Interim 2023/2024 Season Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Primary and Secondary Care in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: We report 2023/2024 season interim influenza vaccine effectiveness for three studies, namely, primary care in Great Britain, hospital settings in Scotland and hospital settings in England. METHODS: A test negative design was used to estimate vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: Estimated vaccine effectiveness against all influenzas ranged from 63% (95% confidence interval 46 to 75%) to 65% (41 to 79%) among children aged 2-17, from 36% (20 to 49%) to 55% (43 to 65%) among adults 18-64 and from 40% (29 to 50%) to 55% (32 to 70%) among adults aged 65 and over. CONCLUSIONS: During a period of co-circulation of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) in the United Kingdom, evidence for effectiveness of the influenza vaccine in both children and adults was found.

End of 2022/23 Season Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in Primary Care in Great Britain.

BACKGROUND: The 2022/23 influenza season in the United Kingdom saw the return of influenza to prepandemic levels following two seasons with low influenza activity. The early season was dominated by A(H3N2), with cocirculation of A(H1N1), reaching a peak late December 2022, while influenza B circulated at low levels during the latter part of the season. From September to March 2022/23, influenza vaccines were offered, free of charge, to all aged 2-13 (and 14-15 in Scotland and Wales), adults up to 49 years of age with clinical risk conditions and adults aged 50 and above across the mainland United Kingdom. METHODS: End-of-season adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates against sentinel primary-care attendance for influenza-like illness, where influenza infection was laboratory confirmed, were calculated using the test negative design, adjusting for potential confounders. METHODS: Results In the mainland United Kingdom, end-of-season VE against all laboratory-confirmed influenza for all those > 65 years of age, most of whom received adjuvanted quadrivalent vaccines, was 30% (95% CI: -6% to 54%). VE for those aged 18-64, who largely received cell-based vaccines, was 47% (95% CI: 37%-56%). Overall VE for 2-17 year olds, predominantly receiving live attenuated vaccines, was 66% (95% CI: 53%-76%). CONCLUSION: The paper provides evidence of moderate influenza VE in 2022/23.

Postpandemic Sentinel Surveillance of Respiratory Diseases in the Context of the World Health Organization Mosaic Framework: Protocol for a Development and Evaluation Study Involving the English Primary Care Network 2023-2024.

BACKGROUND: Prepandemic sentinel surveillance focused on improved management of winter pressures, with influenza-like illness (ILI) being the key clinical indicator. The World Health Organization (WHO) global standards for influenza surveillance include monitoring acute respiratory infection (ARI) and ILI. The WHO's mosaic framework recommends that the surveillance strategies of countries include the virological monitoring of respiratory viruses with pandemic potential such as influenza. The Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioner Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) in collaboration with the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has provided sentinel surveillance since 1967, including virology since 1993. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe the RSC's plans for sentinel surveillance in the 2023-2024 season and evaluate these plans against the WHO mosaic framework. METHODS: Our approach, which includes patient and public involvement, contributes to surveillance objectives across all 3 domains of the mosaic framework. We will generate an ARI phenotype to enable reporting of this indicator in addition to ILI. These data will support UKHSA's sentinel surveillance, including vaccine effectiveness and burden of disease studies. The panel of virology tests analyzed in UKHSA's reference laboratory will remain unchanged, with additional plans for point-of-care testing, pneumococcus testing, and asymptomatic screening. Our sampling framework for serological surveillance will provide greater representativeness and more samples from younger people. We will create a biomedical resource that enables linkage between clinical data held in the RSC and virology data, including sequencing data, held by the UKHSA. We describe the governance framework for the RSC. RESULTS: We are co-designing our communication about data sharing and sampling, contextualized by the mosaic framework, with national and general practice patient and public involvement groups. We present our ARI digital phenotype and the key data RSC network members are requested to include in computerized medical records. We will share data with the UKHSA to report vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19 and influenza, assess the disease burden of respiratory syncytial virus, and perform syndromic surveillance. Virological surveillance will include COVID-19, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, and other common respiratory viruses. We plan to pilot point-of-care testing for group A streptococcus, urine tests for pneumococcus, and asymptomatic testing. We will integrate test requests and results with the laboratory-computerized medical record system. A biomedical resource will enable research linking clinical data to virology data. The legal basis for the RSC's pseudonymized data extract is The Health Service (Control of Patient Information) Regulations 2002, and all nonsurveillance uses require research ethics approval. CONCLUSIONS: The RSC extended its surveillance activities to meet more but not all of the mosaic framework's objectives. We have introduced an ARI indicator. We seek to expand our surveillance scope and could do more around transmissibility and the benefits and risks of nonvaccine therapies.

