emerged in late 2023 and exhibited substantial divergence from co-circulating XBB lineages. METHODS: We analyzed patients hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness at 26 hospitals in 20 U.S. states admitted October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024. Using a test-negative, case-control design, we estimated effectiveness of an updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccine dose against sequence-confirmed XBB and JN lineage hospitalization using logistic regression. Odds of severe outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, were compared for JN versus XBB lineage hospitalizations using logistic regression. RESULTS: 585 case-patients with XBB lineages, 397 case-patients with JN lineages, and 4,580 control-patients were included. VE in the first 7-89 days after receipt of an updated dose was 54.2% (95% CI = 36.1%-67.1%) against XBB lineage hospitalization and 32.7% (95% CI = 1.9%-53.8%) against JN lineage hospitalization. Odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI = 0.46-1.38) and IMV or death (aOR 0.69; 95% CI = 0.34-1.40) were not significantly different among JN compared to XBB lineage hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against both XBB and JN lineage hospitalization, but protection against the latter may be attenuated by immune escape. Clinical severity of JN lineage hospitalizations was not higher relative to XBB.

Caveats Regarding the Test-Negative Design to Study Mpox (monkeypox) Risk Factors and Vaccine Effectiveness.

The test-negative design (TND) has been commonly used to study vaccine effectiveness (notably regarding COVID-19 and influenza vaccines) and has been recently proposed as a valid design to study causal risk factors of diseases during an outbreak. In April 2022, mpox (previously monkeypox) led to a worldwide outbreak that resulted in an international public health emergency. The TND could be used to study vaccine effectiveness and risk factors of mpox using epidemiologic databases, and a few studies have already done so. However, several issues prevent such study design from being valid for this end. Problems stem from stigma surrounding mpox, which impacts a person's decision to look for healthcare. This poses a challenge to the "similar healthcare seeking behaviour" assumption that is central for test negative studies. Further limitations include the differential diagnoses of mpox, which have notable differences from mpox that may be easily detected by clinicians or patients but are unlikely to be included in epidemiologic databases or electronic health records. Herein I discuss caveats regarding the use of the TND in the context of the mpox outbreak, as well as potential steps that may allow it to be used effectively.

Hypothesis testing and sample size considerations for the test-negative design.

The test-negative design (TND) is an observational study design to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) that enrolls individuals receiving diagnostic testing for a target disease as part of routine care. VE is estimated as one minus the adjusted odds ratio of testing positive versus negative comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Although the TND is related to case-control studies, it is distinct in that the ratio of test-positive cases to test-negative controls is not typically pre-specified. For both types of studies, sparse cells are common when vaccines are highly effective. We consider the implications of these features on power for the TND. We use simulation studies to explore three hypothesis-testing procedures and associated sample size calculations for case-control and TND studies. These tests, all based on a simple logistic regression model, are a standard Wald test, a continuity-corrected Wald test, and a score test. The Wald test performs poorly in both case-control and TND when VE is high because the number of vaccinated test-positive cases can be low or zero. Continuity corrections help to stabilize the variance but induce bias. We observe superior performance with the score test as the variance is pooled under the null hypothesis of no group differences. We recommend using a score-based approach to design and analyze both case-control and TND. We propose a modification to the TND score sample size to account for additional variability in the ratio of controls over cases. This work enhances our understanding of the data generating mechanism in a test-negative design (TND) and how it is distinct from that of a case-control study due to its passive recruitment of controls.

Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Against Influenza A-Associated Emergency Department, Urgent Care, and Hospitalization Encounters Among US Adults, 2022-2023.

BACKGROUND: The 2022-2023 United States influenza season had unusually early influenza activity with high hospitalization rates. Vaccine-matched A(H3N2) viruses predominated, with lower levels of A(H1N1)pdm09 activity also observed. METHODS: Using the test-negative design, we evaluated influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) during the 2022-2023 season against influenza A-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations from October 2022 to March 2023 among adults (aged ≥18 years) with acute respiratory illness (ARI). VE was estimated by comparing odds of seasonal influenza vaccination among case-patients (influenza A test positive by molecular assay) and controls (influenza test negative), applying inverse-propensity-to-be-vaccinated weights. RESULTS: The analysis included 85 389 ED/UC ARI encounters (17.0% influenza A positive; 37.8% vaccinated overall) and 19 751 hospitalizations (9.5% influenza A positive; 52.8% vaccinated overall). VE against influenza A-associated ED/UC encounters was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40%-47%) overall and 45% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. VE against influenza A-associated hospitalizations was 35% (95% CI, 27%-43%) overall and 23% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: VE was moderate during the 2022-2023 influenza season, a season characterized with increased burden of influenza and co-circulation with other respiratory viruses. Vaccination is likely to substantially reduce morbidity, mortality, and strain on healthcare resources.

