Meningococcal Disease in the Post-COVID-19 Era: A Time to Prepare.

The global invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) landscape changed considerably during the COVID-19 pandemic, as evidenced by decreased incidence rates due to COVID-19 mitigation measures, such as limited social contact, physical distancing, mask wearing, and hand washing. Vaccination rates were also lower during the pandemic relative to pre-pandemic levels. Although policymakers may have shifted their focus away from IMD vaccination programs to COVID-19 vaccination programs, strong arguments support implementation and prioritization of IMD vaccination programs; IMD cases have increased in some countries and IMD rates may even have exceeded pre-pandemic levels. Additional concerns include increased susceptibility due to vaccination coverage gaps, increased incidence of other respiratory pathogens, immunity debt from lockdown restrictions, and increased IMD epidemiologic variability. The full range of benefits of widely available and effective meningococcal vaccines needs to be considered, especially in health technology assessments, where the broad benefits of these vaccines are neither accurately quantified nor captured in implementation policy decisions. Importantly, implementation of meningococcal vaccination programs in the current IMD climate also appeals to broader healthcare principles, including preparedness rather than reactive approaches, generally accepted benefit-risk approaches to vaccination, historical precedent, and the World Health Organization's goal of defeating meningitis by 2030. Countries should therefore act swiftly to bolster existing meningococcal vaccination strategies to provide broad coverage across age groups and serogroups given the recent increases in IMD incidence.

Country score tool to assess readiness and guide evidence generation of immunization programs in aging adults in Europe.

Objectives: Delaying of policies for immunization of aging adults, low vaccine uptake, and the lack of supportive evidence at the national level could diminish the value in health and economics of such programs. This study aims to develop a "country score tool" to assess readiness and to facilitate evidence generation for aging adult immunization programs in Europe, and examine the comprehensiveness, relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the tool. Methods: The tool was developed in two phases. First, a modified Delphi process was used to construct the tool. The process included a literature review, stakeholder consultations, and a three-round Delphi study. The Delphi panel included researchers, supra-national and national decision-makers of immunization programs recruited from five countries, using snowball sampling method. The consensus was predefined at the agreement rate of 70%. Pilot testing of the tool was conducted in the Netherlands, Germany, Serbia, and Hungary involving researchers in the field of health technology assessment. After assessing the countries' readiness, researchers evaluated four features, namely comprehensiveness, relevance, acceptability, and feasibility of the tool via an online survey that included 5-scale Likert questions. The percentages of affirmative answers including "agree" and "totally agree" choices were presented. Results: The review identified 16 tools and frameworks that formed the first version of our tool with 14 items. Eight experts were involved in the Delphi panel. Through three Delphi rounds, four items were added, one was dropped, and all others were amended. The consensus was achieved on the tool with 17 items divided into decision-making and implementation parts. Each item has a guiding question, corresponding to explanations and rationales to inform assessment with readiness scores. Eight researchers completed the pilot testing. The tool was rated as comprehensive (75%), relevant (100%), acceptable (75%), and feasible (88%) by participants. Conclusion: Through a thorough and transparent process, a country score tool was developed helping to identify strengths, weaknesses, and evidential requirements for decision-making and implementation of immunization programs of aging adults. The tool is relevant for different European contexts and shows good comprehensiveness, acceptability, and feasibility.

Economic evaluation of meningococcal vaccines: considerations for the future.

In 2018, a panel of health economics and meningococcal disease experts convened to review methodologies, frameworks, and decision-making processes for economic evaluations of vaccines, with a focus on evaluation of vaccines targeting invasive meningococcal disease (IMD). The panel discussed vaccine evaluation methods across countries; IMD prevention benefits that are well quantified using current methods, not well quantified, or missing in current cost-effectiveness methodologies; and development of recommendations for future evaluation methods. Consensus was reached on a number of points and further consideration was deemed necessary for some topics. Experts agreed that the unpredictability of IMD complicates an accurate evaluation of meningococcal vaccine benefits and that vaccine cost-effectiveness evaluations should encompass indirect benefits, both for meningococcal vaccines and vaccines in general. In addition, the panel agreed that transparency in the vaccine decision-making process is beneficial and should be implemented when possible. Further discussion is required to ascertain: how enhancing consistency of frameworks for evaluating outcomes of vaccine introduction can be improved; reviews of existing tools used to capture quality of life; how indirect costs are considered within models; and whether and how the weighting of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), application of QALY adjustment factors, or use of altered cost-effectiveness thresholds should be used in the economic evaluation of vaccines.

