Likelihood of hospitalization for a chronic respiratory condition following pediatric infection with enterovirus and rhinovirus strains.

Background: Rhino-enteroviruses, particularly enterovirus strain D68 (EV-D68), have been associated with severe respiratory distress in children. The goal of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of children with EV-D68 infection to that of children with other enterovirus / rhinovirus. Methods: Nasopharyngeal swabs from 174 children presenting with respiratory distress were tested by PCR for respiratory viruses. The primary outcome was diagnosis of a chronic respiratory condition within the follow-up period. Admission to intensive care, and length of stay were recorded. Odds ratios were determined using multinomial logistic regression. Results: During 5 years of follow-up, the crude odds of diagnosis with a chronic respiratory condition were significantly more likely in EV-D68 cases (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.02, 3.82), but failed to remain significant after adjusting for a past history of asthma. Upon admission for a primary concern of asthma, length of stay both in hospital and intensive care were significantly longer in EV-D68 cases (OR: 2.10 [95% CI: 1.56, 2.82, p < 0.001]) and (OR: 5.18 [95% CI: 1.90, 6.28, p < 0.001]), respectively. After adjustment for a history of asthma, EV-D68 cases had significantly longer length of stay in hospital, admitted for 1.94 days for each day that controls were admitted (95% CI: 1.40, 2.68). In admissions to intensive care, EV-D68 cases spent 2.74 days for each day of admission in controls (95% CI: 1.62, 4.97, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Ours is first study to assess prognostic respiratory outcomes of patients infected with EV-D68 in childhood. Our study finds that EV-D68 cases were significantly more likely be hospitalized for longer than other enterovirus/rhinovirus controls in subsequent admissions for respiratory distress. Need for intensive care was significantly longer in EV-D68 infections. Our next steps will be validation in a larger sample size.

Adjuvant-attenuated symptom severity of influenza infections in vaccinated children.

Background: Young children are at high risk for developing complications of influenza, as well as severe clinical presentation of disease. Vaccination provides direct protection and reduces symptom severity in breakthrough infections. We assessed whether adjuvanted trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine is associated with symptom severity in children who developed laboratory-confirmed influenza, as compared to children who received quadrivalent inactivated influenza. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial of influenza vaccines in Canadian Hutterite colonies was conducted from the 2016-2017 to the 2018-2019 influenza season. Children were vaccinated with either quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (QIV), or the MF59 adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV). We assessed children who developed PCR-confirmed influenza infection for symptom severity outcomes using multivariable generalized negative binomial regression. Results: Among vaccinated children, 49 infections were observed across 1779 person-days. Vaccine formulation (aTIV vs QIV) was not significantly associated with composite symptom outcomes, including total number of symptoms or total duration of symptom presentation (p > 0.05 for all outcomes). Receipt of aTIV vaccination was significantly associated with attenuation of fever, with an estimated 74% reduction in fever severity. In influenza A type infections, adjuvanted vaccination was significantly associated with reduced systemic symptoms (incidence rate ratios: 0.16, 95% confidence intervals: 0.03, 0.64, p = 0.01). No associations were observed between vaccine formulation and symptom severity in influenza B infections. Conclusions: In vaccinated children who develop an influenza infection, vaccine formulation was associated with attenuated fever severity, leading to reduced systemic symptoms. In influenza A infections, adjuvanted vaccination was significantly associated with reduced systemic symptoms. Conclusions: Clinical Trials Registry: NCT02871206.

Evaluating the relationship between myocarditis and mRNA vaccination.

INTRODUCTION: Inflammatory conditions affecting the heart and surrounding tissues have been recently reported following mRNA vaccination. Evaluating trends in the epidemiology of these events and possible mechanisms related to vaccination will enhance vaccine safety surveillance and inform best practices for future vaccine campaigns. AREAS COVERED: Epidemiology of the burden of vaccine-associated myocarditis are reviewed. Key summaries of available data from public health advisory bodies and vaccine safety surveillance databases are critically reviewed. The possible biological pathways for vaccine-associated heart inflammations are introduced. A critical synthesis of available information to inform vaccine recommendations and best practices is provided. The citations were selected by the authors based on PubMed searches of the literature, national vaccine safety surveillance databases and summaries from national public health bodies. EXPERT OPINION: Myocarditis may be associated with vaccination, through several biological mechanisms. Studies have shown that live viral vaccinations can act as a trigger for hypersensitivity inflammatory reactions, but further work is required to examine how the mRNA formulation may induce these autoimmune responses. Given that the risk of these adverse events is low, and the benefit of protection against disease is so great, the receipt of mRNA vaccines is recommended.