Prior infections and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in test-negative studies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 can provide protection against infection and severe COVID-19. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-existing immunity on the vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed 66 test-negative design (TND) studies that examined VE against infection or severe disease (hospitalization, ICU admission, or death) for primary vaccination series. Pooled VE among studies that included people with prior COVID-19 infection was lower against infection (pooled VE: 77%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 72%, 81%) and severe disease (pooled VE: 86%; 95% CI: 83%, 89%), compared with studies that excluded people with prior COVID-19 infection (pooled VE against infection: 87%; 95% CI: 85%, 89%; pooled VE against severe disease: 93%; 95% CI: 91%, 95%). There was a negative correlation between VE estimates against infection and severe disease, and the cumulative incidence of cases before the start of the study or incidence rates during the study period. We found clear empirical evidence that higher levels of pre-existing immunity were associated with lower VE estimates. Prior infections should be treated as both a confounder and effect modificatory when the policies target the whole population or stratified by infection history, respectively.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered in the 2023 autumnal campaigns in Europe: Results from the VEBIS primary care test-negative design study, September 2023-January 2024.

In autumn 2023, European vaccination campaigns predominantly administered XBB.1.5 vaccine. In a European multicentre study, we estimated 2023 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic infection at primary care level between September 2023 and January 2024. Using a test-negative case-control design, we estimated VE in the target group for COVID-19 vaccination overall and by time since vaccination. We included 1057 cases and 4397 controls. Vaccine effectiveness was 40 % (95 % CI: 26-53 %) overall, 48 % (95 % CI: 31-61 %) among those vaccinated < 6 weeks of onset and 29 % (95 % CI: 3-49 %) at 6-14 weeks. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccines administered to target groups during the autumn 2023 campaigns showed clinically significant effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed, medically attended symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the 3 months following vaccination. A longer study period will allow for further variant-specific COVID-19 VE estimates, better understanding decline in VE and informing booster administration policies.

Vaccine Effectiveness against GP-Attended Symptomatic COVID-19 and Hybrid Immunity among Adults in Hungary during the 2022-2023 Respiratory Season Dominated by Different SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Subvariants.

Hungary provides the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in a setting where naturally acquired immunity and hybrid immunity are likely to play a greater role due to suboptimal vaccination coverage. METHODS: A test-negative study was conducted during the 2022-2023 respiratory season at the primary care level to determine the effectiveness of at least one COVID-19 booster dose in preventing medically attended symptomatic RT-PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults. Unvaccinated patients were used as a reference group. RESULTS: A total of 247 cases and 1073 controls were included in the analysis. CVE was 56.8% (95% CI: 11.9-78.8%) in the population aged 60 years and older and 2.3% (95% CI: -50.0-36.3%) in the younger adults against COVID-19 caused by Omicron subvariants, mainly BA.5, BQ.1, and XBB.1. Self-reported COVID-19 in the 60-365 days prior to the current illness did not confer protection against reinfection without vaccination, but together with booster vaccination, it reduced the risk of COVID-19 by 63.0% (95% CI: -28.0-89.3%) and 87.6% (95% CI: 26.4-97.9%) among the 18-59 and 60+ age groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CVE against COVID-19 was moderately high in the 60+ age groups. Because of the benefit of hybrid immunity, persons with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection should still be considered for vaccination campaigns.

Vaccine effectiveness in reducing COVID-19-related hospitalization after a risk-age-based mass vaccination program in a Chilean municipality: A comparison of observational study designs.

BACKGROUND: Case-control studies involving test-negative (TN) and syndrome-negative (SN) controls are reliable for evaluating influenza and rotavirus vaccine effectiveness (VE) during a random vaccination process. However, there is no empirical evidence regarding the impact in real-world mass vaccination campaigns against SARS-CoV-2 using TN and SN controls. OBJECTIVE: To compare in the same population the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on COVID-19-related hospitalization rates across a cohort design, TN and SN designs. METHOD: We conducted an unmatched population-based cohort, TN and SN case-control designs linking data from four data sources (public primary healthcare system, hospitalization registers, epidemiological surveillance systems and the national immunization program) in a Chilean municipality (Rancagua) between March 1, 2021 and August 31, 2021. The outcome was COVID-19-related hospitalization. To ensure sufficient sample size in the unexposed group, completion of follow-up in the cohort design, and sufficient time between vaccination and hospitalization in the case-control design, VE was estimated comparing 8-week periods for each individual. RESULTS: Among the 191,505 individuals registered in the primary healthcare system of Rancagua in Chile on March 1, 2021; 116,453 met the cohort study's inclusion criteria. Of the 9,471 hospitalizations registered during the study period in the same place, 526 were COVID-19 cases, 108 were TN controls, and 1,628 were SN controls. For any vaccine product, the age- and sex-adjusted vaccine effectiveness comparing fully and nonvaccinated individuals was 67.2 (55.7-76.3) in the cohort design, whereas it was 67.8 (44.1-81.4) and 77.9 (70.2-83.8) in the TN and SN control designs, respectively. CONCLUSION: The VE of a COVID-19 vaccination program based on age and risk groups tended to differ across the three observational study designs. The SN case-control design may be an efficient option for evaluating COVID-19 VE in real-world settings.