Lessons from an online vaccine communication project.

Most members of the general public use the internet to research health topics. However, the quality of vaccine-related material available online is mixed and internet search engines often bring web users to low-quality anti-vaccine websites. We present a case study of a pro-vaccine information hub launched in 2011. Vaccines Today provides high-quality information about vaccines and diseases, expert interviews, answers to frequently asked questions, parent/patient stories and videos/infographics. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Instagram are used to share this content and to engage with various online audiences. This Commentary outlines what works in online communication about vaccines and offers proposals for improving the impact of online vaccine advocacy. The value of networking to boost visibility and search engine ranking is emphasised. Furthermore, we present the case for the sharing and application of best practice in online communication.

Knowing the scope of meningococcal disease in Latin America

[ABSTRACT]. Opportunities for strengthening surveillance of meningococcal disease exist between and within countries in Latin America. In August of 2015, a workshop was convened in the city of São Paulo, Brazil, to address the following objectives: 1) to review meningococcal disease burden and vaccine use in Latin America; 2) to evaluate the effectiveness of current meningococcal surveillance practices in the region; 3) to identify challenges to meningococcal surveillance in the region; and 4) to outline steps for strengthening meningococcal surveillance and disease control in the region. Based on the workshop’s discussions, recommendations for strengthening surveillance and controlling meningococcal disease in Latin America focus on improving: a) laboratory capabilities for diagnostic testing; b) communication regarding epidemiologic- and laboratory-based analyses; c) communication during outbreaks; d) monitoring of long-term disease outcomes; e) knowledge of vaccines against serogroup B disease; and f) criteria for defining and controlling meningococcal outbreaks. Overall, improving surveillance will help guide strategies for meningococcal disease prevention and control in Latin America.

[RESUMEN]. Existen distintas oportunidades para reforzar los procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica entre los países de América Latina y dentro de ellos. En agosto del 2015, se llevó a cabo un taller en la ciudad de São Paulo (Brasil) en el que se trataron los siguientes puntos: 1) examen de la carga de la enfermedad meningocócica y el uso de la vacuna en América Latina; 2) evaluación de la eficacia de los actuales procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica en la región; 3) especificación de los retos para la vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica en la región; y 4) definición de los pasos para fortalecer los procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica y el control de esta enfermedad en la región. Como resultado del taller se formularon recomendaciones para reforzar los procedimientos de vigilancia y control de la enfermedad meningocócica en América Latina que hacían hincapié en mejorar: a) las capacidades de laboratorio con respecto a las pruebas diagnósticas; b) la comunicación sobre los análisis epidemiológicos y de laboratorio; c) la comunicación durante los brotes; d) el seguimiento de las consecuencias de la enfermedad a largo plazo; e) el conocimiento sobre las vacunas contra la enfermedad causada por el serogrupo B; y f) los criterios para definir y controlar los brotes meningocócicos. En términos generales, la mejora de los procedimientos de vigilancia ayudará a delinear las estrategias para la prevención y el control de la enfermedad meningocócica en América Latina.

[RESUMO]. Existem oportunidades para o reforço da vigilância da doença meningocócica entre os países e em cada país na América Latina. Em agosto de 2015, foi realizado um seminário na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil, com os seguintes objetivos: 1) avaliar a carga da doença meningocócica e o uso da vacina na América Latina; 2) avaliar a eficácia das atuais práticas de vigilância da doença meningocócica na Região; 3) identificar os desafios para a vigilância meningocócica na Região e 4) definir medidas para reforçar a vigilância da doença meningocócica e o controle da doença na Região. Partindo dos debates realizados durante o seminário, foram feitas as seguintes recomendações para reforçar a vigilância e o controle da doença meningocócica na América Latina, dando-se ênfase a melhorar: a) a infraestrutura laboratorial para exames diagnósticos; b) a comunicação das análises epidemiológicas e laboratoriais; c) a comunicação nos surtos; d) o monitoramento dos desfechos da doença a longo prazo; e) o conhecimento sobre as vacinas contra o meningococo do sorogrupo B e f) os critérios para definir e controlar os surtos de doença meningocócica. Em geral, a melhoria da vigilância contribuirá para orientar as estratégias para prevenção e controle da doença meningocócica na América Latina.