Disparities in COVID-19 mortality amongst the immunosuppressed: A systematic review and meta-analysis for enhanced disease surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Effective disease surveillance, including that for COVID-19, is compromised without a standardised method for categorising the immunosuppressed as a clinical risk group. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate whether excess COVID-associated mortality compared to the immunocompetent could meaningfully subdivide the immunosuppressed. Our study adhered to UK Immunisation against infectious disease (Green Book) criteria for defining and categorising immunosuppression. Using OVID (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Transplant Library, and Global Health), PubMed, and Google Scholar, we examined relevant literature between the entirety of 2020 and 2022. We selected for cohort studies that provided mortality data for immunosuppressed subgroups and immunocompetent comparators. Meta-analyses, grey literature and any original works that failed to provide comparator data or reported all-cause or paediatric outcomes were excluded. Odds Ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of COVID-19 mortality were meta-analysed by immunosuppressed category and subcategory. Subgroup analyses differentiated estimates by effect measure, country income, study setting, level of adjustment, use of matching and publication year. Study screening, extraction and bias assessment were performed blinded and independently by two researchers; conflicts were resolved with the oversight of a third researcher. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022360755. FINDINGS: We identified 99 unique studies, incorporating data from 1,542,097 and 56,248,181 unique immunosuppressed and immunocompetent patients with COVID-19 infection, respectively. Compared to immunocompetent people (pooled OR, 95%CI), solid organ transplants (2.12, 1.50-2.99) and malignancy (2.02, 1.69-2.42) patients had a very high risk of COVID-19 mortality. Patients with rheumatological conditions (1.28, 1.13-1.45) and HIV (1.20, 1.05-1.36) had just slightly higher risks than the immunocompetent baseline. Case type, setting income and mortality data matching and adjustment were significant modifiers of excess immunosuppressed mortality for some immunosuppressed subgroups. INTERPRETATION: Excess COVID-associated mortality among the immunosuppressed compared to the immunocompetent was seen to vary significantly across subgroups. This novel means of subdivision has prospective benefit for targeting patient triage, shielding and vaccination policies during periods of high disease transmission.

Influenza vaccination during the 2021/22 season: A data-linkage test-negative case-control study of effectiveness against influenza requiring emergency care in England and serological analysis of primary care patients.

