COVID-19 Vaccines: Moderna And Pfizer-BioNTech Use Varied By Urban, Rural Counties.

We investigated county-level variation in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine use among Medicare beneficiaries throughout the United States. There was greater use of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines than Moderna vaccines in urban areas for first and booster doses.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 primary series vaccination in children aged 5-17 years in the United States: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for use in children in the United States; real-world assessment of vaccine effectiveness in children is needed. This study's objective was to estimate the effectiveness of receiving a complete primary series of monovalent BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine in US children. METHODS: This cohort study identified children aged 5-17 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 matched with unvaccinated children. Participants and BNT162b2 vaccinations were identified in Optum and CVS Health insurance administrative claims databases linked with Immunization Information System (IIS) COVID-19 vaccination records from 16 US jurisdictions between December 11, 2020, and May 31, 2022 (end date varied by database and IIS). Vaccinated children were followed from their first BNT162b2 dose and matched to unvaccinated children on calendar date, US county of residence, and demographic and clinical factors. Censoring occurred if vaccinated children failed to receive a timely dose 2 or if unvaccinated children received any dose. Two COVID-19 outcome definitions were evaluated: COVID-19 diagnosis in any medical setting and COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus HR. VE was estimated overall, within age subgroups, and within variant-specific eras. Sensitivity, negative control, and quantitative bias analyses evaluated various potential biases. RESULTS: There were 453,655 eligible vaccinated children one-to-one matched to unvaccinated comparators (mean age 12 years; 50% female). COVID-19 hospitalizations/ED visits were rare in children, regardless of vaccination status (Optum, 41.2 per 10,000 person-years; CVS Health, 44.1 per 10,000 person-years). Overall, vaccination was associated with reduced incidence of any medically diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 38% [95% CI, 36-40%]) and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 61% [95% CI, 56-65%]). VE estimates were lowest among children 5-11 years and during the Omicron-variant era. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of a complete BNT162b2 vaccine primary series was associated with overall reduced medically diagnosed COVID-19 and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 in children; observed VE estimates differed by age group and variant era. REGISTRATION: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website ( https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf ).

Risk of Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Events Among Patients with COVID-19: A Multi-National Collaboration of Regulatory Agencies from Canada, Europe, and United States.

Purpose: Few studies have examined how the absolute risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 has evolved over time across different countries. Researchers from the European Medicines Agency, Health Canada, and the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration established a collaboration to evaluate the absolute risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the 90 days after diagnosis of COVID-19 in the ambulatory (eg, outpatient, emergency department, nursing facility) setting from seven countries across North America (Canada, US) and Europe (England, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain) within periods before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability. Patients and Methods: We conducted cohort studies of patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting from the seven specified countries. Patients were followed for 90 days after COVID-19 diagnosis. The primary outcomes were ATE and VTE over 90 days from diagnosis date. We measured country-level estimates of 90-day absolute risk (with 95% confidence intervals) of ATE and VTE. Results: The seven cohorts included 1,061,565 patients initially diagnosed with COVID-19 in the ambulatory setting before COVID-19 vaccines were available (through November 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.11% (0.09-0.13%) in Canada to 1.01% (0.97-1.05%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.23% (0.21-0.26%) in Canada to 0.84% (0.80-0.89%) in England. The seven cohorts included 3,544,062 patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (beginning December 2020). The 90-day absolute risk of ATE during this period ranged from 0.06% (0.06-0.07%) in England to 1.04% (1.01-1.06%) in the US, and the 90-day absolute risk of VTE ranged from 0.25% (0.24-0.26%) in England to 1.02% (0.99-1.04%) in the US. Conclusion: There was heterogeneity by country in 90-day absolute risk of ATE and VTE after ambulatory COVID-19 diagnosis both before and during COVID-19 vaccine availability.

Factors associated with anxiety during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States: An analysis of the COVID-19 Citizen Science study.

COVID-19 increased the prevalence of clinically significant anxiety in the United States. To investigate contributing factors we analyzed anxiety, reported online via monthly Generalized Anxiety Disorders-7 (GAD-7) surveys between April 2020 and May 2022, in association with self-reported worry about the health effects of COVID-19, economic difficulty, personal COVID-19 experience, and subjective social status. 333,292 anxiety surveys from 50,172 participants (82% non-Hispanic white; 73% female; median age 55, IQR 42-66) showed high levels of anxiety, especially early in the pandemic. Anxiety scores showed strong independent associations with worry about the health effects of COVID-19 for oneself or family members (GAD-7 score +3.28 for highest vs. lowest category; 95% confidence interval: 3.24, 3.33; p<0.0001 for trend) and with difficulty paying for basic living expenses (+2.06; 1.97, 2.15, p<0.0001) in multivariable regression models after adjusting for demographic characteristics, COVID-19 case rates and death rates, and personal COVID-19 experience. High levels of COVID-19 health worry and economic stress were each more common among participants reporting lower subjective social status, and median anxiety scores for those experiencing both were in the range considered indicative of moderate to severe clinical anxiety disorders. In summary, health worry and economic difficulty both contributed to high rates of anxiety during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US, especially in disadvantaged socioeconomic groups. Programs to address both health concerns and economic insecurity in vulnerable populations could help mitigate pandemic impacts on anxiety and mental health.