Safety and use of tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis-5 (Tdap5) vaccine during pregnancy: findings from 11 years of reporting to a pregnancy registry.

The "Adacel (Tdap5) Pregnancy Registry" was used to identify 1182 women who received the tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis [5 components] (Tdap5) vaccine during pregnancy from 2005 to 2016. To evaluate the safety and use of prenatal Tdap5, we calculated the rate of maternal, obstetrical, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes following Tdap5 pregnancy exposure and assessed vaccine uptake by year and trimester of exposure. The most commonly reported maternal adverse events included injection site reactions (2.6%; 95% Confidence Interval 1.8%, 3.7%), nervous system events (1.3%; 0.8%, 2.1%) and musculoskeletal events (1.1%; 0.6%, 1.9%). The most commonly reported complications of pregnancy were hypertension/preeclampsia (5.5%; 3.3%, 8.9%) and gestational diabetes (2.5%; 1.1%, 5.3%), while those for labor and delivery were premature labor (2.9%; 1.4%, 5.7%) and premature membrane rupture (1.5%; 0.4%, 3.8%). These rates were similar to, or lower than those reported for the general population of pregnant women. Among pregnancies with known birth outcomes (N = 275), 90.4% (86.2%, 93.4%) resulted in a live birth, 5.9% (3.6%, 9.5%) in spontaneous abortion, 3.0% (1.4%, 5.8%) in stillbirth, and 0.7% (0.0%, 2.8%) in ectopic pregnancies. Most newborns had normal APGAR scores and birth weights (98.1% and 93.0%, respectively), and only two reported a congenital anomaly (0.7%; 0.0%, 2.8%). An influx of reports in 2012 with third trimester Tdap5 exposure coincided with the 2012 updated Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations. This analysis did not identify any safety concerns across the continuum of maternal, obstetrical, pregnancy, and neonatal outcomes in women who received Tdap5 vaccination during pregnancy.

Antibody and cellular therapies for treatment of covid-19: a living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of antiviral antibody therapies and blood products for the treatment of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis, with pairwise meta-analysis for outcomes with insufficient data. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, and six Chinese databases (up to 21 July 2021). STUDY SELECTION: Trials randomising people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 to antiviral antibody therapies, blood products, or standard care or placebo. Paired reviewers determined eligibility of trials independently and in duplicate. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, we performed random effects bayesian meta-analysis, including network meta-analysis for outcomes with sufficient data. We assessed risk of bias using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. We meta-analysed interventions with ≥100 patients randomised or ≥20 events per treatment arm. RESULTS: As of 21 July 2021, we identified 47 trials evaluating convalescent plasma (21 trials), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) (5 trials), umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (5 trials), bamlanivimab (4 trials), casirivimab-imdevimab (4 trials), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (2 trials), control plasma (2 trials), peripheral blood non-haematopoietic enriched stem cells (2 trials), sotrovimab (1 trial), anti-SARS-CoV-2 IVIg (1 trial), therapeutic plasma exchange (1 trial), XAV-19 polyclonal antibody (1 trial), CT-P59 monoclonal antibody (1 trial) and INM005 polyclonal antibody (1 trial) for the treatment of covid-19. Patients with non-severe disease randomised to antiviral monoclonal antibodies had lower risk of hospitalisation than those who received placebo: casirivimab-imdevimab (odds ratio (OR) 0.29 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.47); risk difference (RD) -4.2%; moderate certainty), bamlanivimab (OR 0.24 (0.06 to 0.86); RD -4.1%; low certainty), bamlanivimab-etesevimab (OR 0.31 (0.11 to 0.81); RD -3.8%; low certainty), and sotrovimab (OR 0.17 (0.04 to 0.57); RD -4.8%; low certainty). They did not have an important impact on any other outcome. There was no notable difference between monoclonal antibodies. No other intervention had any meaningful effect on any outcome in patients with non-severe covid-19. No intervention, including antiviral antibodies, had an important impact on any outcome in patients with severe or critical covid-19, except casirivimab-imdevimab, which may reduce mortality in patients who are seronegative. CONCLUSION: In patients with non-severe covid-19, casirivimab-imdevimab probably reduces hospitalisation; bamlanivimab-etesevimab, bamlanivimab, and sotrovimab may reduce hospitalisation. Convalescent plasma, IVIg, and other antibody and cellular interventions may not confer any meaningful benefit. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a data supplement. FUNDING: This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant CIHR- IRSC:0579001321). READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Interim updates and additional study data will be posted on our website (www.covid19lnma.com).