We present England 2021/22 end-of-season adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) against laboratory confirmed influenza related emergency care use in children aged 1-17 and in adults aged 50+, and serological findings in vaccinated vs unvaccinated adults by hemagglutination inhibition assay. Influenza vaccination has been routinely offered to all children aged 2-10 years and adults aged 65 years + in England. In 2021/22, the offer was extended to children to age 15 years, and adults aged 50-64 years. Influenza activity rose during the latter half of the 2021/22 season, while remaining comparatively low due to COVID-19 pandemic control measures. Influenza A(H3N2) strains predominated. A test negative design was used to estimate aVE by vaccine type. Cases and controls were identified within a sentinel laboratory surveillance system. Vaccine histories were obtained from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS), an influenza and COVID-19 vaccine registry. These were linked to emergency department presentations (excluding accidents) with respiratory swabbing ≤ 14 days before or ≤ 7 days after presentation. Amongst adults, 423 positive and 32,917 negative samples were eligible for inclusion, and 145 positive and 6,438 negative samples among children. Those admitted to hospital were further identified. In serology against the circulating A(H3N2) A/Bangladesh/4005/2020-like strain, 61 % of current season adult vaccinees had titres ≥ 1:40 compared to 17 % of those unvaccinated in 2020/21 or 2021/22 (p < 0.001). We found good protection from influenza vaccination against influenza requiring emergency care in children (72.7 % [95 % CI 52.7, 84.3 %]) and modest effectiveness in adults (26.1 % [95 % CI 4.5, 42.8 %]). Adult VE was higher for A(H1N1) (81 % [95 % CI 50, 93 %]) than A(H3N2) (33 % [95 % CI 6, 53 %]). Consistent protection was observable across preschool, primary and secondary school aged children. Imperfect test specificity combined with very low prevalence may have biased estimates towards null. With limited influenza circulation, the study could not determine differences by vaccine types.

Erratum to "Risk of cardiac arrhythmia and cardiac arrest after primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination in England: A self-controlled case series analysis" [Vaccine: X 15 (2023) 100418].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.jvacx.2023.100418.].

Risk of death following chikungunya virus disease in the 100 Million Brazilian Cohort, 2015-18: a matched cohort study and self-controlled case series.

BACKGROUND: Chikungunya virus outbreaks have been associated with excess deaths at the ecological level. Previous studies have assessed the risk factors for severe versus mild chikungunya virus disease. However, the risk of death following chikungunya virus disease compared with the risk of death in individuals without the disease remains unexplored. We aimed to investigate the risk of death in the 2 years following chikungunya virus disease. METHODS: We used a population-based cohort study and a self-controlled case series to estimate mortality risks associated with chikungunya virus disease between Jan 1, 2015, and Dec 31, 2018, in Brazil. The dataset was created by linking national databases for social programmes, notifiable diseases, and mortality. For the matched cohort design, individuals with chikungunya virus disease recorded between Jan 1, 2015, and Dec 31, 2018, were considered as exposed and those who were arbovirus disease-free and alive during the study period were considered as unexposed. For the self-controlled case series, we included all deaths from individuals with a chikungunya virus disease record, and each individual acted as their own control according to different study periods relative to the date of disease. The primary outcome was all-cause natural mortality up to 728 days after onset of chikungunya virus disease symptoms, and secondary outcomes were cause-specific deaths, including ischaemic heart diseases, diabetes, and cerebrovascular diseases. FINDINGS: In the matched cohort study, we included 143 787 individuals with chikungunya virus disease who were matched, at the day of symptom onset, to unexposed individuals using sociodemographic factors. The incidence rate ratio (IRR) of death within 7 days of chikungunya symptom onset was 8·40 (95% CI 4·83-20·09) as compared with the unexposed group and decreased to 2·26 (1·50-3·77) at 57-84 days and 1·05 (0·82-1·35) at 85-168 days, with IRR close to 1 and wide CI in the subsequent periods. For the secondary outcomes, the IRR of deaths within 28 days after disease onset were: 1·80 (0·58-7·00) for cerebrovascular diseases, 3·75 (1·33-17·00) for diabetes, and 3·67 (1·25-14·00) for ischaemic heart disease, and there was no evidence of increased risk in the subsequent periods. For the self-controlled case series study, 1933 individuals died after having had chikungunya virus disease and were included in the analysis. The IRR of all-cause natural death within 7 days of symptom onset of chikungunya virus disease was 8·75 (7·18-10·66) and decreased to 1·59 (1·26-2·00) at 57-84 days and 1·09 (0·92-1·29) at 85-168 days. For the secondary outcomes, the IRRs of deaths within 28 days after disease onset were: 2·73 (1·50-4·96) for cerebrovascular diseases, 8·43 (5·00-14·21) for diabetes, and 2·38 (1·33-4·26) for ischaemic heart disease, and there was no evidence of increased risk at 85-168 days. INTERPRETATION: Chikungunya virus disease is associated with an increased risk of death for up to 84 days after symptom onset, including deaths from cerebrovascular diseases, ischaemic heart diseases, and diabetes. This study highlights the need for equitable access to approved vaccines and effective anti-chikungunya virus therapeutics and reinforces the importance of robust vector-control efforts to reduce viral transmission. FUNDING: Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado da Bahia, Wellcome Trust, and UK Medical Research Council. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Risk of cardiac arrhythmia and cardiac arrest after primary and booster COVID-19 vaccination in England: A self-controlled case series analysis.