Effectiveness of monovalent COVID-19 booster/additional vaccine doses in the United States.

Background: Monovalent booster/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized in August 2021 in the United States. We evaluated the real-world effectiveness of receipt of a monovalent booster/additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with receiving a primary vaccine series without a booster/additional dose. Methods: Cohorts of individuals receiving a COVID-19 booster/additional dose after receipt of a complete primary vaccine series were identified in 2 administrative insurance claims databases (Optum, CVS Health) supplemented with state immunization information system data between August 2021 and March 2022. Individuals with a complete primary series but without a booster/additional dose were one-to-one matched to boosted individuals on calendar date, geography, and clinical factors. COVID-19 diagnoses were identified in any medical setting, or specifically in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models; vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus the HR by vaccine brand overall and within subgroups of variant-specific eras, immunocompromised status, and homologous/heterologous booster status. Results: Across both data sources, we identified 752,165 matched pairs for BNT162b2, 410,501 for mRNA-1273, and 11,398 for JNJ-7836735. For any medically diagnosed COVID-19, meta-analyzed VE estimates for BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and JNJ-7836735, respectively, were: BNT162b2, 54% (95% CI, 53%-56%); mRNA-1273, 58% (95% CI, 56%-59%); JNJ-7836735, 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%). For hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19, VE estimates ranged from 70% to 76%. VE was generally lower during the Omicron era than the Delta era and for immunocompromised individuals. There was little difference observed by homologous or heterologous booster status. Conclusion: The original, monovalent booster/additional doses were reasonably effective in real-world use among the populations for which they were indicated during the study period. Additional studies may be informative in the future as new variants emerge and new vaccines become available.Registration: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website (https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf).

COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccine Coadministration Among Older U.S. Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Coadministering COVID-19 and influenza vaccines is recommended by public health authorities and intended to improve uptake and convenience; however, the extent of vaccine coadministration is largely unknown. Investigations into COVID-19 and influenza vaccine coadministration are needed to describe compliance with newer recommendations and to identify potential gaps in the implementation of coadministration. METHODS: A descriptive, repeated cross-sectional study between September 1, 2021 to November 30, 2021 (Period 1) and September 1, 2022 to November 30, 2022 (Period 2) was conducted. This study included community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 66 years who received an mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccine in Periods 1 and 2. The outcome was an influenza vaccine administered on the same day as the COVID-19 vaccine. Adjusted ORs and 99% CIs were estimated using logistic regression to describe the association between beneficiaries' characteristics and vaccine coadministration. Statistical analysis was performed in 2023. RESULTS: Among beneficiaries who received a COVID-19 vaccine, 78.8% in Period 1 (N=6,292,777) and 89.1% in Period 2 (N=4,757,501), received an influenza vaccine at some point during the study period (i.e., before, after, or on the same day as their COVID-19 vaccine), though rates were lower in non-White and rural individuals. Vaccine coadministration increased from 11.1% to 36.5% between periods. Beneficiaries with dementia (aORPeriod 2=1.31; 99%CI=1.29-1.32) and in rural counties (aORPeriod 2=1.19; 99%CI=1.17-1.20) were more likely to receive coadministered vaccines, while those with cancer (aORPeriod 2=0.90; 99%CI=0.89-0.91) were less likely. CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries vaccinated against COVID-19, influenza vaccination was high, but coadministration of the 2 vaccines was low. Future work should explore which factors explain variation in the decision to receive coadministered vaccines.

Incidence rates of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) among adults in United States commercial and Medicare claims databases, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare). RESULTS: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults. CONCLUSION: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS.