Prophylaxis against covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

UPDATES: This is the second version (first update) of the living systematic review, replacing the previous version (available as a data supplement). When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity. OBJECTIVE: To determine and compare the effects of drug prophylaxis on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA). DATA SOURCES: World Health Organization covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature to 4 March 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised trials in which people at risk of covid-19 were allocated to prophylaxis or no prophylaxis (standard care or placebo). Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, we conducted random-effects bayesian network meta-analysis. We assessed risk of bias of the included studies using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: The second iteration of this living NMA includes 32 randomised trials which enrolled 25 147 participants and addressed 21 different prophylactic drugs; adding 21 trials (66%), 18 162 participants (75%) and 16 (76%) prophylactic drugs. Of the 16 prophylactic drugs analysed, none provided convincing evidence of a reduction in the risk of laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. For admission to hospital and mortality outcomes, no prophylactic drug proved different than standard care or placebo. Hydroxychloroquine and vitamin C combined with zinc probably increase the risk of adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation­risk difference for hydroxychloroquine (RD) 6 more per 1000 (95% credible interval (CrI) 2 more to 10 more); for vitamin C combined with zinc, RD 69 more per 1000 (47 more to 90 more), moderate certainty evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Much of the evidence remains very low certainty and we therefore anticipate future studies evaluating drugs for prophylaxis may change the results for SARS-CoV-2 infection, admission to hospital and mortality outcomes. Both hydroxychloroquine and vitamin C combined with zinc probably increase adverse effects. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol established a priori is included as a supplement. FUNDING: This study was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (grant CIHR-IRSC:0579001321).

Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). DESIGN: Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 3 December 2021 and six additional Chinese databases up to 20 February 2021. Studies identified as of 1 December 2021 were included in the analysis. STUDY SELECTION: Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. METHODS: After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. RESULTS: 463 trials enrolling 166 581 patients were included; 267 (57.7%) trials and 89 814 (53.9%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 265 (57.2%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, three drugs reduced mortality in patients with mostly severe disease with at least moderate certainty: systemic corticosteroids (risk difference 23 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 40 fewer to 7 fewer, moderate certainty), interleukin-6 receptor antagonists when given with corticosteroids (23 fewer per 1000, 36 fewer to 7 fewer, moderate certainty), and Janus kinase inhibitors (44 fewer per 1000, 64 fewer to 20 fewer, high certainty). Compared with standard care, two drugs probably reduce hospital admission in patients with non-severe disease: nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (36 fewer per 1000, 41 fewer to 26 fewer, moderate certainty) and molnupiravir (19 fewer per 1000, 29 fewer to 5 fewer, moderate certainty). Remdesivir may reduce hospital admission (29 fewer per 1000, 40 fewer to 6 fewer, low certainty). Only molnupiravir had at least moderate quality evidence of a reduction in time to symptom resolution (3.3 days fewer, 4.8 fewer to 1.6 fewer, moderate certainty); several others showed a possible benefit. Several drugs may increase the risk of adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation; hydroxychloroquine probably increases the risk of mechanical ventilation (moderate certainty). CONCLUSION: Corticosteroids, interleukin-6 receptor antagonists, and Janus kinase inhibitors probably reduce mortality and confer other important benefits in patients with severe covid-19. Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir probably reduce admission to hospital in patients with non-severe covid-19. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: This review was not registered. The protocol is publicly available in the supplementary material. READERS' NOTE: This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This is the fifth version of the original article published on 30 July 2020 (BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.

Quantifying outcome misclassification in multi-database studies: The case study of pertussis in the ADVANCE project.