Exploring the effect of clinical case definitions on influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation at primary care level: Results from the end-of-season 2022-23 VEBIS multicentre study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Within influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies at primary care level with a laboratory-confirmed outcome, clinical case definitions for recruitment of patients can vary. We used the 2022-23 VEBIS primary care European multicentre study end-of-season data to evaluate whether the clinical case definition affected IVE estimates. METHODS: We estimated VE using a multicentre test-negative case-control design. We measured VE against any influenza and influenza (sub)types, by age group (0-14, 15-64, ≥65 years) and by influenza vaccine target group, using logistic regression. We estimated IVE among patients meeting the European Union (EU) acute respiratory infection (ARI) case definition and among those meeting the EU influenza-like illness (ILI) case definition, including only sites providing information on specific symptoms and recruiting patients using an ARI case definition (as the EU ILI case definition is a subset of the EU ARI one). RESULTS: We included 24 319 patients meeting the EU ARI case definition, of whom 21 804 patients (90 %) meet the EU ILI case definition, for the overall pooled VE analysis against any influenza. The overall and influenza (sub)type-specific VE varied by ≤2 % between EU ILI and EU ARI populations. DISCUSSION: Among all analyses, we found similar VE estimates between the EU ILI and EU ARI populations, with few (10%) additional non-ILI ARI patients recruited. These results indicate that VE in the 2022-23 influenza season was not affected by use of a different clinical case definition for recruitment, although we recommend investigating whether this holds true for next seasons.

Reduced effectiveness of repeat influenza vaccination: distinguishing among within-season waning, recent clinical infection, and subclinical infection.

Studies have reported that prior-season influenza vaccination is associated with higher risk of clinical influenza infection among vaccinees. This effect might arise from incomplete consideration of within-season waning and recent infection. Using data from the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network (2011-2012 to 2018-2019 seasons), we found that repeat vaccinees were vaccinated earlier in a season by one week. After accounting for waning VE, repeat vaccinees were still more likely to test positive for A(H3N2) (OR=1.11, 95%CI:1.02-1.21) but not for influenza B or A(H1N1). We found that clinical infection influenced individuals' decision to vaccinate in the following season while protecting against clinical infection of the same (sub)type. However, adjusting for recent clinical infections did not strongly influence the estimated effect of prior-season vaccination. In contrast, we found that adjusting for subclinical infection could theoretically attenuate this effect. Additional investigation is needed to determine the impact of subclinical infections on VE.

Non-specific effects of the inactivated influenza vaccine. A test-negative study: The inactivated influenza vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 infections.

BACKGROUND: Previous research suggested that the inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) may protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection or a severe course of COVID-19. These findings were however based on cohort studies, that are prone to confounding by indication. We examined the association between IIV and SARS-Cov-2 infection in a Dutch population using a test-negative design. METHODS: This test-negative case-control study was conducted in adults (≥60) who tested because of COVID-19 like symptoms at community SARS-CoV-2 testing locations in the Netherlands during the period of November 8th 2021-March 11th 2022. Information on receipt of IIV in October-November 2021 was routinely collected at each visit. Logistic regression was used to calculate unadjusted, partially (sex, age, education level) and fully adjusted (COVID-19 vaccination, IIV 2020) odds ratios (ORs) for receipt of IIV in SARS-CoV-2 positive versus negative subjects. Differential effects on SARS-CoV-2 risk by time since IIV were investigated by including an interaction term for calendar time: November 2021-January 2022 vs February-March 2022. RESULTS: In total, 1,832 participants were included in the main analysis, of whom 336 (18.3 %) had a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. No significant association between IIV and SARS-CoV-2 infection was found; fully adjusted OR of 1.07 (95 % CI: 0.78-1.49). The interaction term for time periods was not significant (1.04 [95 % CI: 0.51-2.15], p = 0.91). Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: While earlier observational studies suggested a protective non-specific effect of IIV and SARS-CoV-2 infections, this smaller, but well controlled test-negative design study does not suggest an effect, either positive or negative. Larger test-negative design studies, or alternative designs such as the self-controlled case series design are needed to confirm these findings and provide more definite answers on the topic.