Background: Various cardiac arrhythmias have been reported after COVID-19 infection and vaccination. We assessed the risk after primary immunisation with the ChAdOx1 adenovirus vectored vaccine, and primary and booster immunisation with an mRNA vaccine in 40 million vaccinated adults with 121 million doses (33.9% ChAdOx1 and 66.1% mRNA) in England. Methods: Hospital admissions for a cardiac arrhythmia and emergency care attendance for a cardiac arrest in individuals aged 18 years and older on the 31st March 2021 were linked to the national COVID-19 immunisation register. The incidence of events 1-14 and 15-28 days after vaccination relative to a post-vaccination control period was estimated using the self-controlled case series method modified for fatal events. Outcomes were stratified by arrhythmia type, vaccine type, age group and dose number (up to five). Elevated relative incidence (RI) estimates with p < 0.001 were considered strong evidence of an association. Findings: There was an increased risk of admission for arrhythmia events that were largely palpitations without myocarditis within 14 days of a second priming dose of an mRNA vaccine in 18-49 year olds with an RI of 1.66 (95 % confidence interval 1.47,1.86) for BNT162b2 and 3.75 (2.52,5.57) for mRNA-1273 (p < 0.001) and also after a first booster dose, 1.34 (1.17,1.53) and 1.75 (1.43,2.15) respectively (p < 0.001). No other cardiac arrhythmia, including cardiac arrest, showed an elevated incidence within 28 days of vaccination for any dose, age group or vaccine type. In contrast the risk of a cardiac arrhythmia of all types, including a cardiac arrest, was consistently elevated in those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Interpretation: Our study provides reassuring evidence of the safety of the ChAdOx1 and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines with respect to serious cardiac arrhythmias and of the favourable risk benefit of mRNA booster vaccination.

COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation and death of people in clinical risk groups during the Delta variant period: English primary care network cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to be highly effective against hospitalisation and death following COVID-19 infection. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness estimates against severe endpoints among individuals with clinical conditions that place them at increased risk of critical disease are limited. METHODS: We used English primary care medical record data from the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners Research and Surveillance Centre sentinel network (N > 18 million). Data were linked to the National Immunisation Management Service database, Second Generation Surveillance System for virology test data, Hospital Episode Statistics, and death registry data. We estimated adjusted vaccine effectiveness (aVE) against COVID-19 infection followed by hospitalisation and death among individuals in specific clinical risk groups using a cohort design during the delta-dominant period. We also report mortality statistics and results from our antibody surveillance in this population. FINDINGS: aVE against severe endpoints was high, 14-69d following a third dose aVE was 96.4% (95.1%-97.4%) and 97.9% (97.2%-98.4%) for clinically vulnerable people given a Vaxzevria and Comirnaty primary course respectively. Lower aVE was observed in the immunosuppressed group: 88.6% (79.1%-93.8%) and 91.9% (85.9%-95.4%) for Vaxzevria and Comirnaty respectively. Antibody levels were significantly lower among the immunosuppressed group than those not in this risk group across all vaccination types and doses. The standardised case fatality rate within 28 days of a positive test was 3.9/1000 in people not in risk groups, compared to 12.8/1000 in clinical risk groups. Waning aVE with time since 2nd dose was also demonstrated, for example, Comirnaty aVE against hospitalisation reduced from 96.0% (95.1-96.7%) 14-69days post-dose 2-82.9% (81.4-84.2%) 182days+ post-dose 2. INTERPRETATION: In all clinical risk groups high levels of vaccine effectiveness against severe endpoints were seen. Reduced vaccine effectiveness was noted among the immunosuppressed group.

Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis after a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine booster and after COVID-19 in those with and without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection: A self-controlled case series analysis in England.

BACKGROUND: An increased risk of myocarditis or pericarditis after priming with mRNA Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines has been shown but information on the risk post-booster is limited. With the now high prevalence of prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, we assessed the effect of prior infection on the vaccine risk and the risk from COVID-19 reinfection. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a self-controlled case series analysis of hospital admissions for myocarditis or pericarditis in England between 22 February 2021 and 6 February 2022 in the 50 million individuals eligible to receive the adenovirus-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1-S) for priming or an mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) for priming or boosting. Myocarditis and pericarditis admissions were extracted from the Secondary Uses Service (SUS) database in England and vaccination histories from the National Immunisation Management System (NIMS); prior infections were obtained from the UK Health Security Agency's Second-Generation Surveillance Systems. The relative incidence (RI) of admission within 0 to 6 and 7 to 14 days of vaccination compared with periods outside these risk windows stratified by age, dose, and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection for individuals aged 12 to 101 years was estimated. The RI within 27 days of an infection was assessed in the same model. There were 2,284 admissions for myocarditis and 1,651 for pericarditis in the study period. Elevated RIs were only observed in 16- to 39-year-olds 0 to 6 days postvaccination, mainly in males for myocarditis. Both mRNA vaccines showed elevated RIs after first, second, and third doses with the highest RIs after a second dose 5.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) [3.81, 7.48]; p < 0.001) for BNT162b2 and 56.48 (95% CI [33.95, 93.97]; p < 0.001) for mRNA-1273 compared with 4.38 (95% CI [2.59, 7.38]; p < 0.001) and 7.88 (95% CI [4.02, 15.44]; p < 0.001), respectively, after a third dose. For ChAdOx1-S, an elevated RI was only observed after a first dose, RI 5.23 (95% CI [2.48, 11.01]; p < 0.001). An elevated risk of admission for pericarditis was only observed 0 to 6 days after a second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine in 16 to 39 year olds, RI 4.84 (95% CI [1.62, 14.01]; p = 0.004). RIs were lower in those with a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection than in those without, 2.47 (95% CI [1.32,4.63]; p = 0.005) versus 4.45 (95% [3.12, 6.34]; p = 0.001) after a second BNT162b2 dose, and 19.07 (95% CI [8.62, 42.19]; p < 0.001) versus 37.2 (95% CI [22.18, 62.38]; p < 0.001) for mRNA-1273 (myocarditis and pericarditis outcomes combined). RIs 1 to 27 days postinfection were elevated in all ages and were marginally lower for breakthrough infections, 2.33 (95% CI [1.96, 2.76]; p < 0.001) compared with 3.32 (95% CI [2.54, 4.33]; p < 0.001) in vaccine-naïve individuals respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We observed an increased risk of myocarditis within the first week after priming and booster doses of mRNA vaccines, predominantly in males under 40 years with the highest risks after a second dose. The risk difference between the second and the third doses was particularly marked for the mRNA-1273 vaccine that contains half the amount of mRNA when used for boosting than priming. The lower risk in those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and lack of an enhanced effect post-booster, does not suggest a spike-directed immune mechanism. Research to understand the mechanism of vaccine-associated myocarditis and to document the risk with bivalent mRNA vaccines is warranted.

Interim 2022/23 influenza vaccine effectiveness: six European studies, October 2022 to January 2023.