BACKGROUND: The Accelerated Development of VAccine beNefit-risk Collaboration in Europe (ADVANCE) is a public-private collaboration aiming to develop and test a system for rapid benefit-risk (B/R) monitoring of vaccines using European healthcare databases. Event misclassification can result in biased estimates. Using different algorithms for identifying cases of Bordetella pertussis (BorPer) infection as a test case, we aimed to describe a strategy to quantify event misclassification, when manual chart review is not feasible. METHODS: Four participating databases retrieved data from primary care (PC) setting: BIFAP: (Spain), THIN and RCGP RSC (UK) and PEDIANET (Italy); SIDIAP (Spain) retrieved data from both PC and hospital settings. BorPer algorithms were defined by healthcare setting, data domain (diagnoses, drugs, or laboratory tests) and concept sets (specific or unspecified pertussis). Algorithm- and database-specific BorPer incidence rates (IRs) were estimated in children aged 0-14 years enrolled in 2012 and 2014 and followed up until the end of each calendar year and compared with IRs of confirmed pertussis from the ECDC surveillance system (TESSy). Novel formulas were used to approximate validity indices, based on a small set of assumptions. They were applied to approximately estimate positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity in SIDIAP. RESULTS: The number of cases and the estimated BorPer IRs per 100,000 person-years in PC, using data representing 3,173,268 person-years, were 0 (IR = 0.0), 21 (IR = 4.3), 21 (IR = 5.1), 79 (IR = 5.7), and 2 (IR = 2.3) in BIFAP, SIDIAP, THIN, RCGP RSC and PEDIANET respectively. The IRs for combined specific/unspecified pertussis were higher than TESSy, suggesting that some false positives had been included. In SIDIAP the estimated IR was 45.0 when discharge diagnoses were included. The sensitivity and PPV of combined PC specific and unspecific diagnoses for BorPer cases in SIDIAP were approximately 85% and 72%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Retrieving BorPer cases using only specific concepts has low sensitivity in PC databases, while including cases retrieved by unspecified concepts introduces false positives, which were approximately estimated to be 28% in one database. The share of cases that cannot be retrieved from a PC database because they are only seen in hospital was approximately estimated to be 15% in one database. This study demonstrated that quantifying the impact of different event-finding algorithms across databases and benchmarking with disease surveillance data can provide approximate estimates of algorithm validity.

Safety of Maternal Immunization Against Pertussis: A Systematic Review.

The WHO recommends vaccination of all children against pertussis. However, newborn infants remain vulnerable to infection. Pertussis vaccination during pregnancy has been introduced in several countries to protect newborns via transplacental transfer of maternal pertussis antibodies to the infant. We reviewed the impact of maternal pertussis vaccination on the health of pregnant women, the developing fetus, and health of the newborn. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus (Elsevier), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ProQuest, and Science Direct to identify studies that assessed the safety of maternal pertussis vaccination. Twenty-seven English language publications published between January 1995 and December 2018 were included in this review. Pregnant women receiving pertussis vaccines did not have increased rates of systemic or local reactions. There were no safety concerns with repeat vaccination with other tetanus-containing vaccines or their concomitant administration with influenza vaccines. Maternal pertussis vaccination did not adversely affect pregnancy, birth or neonatal outcomes. This review confirms the safety of maternal pertussis vaccination during pregnancy. FUNDING: Sanofi Pasteur. Plain language summary available for this article.

Immunological and Clinical Benefits of Maternal Immunization Against Pertussis: A Systematic Review.

Infants are vulnerable to pertussis infection particularly before initiation of pertussis vaccination. Maternal pertussis vaccination during pregnancy has been introduced in a number of countries in order to confer on young infants indirect protection from the disease through transplacental transfer of maternal antibodies. We reviewed the evidence on the immunogenicity and efficacy of maternal pertussis vaccination during pregnancy. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ProQuest, and Science Direct was undertaken to identify studies published between January 1995 and December 2018. This review was not specific to any particular pertussis vaccine but included applicable data on available pertussis vaccines administered to pregnant women. The search identified 40 publications for inclusion in this review. Vaccination during pregnancy elicited robust maternal immune responses against all vaccine antigens and resulted in high placental transfer of pertussis antibodies to the infant that persisted well beyond delivery. Vaccination during the second or early third trimesters was considered ideal for antibody quantity and functionality. Although blunting of immune responses to some antigens in the primary immunization series was documented in neonates born to women vaccinated during pregnancy, there was no apparent adverse effect on vaccine efficacy. Multiple studies conducted in diverse settings have confirmed the effectiveness of maternal pertussis vaccination during pregnancy in preventing pertussis in infants prior to receipt of their first primary vaccine dose and beyond. These findings collectively underscore the value of maternal pertussis vaccination during pregnancy in protecting vulnerable infants too young to be vaccinated.Funding Sanofi Pasteur.Plain Language Summary Plain language summary available for this article.

Determining optimal community protection strategies for the influenza vaccine.

Introduction: Seasonal influenza poses a major risk to the health of the population. Optimal strategies for influenza vaccination can help to reduce this risk. Areas covered: Systematic evaluations of the burden of influenza are first reviewed. Key meta-analysis, randomized trials, and observational studies are critically reviewed to provide the best estimates of the efficacy of influenza vaccine. The concept of herd effect is first introduced and this is followed by the rationale and the evidence to support herd effect that can be provided with strategic use of influenza vaccination in populations. Challenges including the effect of repeated influenza vaccination and vaccine hesitancy are reviewed. The citations were selected by the authors based on PubMed searches of the literature. Expert opinion: Efforts to develop new vaccines, including a universal vaccine, offer the best prospects for improved herd effect. Increasing uptake in new populations can increase likelihood of a herd effect.