Mid-Term Estimates of Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness against the A(H1N1)pdm09 Prevalent Circulating Subtype in the 2023/24 Season: Data from the Sicilian RespiVirNet Surveillance System.

The current influenza season started in Italy in October 2023, approaching the epidemic peak in late December (52nd week of the year). We aimed to explore the mid-term virologic surveillance data of the 2023/2024 influenza season (from 16 October 2023 to 7 January 2024) in Sicily, the fourth most populous Italian region. A test-negative design was used to estimate the effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine (VE) against A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, the predominant subtype in Sicily (96.2% of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases). Overall, 29.2% (n = 359/1230) of oropharyngeal swabs collected from patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) were positive for influenza. Among the laboratory-confirmed influenza cases, 12.5% (n = 45/359) were vaccinated against influenza, with higher prevalence of laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of influenza A among subjects vaccinated with quadrivalent inactivated standard dose (29.4%), live attenuated intranasal (25.1%), and quadrivalent inactivated high-dose (23.8%) influenza vaccines. Comparing influenza vaccination status for the 2023/2024 season among laboratory-confirmed influenza-positive and -negative samples, higher vaccination rates in influenza-negative samples (vs. positive) were observed in all age groups, except for 45-64 years old, regardless of sex and comorbidities. The overall adjusted VE (adj-VE) was 41.4% [95%CI: 10.5-61.6%], whereas the adj-VE was 37.9% [95%CI: -0.7-61.7%] among children 7 months-14 years old and 52.7% [95%CI: -38.0-83.8%] among the elderly (≥65 years old).

Effectiveness of Enterovirus 71 inactivated vaccines against hand, foot, and mouth disease: A test-negative case-control study.

The Enterovirus A71 (EV-A71) vaccine was introduced in China in December 2015 as a preventive measure against hand, foot, and mouth disease (HFMD) caused by EV-A71. However, the effectiveness of the vaccine (VE) in real-world settings needs to be evaluated. We conducted a test-negative case-control study to assess the effectiveness of EV-A71 vaccines in preventing EV-A71-associated HFMD. Children aged 6-71 months with HFMD were enrolled as participants. The case group comprised those who tested positive for EV-A71, while the control group comprised those who tested negative for EV-A71. To estimate VE, a logistic regression model was employed, adjusting for potential confounders including age, gender, and clinical severity. In total, 3223 children aged 6 to 71 months were included in the study, with 162 in the case group and 3061 in the control group. The proportion of children who received EV-A71 vaccination was significantly lower in the case group compared to the control group (p < .001). The overall VEadj was estimated to be 90.8%. The VEadj estimates for partially and fully vaccinated children were 90.1% and 90.9%, respectively. Stratified by age group, the VEadj estimates were 88.7% for 6 to 35-month-olds and 95.5% for 36 to 71-month-olds. Regarding disease severity, the VEadj estimates were 86.3% for mild cases and 100% for severe cases. Sensitivity analysis showed minimal changes in the VE point estimates, with most changing by no more than 1% point. Our study demonstrates a high level of vaccine effectiveness against EV-A71-HFMD, especially in severe cases. Active promotion of EV-A71 vaccination is an effective strategy in preventing EV-A71 infections.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 BA.1/BA.2 lineages among adults and adolescents in a multicentre primary care study, Europe, December 2021 to June 2022.

BackgroundScarce European data in early 2021 suggested lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineages than previous variants.AimWe aimed to estimate primary series (PS) and first booster VE against symptomatic BA.1/BA.2 infection and investigate potential biases.MethodsThis European test-negative multicentre study tested primary care patients with acute respiratory symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 in the BA.1/BA.2-dominant period. We estimated PS and booster VE among adults and adolescents (PS only) for all products combined and for Comirnaty alone, by time since vaccination, age and chronic condition. We investigated potential bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination and explored effect modification and confounding by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong adults, PS VE was 37% (95% CI: 24-47%) overall and 60% (95% CI: 44-72%), 43% (95% CI: 26-55%) and 29% (95% CI: 13-43%) < 90, 90-179 and ≥ 180 days post vaccination, respectively. Booster VE was 42% (95% CI: 32-51%) overall and 56% (95% CI: 47-64%), 22% (95% CI: 2-38%) and 3% (95% CI: -78% to 48%), respectively. Primary series VE was similar among adolescents. Restricting analyses to Comirnaty had little impact. Vaccine effectiveness was higher among older adults. There was no signal of bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. Confounding by previous infection was low, but sample size precluded definite assessment of effect modification.ConclusionPrimary series and booster VE against symptomatic infection with BA.1/BA.2 ranged from 37% to 42%, with similar waning post vaccination. Comprehensive data on previous SARS-CoV-2 infection would help disentangle vaccine- and infection-induced immunity.