BackgroundBetween October 2022 and January 2023, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B/Victoria viruses circulated in Europe with different influenza (sub)types dominating in different areas.AimTo provide interim 2022/23 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from six European studies, covering 16 countries in primary care, emergency care and hospital inpatient settings.MethodsAll studies used the test-negative design, but with differences in other study characteristics, such as data sources, patient selection, case definitions and included age groups. Overall and influenza (sub)type-specific VE was estimated for each study using logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders.ResultsThere were 20,477 influenza cases recruited across the six studies, of which 16,589 (81%) were influenza A. Among all ages and settings, VE against influenza A ranged from 27 to 44%. Against A(H1N1)pdm09 (all ages and settings), VE point estimates ranged from 28% to 46%, higher among children (< 18 years) at 49-77%. Against A(H3N2), overall VE ranged from 2% to 44%, also higher among children (62-70%). Against influenza B/Victoria, overall and age-specific VE were ≥ 50% (87-95% among children < 18 years).ConclusionsInterim results from six European studies during the 2022/23 influenza season indicate a ≥ 27% and ≥ 50% reduction in disease occurrence among all-age influenza vaccine recipients for influenza A and B, respectively, with higher reductions among children. Genetic virus characterisation results and end-of-season VE estimates will contribute to greater understanding of differences in influenza (sub)type-specific results across studies.

Development of a modified Cambridge Multimorbidity Score for use with SNOMED CT: an observational English primary care sentinel network study.

BACKGROUND: People with multiple health conditions are more likely to have poorer health outcomes and greater care and service needs; a reliable measure of multimorbidity would inform management strategies and resource allocation. AIM: To develop and validate a modified version of the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score in an extended age range, using clinical terms that are routinely used in electronic health records across the world (Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms, SNOMED CT). DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational study using diagnosis and prescriptions data from an English primary care sentinel surveillance network between 2014 and 2019. METHOD: In this study new variables describing 37 health conditions were curated and the associations modelled between these and 1-year mortality risk using the Cox proportional hazard model in a development dataset (n = 300 000). Two simplified models were then developed - a 20-condition model as per the original Cambridge Multimorbidity Score and a variable reduction model using backward elimination with Akaike information criterion as the stopping criterion. The results were compared and validated for 1-year mortality in a synchronous validation dataset (n = 150 000), and for 1-year and 5-year mortality in an asynchronous validation dataset (n = 150 000). RESULTS: The final variable reduction model retained 21 conditions, and the conditions mostly overlapped with those in the 20-condition model. The model performed similarly to the 37- and 20-condition models, showing high discrimination and good calibration following recalibration. CONCLUSION: This modified version of the Cambridge Multimorbidity Score allows reliable estimation using clinical terms that can be applied internationally across multiple healthcare settings.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 Omicron Variant in Solid Organ and Islet Transplant Recipients in England: A National Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) B.1.1.529 Omicron variant in immunosuppressed solid organ and islet transplant (SOT) recipients is unclear. METHODS: National registries in England were linked to identify SARS-CoV-2 positive tests, noninjury hospitalization within 14 d, and deaths within 28 d between December 7, 2020, and March 31, 2022 in adult SOT recipients. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for infection, and hospitalization or death, were adjusted for recipient demographics and calendar month for the Omicron-dominant period (December 20, 2021, to March 31, 2022). Mortality risk following SARS-CoV-2 infection was adjusted for recipient demographics and dominant variant using a Cox proportional-hazards model for the entire time period. RESULTS: During the Omicron-dominant period, infection IRRs (95% confidence intervals) were higher in those receiving 2, 3, and 4 vaccine doses than in unvaccinated patients (1.25 [1.08-1.45], 1.46 [1.28-1.67], and 1.79 [1.54-2.06], respectively). However, hospitalization or death IRRs during this period were lower in those receiving 3 or 4 vaccine doses than in unvaccinated patients (0.62 [0.45-0.86] and 0.39 [0.26-0.58], respectively). Risk-adjusted analyses for deaths after SARS-CoV-2 infection between December 7, 2020, and March 31, 2022, found hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) of 0.67 (0.46-0.98), 0.46 (0.30-0.69), and 0.18 (0.09-0.35) for those with 2, 3, and 4 vaccine doses, respectively, when compared with the unvaccinated group. CONCLUSIONS: In immunosuppressed SOT recipients, vaccination is associated with incremental, dose-dependent protection against hospitalization or death after SARS-CoV-2 infection, including against the Omicron variant.

Sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 seroprevalence across England in the Oxford RCGP primary care sentinel network.

OBJECTIVES: To monitor changes in seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in populations over time and between different demographic groups. METHODS: A subset of practices in the Oxford-Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) Research and Surveillance Centre (RSC) sentinel network provided serum samples, collected when volunteer patients had routine blood tests. We tested these samples for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies using Abbott (Chicago, USA), Roche (Basel, Switzerland) and/or Euroimmun (Luebeck, Germany) assays, and linked the results to the patients' primary care computerised medical records. We report seropositivity by region and age group, and additionally examined the effects of gender, ethnicity, deprivation, rurality, shielding recommendation and smoking status. RESULTS: We estimated seropositivity from patients aged 18-100 years old, which ranged from 4.1% (95% CI 3.1-5.3%) to 8.9% (95% CI 7.8-10.2%) across the different assays and time periods. We found higher Euroimmun seropositivity in younger age groups, people of Black and Asian ethnicity (compared to white), major conurbations, and non-smokers. We did not observe any significant effect by region, gender, deprivation, or shielding recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that prior to the vaccination programme, most of the population remained unexposed to SARS-CoV-2.

Implementation and Extended Evaluation of the Euroimmun Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG Assay and Its Contribution to the United Kingdom's COVID-19 Public Health Response.

In March 2020, the Rare and Imported Pathogens Laboratory at the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) (formerly Public Health England [PHE]) Porton Down, was tasked by the Department of Health and Social Care with setting up a national surveillance laboratory facility to study SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses and population-level sero-surveillance in response to the growing SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. In the following 12 months, the laboratory tested more than 160,000 samples, facilitating a wide range of research and informing UKHSA, DHSC, and UK government policy. Here we describe the implementation and use of the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay and provide an extended evaluation of its performance. We present a markedly improved overall sensitivity of 91.39% (≥14 days 92.74%, ≥21 days 93.59%) compared to our small-scale early study, and a specificity of 98.56%. In addition, we detail extended characteristics of the Euroimmun assay: intra- and interassay precision, correlation to neutralization, and assay linearity. IMPORTANCE Serology assays have been useful in determining those with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection in a wide range of research and serosurveillance projects. However, assays vary in their sensitivity at detecting SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Here, we detail an extended evaluation and characterization of the Euroimmun anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay, one that has been widely used within the United Kingdom on over 160,000 samples to date.

Real-world data on immune responses following heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccination schedule with Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines in England.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on immune responses to heterologous COVID-19 immunisation schedules, especially following an extended ≥12-week interval between doses. METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 infection-naïve and previously-infected adults receiving ChAd-BNT (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, AstraZeneca followed by BNT162b2, Pfizer-BioNTech) or BNT-ChAd as part of the UK national immunisation programme provided blood samples at 30 days and 12 weeks after their second dose. Geometric mean concentrations (GMC) of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike (S-antibody) and nucleoprotein (N-antibody) IgG antibodies and geometric mean ratios (GMR) were compared with a contemporaneous cohort receiving homologous ChAd-ChAd or BNT-BNT. RESULTS: During March-October 2021, 75,827 individuals were identified as having received heterologous vaccination, 9,489 invited to participate, 1,836 responded (19.3%) and 656 were eligible. In previously-uninfected adults, S-antibody GMC at 30 days post-second dose were lowest for ChAd-ChAd (862 [95% CI, 694 - 1069]) and significantly higher for ChAd-BNT (6233 [5522-7035]; GMR 6.29; [5.04-7.85]; p<0.001), BNT-ChAd (4776 [4066-5610]; GMR 4.55 [3.56-5.81]; p<0.001) and BNT-BNT (5377 [4596-6289]; GMR 5.66 [4.49-7.15]; p<0.001). By 12 weeks after dose two, S-antibody GMC had declined in all groups and remained significantly lower for ChAd-ChAd compared to ChAd-BNT (GMR 5.12 [3.79-6.92]; p<0.001), BNT-ChAd (GMR 4.1 [2.96-5.69]; p<0.001) and BNT-BNT (GMR 6.06 [4.32-8.50]; p<0.001). Previously infected adults had higher S-antibody GMC compared to infection-naïve adults at all time-points and with all vaccine schedules. CONCLUSIONS: These real-world findings demonstrate heterologous schedules with adenoviral-vector and mRNA vaccines are highly immunogenic and may be recommended after a serious adverse reaction to one vaccine product, or to increase programmatic flexibility where vaccine supplies are constrained.