Enhancing the role of vaccines in combatting antimicrobial resistance.

Interest in addressing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has grown recently but little effort has been made to consider how existing and new vaccines could impact on AMR. A 2017 Chatham House meeting considered the role of vaccines and how to demonstrate their value through their impact on AMR. Ways existing vaccines have reduced antibiotic prescribing and the prevalence of some resistant organisms were reviewed. Other new vaccines could have a similar impact. In gonorrhoea, where complete resistance has developed, vaccine may be the best option. Valuing the impact of vaccines on AMR was challenging: there were difficult methodological issues and a lack of data for modelling. A participant poll suggested priorities for accelerated vaccine development were tuberculosis, typhoid, influenza, RSV and gonorrhoea. More evidence is needed to convince policymakers but that vaccine development projects should be considered by funders on the same basis as those for new antibiotics or diagnostics.

Knowing the scope of meningococcal disease in Latin America.

Opportunities for strengthening surveillance of meningococcal disease exist between and within countries in Latin America. In August of 2015, a workshop was convened in the city of São Paulo, Brazil, to address the following objectives: 1) to review meningococcal disease burden and vaccine use in Latin America; 2) to evaluate the effectiveness of current meningococcal surveillance practices in the region; 3) to identify challenges to meningococcal surveillance in the region; and 4) to outline steps for strengthening meningococcal surveillance and disease control in the region. Based on the workshop's discussions, recommendations for strengthening surveillance and controlling meningococcal disease in Latin America focus on improving: a) laboratory capabilities for diagnostic testing; b) communication regarding epidemiologic- and laboratory-based analyses; c) communication during outbreaks; d) monitoring of long-term disease outcomes; e) knowledge of vaccines against serogroup B disease; and f) criteria for defining and controlling meningococcal outbreaks. Overall, improving surveillance will help guide strategies for meningococcal disease prevention and control in Latin America.

Existen distintas oportunidades para reforzar los procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica entre los países de América Latina y dentro de ellos. En agosto del 2015, se llevó a cabo un taller en la ciudad de São Paulo (Brasil) en el que se trataron los siguientes puntos: 1) examen de la carga de la enfermedad meningocócica y el uso de la vacuna en América Latina; 2) evaluación de la eficacia de los actuales procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica en la región; 3) especificación de los retos para la vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica en la región; y 4) definición de los pasos para fortalecer los procedimientos de vigilancia de la enfermedad meningocócica y el control de esta enfermedad en la región. Como resultado del taller se formularon recomendaciones para reforzar los procedimientos de vigilancia y control de la enfermedad meningocócica en América Latina que hacían hincapié en mejorar: a) las capacidades de laboratorio con respecto a las pruebas diagnósticas; b) la comunicación sobre los análisis epidemiológicos y de laboratorio; c) la comunicación durante los brotes; d) el seguimiento de las consecuencias de la enfermedad a largo plazo; e) el conocimiento sobre las vacunas contra la enfermedad causada por el serogrupo B; y f) los criterios para definir y controlar los brotes meningocócicos. En términos generales, la mejora de los procedimientos de vigilancia ayudará a delinear las estrategias para la prevención y el control de la enfermedad meningocócica en América Latina.

Existem oportunidades para o reforço da vigilância da doença meningocócica entre os países e em cada país na América Latina. Em agosto de 2015, foi realizado um seminário na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil, com os seguintes objetivos: 1) avaliar a carga da doença meningocócica e o uso da vacina na América Latina; 2) avaliar a eficácia das atuais práticas de vigilância da doença meningocócica na Região; 3) identificar os desafios para a vigilância meningocócica na Região e 4) definir medidas para reforçar a vigilância da doença meningocócica e o controle da doença na Região. Partindo dos debates realizados durante o seminário, foram feitas as seguintes recomendações para reforçar a vigilância e o controle da doença meningocócica na América Latina, dando-se ênfase a melhorar: a) a infraestrutura laboratorial para exames diagnósticos; b) a comunicação das análises epidemiológicas e laboratoriais; c) a comunicação nos surtos; d) o monitoramento dos desfechos da doença a longo prazo; e) o conhecimento sobre as vacinas contra o meningococo do sorogrupo B e f) os critérios para definir e controlar os surtos de doença meningocócica. Em geral, a melhoria da vigilância contribuirá para orientar as estratégias para prevenção e controle da doença meningocócica na América Latina.

Communicating the role and value of vaccine adjuvants.

Despite the inclusion of adjuvants in many routinely used vaccines to improve the immune response, their presence and role are neither clear in product details such as the packaging or in the Summaries of Product Characteristics, nor understood by health professionals or the public. For many vaccines the adjuvant may simply be described as 'Adsorbed' without clarification that the adsorbing onto a material such as aluminium hydroxide adjuvants the antigens. As many future vaccines are likely to be adjuvanted, the presence of adjuvants, either those used in existing vaccines or novel formulations, may raise public and professional concerns unless communication materials are prepared in advance to allay anxieties such as those that have arisen over some present vaccine ingredients such as thiomersal. This raises a dilemma about how active such communications should be: over-promotion of the presence of a new adjuvant may cause unneeded anxieties; under-promotion may raise concerns over concealment of information. Research is needed and appropriate communication materials should be prepared.

Translating vaccine policy into action: a report from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Consultation on the prevention of maternal and early infant influenza in resource-limited settings.

Immunization of pregnant women against influenza is a promising strategy to protect the mother, fetus, and young infant from influenza-related diseases. The burden of influenza during pregnancy, the vaccine immunogenicity during this period, and the robust influenza vaccine safety database underpin recommendations that all pregnant women receive the vaccine to decrease complications of influenza disease during their pregnancies. Recent data also support maternal immunization for the additional purpose of preventing disease in the infant during the first six months of life. In April 2012, the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) on Immunization recommended revisions to the WHO position paper on influenza vaccines. For the first time, SAGE recommended pregnant women should be made the highest priority for inactivated seasonal influenza vaccination. However, the variable maternal influenza vaccination coverage in countries with pre-existing maternal influenza vaccine recommendations underscores the need to understand and to address the discrepancy between recommendations and implementation success. We present the outcome of a multi-stakeholder expert consultation on inactivated influenza vaccination in pregnancy. The creation and implementation of vaccine policies and regulations require substantial resources and capacity. As with all public health interventions, the existence of perceived and real risks of vaccination will necessitate effective and transparent risk communication. Potential risk allocation and sharing mechanisms should be addressed by governments, vaccine manufacturers, and other stakeholders. In resource-limited settings, vaccine-related issues concerning supply, formulation, regulation, evidence evaluation, distribution, cost-utility, and post-marketing safety surveillance need to be addressed. Lessons can be learned from the Maternal and Neonatal Tetanus Elimination Initiative as well as efforts to increase vaccine coverage among pregnant women during the 2009 influenza pandemic. We conclude with an analysis of data gaps and necessary activities to facilitate implementation of maternal influenza immunization programs in resource-limited settings.

Tracking mothers' attitudes to MMR immunisation 1996-2006.

This paper presents the findings of surveys that have tracked mothers' attitudes towards MMR over the period 1996-2006. The main aim was to demonstrate how attitudes in relation to MMR have evolved over the last 10 years incorporating the periods of time before, during and after the height of the MMR controversy within the UK. MMR vaccine remains the number one 'top of mind' vaccination issue for parents. The proportion of parents believing MMR to be a greater risk than the diseases it protects against has fallen from 24% in 2002 to 14% in 2006. The proportion of 'hard-core rejectors' of MMR vaccine remains stable at 6%. There has been a gradual and sustained increase in the proportion of parents across all social groups saying MMR was completely safe/slight risk rising from 60% in 2002 to a current level of 74%. There now appears to be a sustained move away from fears over MMR safety and belief in the unfounded link to autism towards a more positive perception of the vaccine.

Development of immunization policy and its implementation in the United Kingdom.

The U.K. immunization program is managed through a tightly connected process that links the ways policy is developed, submitted to independent expert review and recommendation, adopted into strategy, and implemented into practice. There is one advisory body for immunization. Its recommendations, once accepted by government, are centrally funded, and vaccines are provided at no cost to recipients. Although the present system has worked well, changes in health care management at the peripheral level mean that the immunization program will need to adapt to retain the health gains achieved. Rates of vaccine-preventable disease are at historically low levels, although challenges related to costs and effectiveness remain.