Real-world Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 and Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-S Vaccines Against SARS-CoV-2 in Solid Organ and Islet Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The clinical effectiveness of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in immunosuppressed solid organ and islet transplant (SOT) recipients is unclear. METHODS: We linked 4 national registries to retrospectively identify laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and deaths within 28 d in England between September 1, 2020, and August 31, 2021, comparing unvaccinated adult SOT recipients and those who had received 2 doses of ChAdOx1-S or BNT162b2 vaccine. Infection incidence rate ratios were adjusted for recipient demographics and calendar month using a negative binomial regression model, with 95% confidence intervals. Case fatality rate ratios were adjusted using a Cox proportional hazards model to generate hazard ratio (95% confidence interval). RESULTS: On August 31, 2021, it was found that 3080 (7.1%) were unvaccinated, 1141 (2.6%) had 1 vaccine dose, and 39 260 (90.3%) had 2 vaccine doses. There were 4147 SARS-CoV-2 infections and 407 deaths (unadjusted case fatality rate 9.8%). The risk-adjusted infection incidence rate ratio was 1.29 (1.03-1.61), implying that vaccination was not associated with reduction in risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Overall, the hazard ratio for death within 28 d of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 0.80 (0.63-1.00), a 20% reduction in risk of death in vaccinated patients (P = 0.05). Two doses of ChAdOx1-S were associated with a significantly reduced risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.69; 0.52-0.92), whereas vaccination with BNT162b2 was not (0.97; 0.71-1.31). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination of SOT recipients confers some protection against SARS-CoV-2-related mortality, but this protection is inferior to that achieved in the general population. SOT recipients require additional protective measures, including further vaccine doses, antiviral drugs, and nonpharmaceutical interventions.

Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and immune response amongst individuals in clinical risk groups.

Background COVID-19 vaccines approved in the UK are highly effective in general population cohorts, however, data on effectiveness amongst individuals with clinical conditions that place them at increased risk of severe disease are limited. Methods We used GP electronic health record data, sentinel virology swabbing and antibody testing within a cohort of 712 general practices across England to estimate vaccine antibody response and vaccine effectiveness against medically attended COVID-19 amongst individuals in clinical risk groups using cohort and test-negative case control designs. Findings There was no reduction in S-antibody positivity in most clinical risk groups, however reduced S-antibody positivity and response was significant in the immunosuppressed group. Reduced vaccine effectiveness against clinical disease was also noted in the immunosuppressed group; after a second dose, effectiveness was moderate (Pfizer: 59.6%, 95%CI 18.0-80.1%; AstraZeneca 60.0%, 95%CI -63.6-90.2%). Interpretation In most clinical risk groups, immune response to primary vaccination was maintained and high levels of vaccine effectiveness were seen. Reduced antibody response and vaccine effectiveness were seen after 1 dose of vaccine amongst a broad immunosuppressed group, and second dose vaccine effectiveness was moderate. These findings support maximising coverage in immunosuppressed individuals and the policy of prioritisation of this group for third doses.