Validation of an ICD-10 case-finding algorithm for endometrial cancer in US insurance claims.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the positive predictive value (PPV) of an endometrial cancer case finding algorithm using International Classification of Disease 10th revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis codes from US insurance claims for implementation in a planned post-marketing safety study. Two algorithm variants were evaluated. METHODS: Provisional incident endometrial cancer cases were identified from 2016 through 2020 among women aged ≥50 years. One algorithm variant used diagnosis codes for malignant neoplasms of uterine sites (C54.x), excluding C54.2 (malignant neoplasm of myometrium); the other used only C54.1 (malignant neoplasm of endometrium). A random sample of medical records of recent incident provisional cases (2018-2020) was requested for adjudication. Confirmed cases showed biopsy evidence of endometrial cancer, documentation of cancer staging, or hysterectomy following diagnosis. We estimated the PPV of the variants with 95% confidence intervals (CI) excluding cases that had insufficient information. RESULTS: Of 294 provisional cases adjudicated, 85% were from outpatient settings (n = 249). Mean age at diagnosis was 69.3 years. Among the 294 adjudicated cases (identified with the broader algorithm variant), the same 223 were confirmed endometrial cancer cases by both algorithm variants. The PPV (95% CI) for the broader algorithm variant was 84.2% (79.2% and 88.3%), and for the variant using only C54.1 was 85.8% (80.9% and 89.8%). CONCLUSION: We developed and validated an algorithm using ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes to identify endometrial cancer cases in health insurance claims with a sufficiently high PPV to use in a planned post-marketing safety study.

Associations between tobacco and cannabis use and anxiety and depression among adults in the United States: Findings from the COVID-19 citizen science study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about whether people who use both tobacco and cannabis (co-use) are more or less likely to have mental health disorders than single substance users or non-users. We aimed to examine associations between use of tobacco and/or cannabis with anxiety and depression. METHODS: We analyzed data from the COVID-19 Citizen Science Study, a digital cohort study, collected via online surveys during 2020-2022 from a convenience sample of 53,843 US adults (≥ 18 years old) nationwide. Past 30-day use of tobacco and cannabis was self-reported at baseline and categorized into four exclusive patterns: tobacco-only use, cannabis-only use, co-use of both substances, and non-use. Anxiety and depression were repeatedly measured in monthly surveys. To account for multiple assessments of mental health outcomes within a participant, we used Generalized Estimating Equations to examine associations between the patterns of tobacco and cannabis use with each outcome. RESULTS: In the total sample (mean age 51.0 years old, 67.9% female), 4.9% reported tobacco-only use, 6.9% cannabis-only use, 1.6% co-use, and 86.6% non-use. Proportions of reporting anxiety and depression were highest for the co-use group (26.5% and 28.3%, respectively) and lowest for the non-use group (10.6% and 11.2%, respectively). Compared to non-use, the adjusted odds of mental health disorders were highest for co-use (Anxiety: OR = 1.89, 95%CI = 1.64-2.18; Depression: OR = 1.77, 95%CI = 1.46-2.16), followed by cannabis-only use, and tobacco-only use. Compared to tobacco-only use, co-use (OR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.08-1.69) and cannabis-only use (OR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.00-1.37) were associated with higher adjusted odds for anxiety, but not for depression. Daily use (vs. non-daily use) of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cannabis were associated with higher adjusted odds for anxiety and depression. CONCLUSIONS: Use of tobacco and/or cannabis, particularly co-use of both substances, were associated with poor mental health. Integrating mental health support with tobacco and cannabis cessation may address this co-morbidity.

Comparative Risks of Potential Adverse Events Following COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination Among Older US Adults.

Importance: Head-to-head safety comparisons of the mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 are needed for decision making; however, current evidence generalizes poorly to older adults, lacks sufficient adjustment, and inadequately captures events shortly after vaccination. Additionally, no studies to date have explored potential variation in comparative vaccine safety across subgroups with frailty or an increased risk of adverse events, information that would be useful for tailoring clinical decisions. Objective: To compare the risk of adverse events between mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 (mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2) overall, by frailty level, and by prior history of the adverse events of interest. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted between December 11, 2020, and July 11, 2021, with 28 days of follow-up following the week of vaccination. A novel linked database of community pharmacy and Medicare claims data was used, representing more than 50% of the US Medicare population. Community-dwelling, fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 years or older who received mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 as their first COVID-19 vaccine were identified. Data analysis began on October 18, 2022. Exposure: Dose 1 of mRNA-1273 vs BNT162b2 vaccine. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twelve potential adverse events (eg, pulmonary embolism, thrombocytopenia purpura, and myocarditis) were assessed individually. Frailty was measured using a claims-based frailty index, with beneficiaries being categorized as nonfrail, prefrail, and frail. The risk of diagnosed COVID-19 was assessed as a secondary outcome. Generalized linear models estimated covariate-adjusted risk ratios (RRs) and risk differences (RDs) with 95% CIs. Results: This study included 6 388 196 eligible individuals who received the mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccine. Their mean (SD) age was 76.3 (7.5) years, 59.4% were women, and 86.5% were White. A total of 38.1% of individuals were categorized as prefrail and 6.0% as frail. The risk of all outcomes was low in both vaccine groups. In adjusted models, the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with a lower risk of pulmonary embolism (RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.93-1.00]; RD, 9 [95% CI, 1-16] events per 100 000 persons) and other adverse events in subgroup analyses (eg, 11.0% lower risk of thrombocytopenia purpura among individuals categorized as nonfrail). The mRNA-1273 vaccine was also associated with a lower risk of diagnosed COVID-19 (RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.83-0.87]), a benefit that was attenuated by frailty level (frail: RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-0.99]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of older US adults, the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with a slightly lower risk of several adverse events compared with BNT162b2, possibly due to greater protection against COVID-19. Future research should seek to formally disentangle differences in vaccine safety and effectiveness and consider the role of frailty in assessments of COVID-19 vaccine performance.

Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 booster vaccination among U.S. older adults differ by geographic region and Medicare enrollment.

Introduction: COVID-19 booster vaccines are highly effective at reducing severe illness and death from COVID-19. Research is needed to identify whether racial and ethnic disparities observed for the primary series of the COVID-19 vaccines persist for booster vaccinations and how those disparities may vary by other characteristics. We aimed to measure racial and ethnic differences in booster vaccine receipt among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries and characterize potential variation by demographic characteristics. Methods: We conducted a cohort study using CVS Health and Walgreens pharmacy data linked to Medicare claims. We included community-dwelling Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥66 years who received two mRNA vaccine doses (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) as of 8/1/2021. We followed beneficiaries from 8/1/2021 until booster vaccine receipt, death, Medicare disenrollment, or end of follow-up (12/31/2021). Adjusted Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing vaccine uptake between groups. Results: We identified 11,339,103 eligible beneficiaries (mean age 76 years, 60% female, 78% White). Overall, 67% received a booster vaccine (White = 68.5%; Asian = 67.0%; Black = 57.0%; Hispanic = 53.3%). Compared to White individuals, Black (RR = 0.78 [95%CI = 0.78-0.78]) and Hispanic individuals (RR = 0.72 [95% = CI 0.72-0.72]) had lower rates of booster vaccination. Disparities varied by geographic region, urbanicity, and Medicare plan/Medicaid eligibility. The relative magnitude of disparities was lesser in areas where vaccine uptake was lower in White individuals. Discussion: Racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 vaccination have persisted for booster vaccines. These findings highlight that interventions to improve vaccine uptake should be designed at the intersection of race and ethnicity and geographic location.

Risk of admission to hospital with arterial or venous thromboembolism among patients diagnosed in the ambulatory setting with covid-19 compared with influenza: retrospective cohort study.

Objective: To measure the 90 day risk of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism among patients diagnosed with covid-19 in the ambulatory (ie, outpatient, emergency department, or institutional) setting during periods before and during covid-19 vaccine availability and compare results to patients with ambulatory diagnosed influenza. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Four integrated health systems and two national health insurers in the US Food and Drug Administration's Sentinel System. Participants: Patients with ambulatory diagnosed covid-19 when vaccines were unavailable in the US (period 1, 1 April-30 November 2020; n=272 065) and when vaccines were available in the US (period 2, 1 December 2020-31 May 2021; n=342 103), and patients with ambulatory diagnosed influenza (1 October 2018-30 April 2019; n=118 618). Main outcome measures: Arterial thromboembolism (hospital diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) and venous thromboembolism (hospital diagnosis of acute deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) within 90 days after ambulatory covid-19 or influenza diagnosis. We developed propensity scores to account for differences between the cohorts and used weighted Cox regression to estimate adjusted hazard ratios of outcomes with 95% confidence intervals for covid-19 during periods 1 and 2 versus influenza. Results: 90 day absolute risk of arterial thromboembolism with covid-19 was 1.01% (95% confidence interval 0.97% to 1.05%) during period 1, 1.06% (1.03% to 1.10%) during period 2, and with influenza was 0.45% (0.41% to 0.49%). The risk of arterial thromboembolism was higher for patients with covid-19 during period 1 (adjusted hazard ratio 1.53 (95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.69)) and period 2 (1.69 (1.53 to 1.86)) than for patients with influenza. 90 day absolute risk of venous thromboembolism with covid-19 was 0.73% (0.70% to 0.77%) during period 1, 0.88% (0.84 to 0.91%) during period 2, and with influenza was 0.18% (0.16% to 0.21%). Risk of venous thromboembolism was higher with covid-19 during period 1 (adjusted hazard ratio 2.86 (2.46 to 3.32)) and period 2 (3.56 (3.08 to 4.12)) than with influenza. Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with covid-19 in the ambulatory setting had a higher 90 day risk of admission to hospital with arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism both before and after covid-19 vaccine availability compared with patients with influenza.

Identification of cancer chemotherapy regimens and patient cohorts in administrative claims: challenges, opportunities, and a proposed algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Real-world evidence is a valuable source of information in healthcare. This study describes the challenges and successes during algorithm development to identify cancer cohorts and multi-agent chemotherapy regimens from claims data to perform a comparative effectiveness analysis of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) use. METHODS: Using the Biologics and Biosimilars Collective Intelligence Consortium's Distributed Research Network, we iteratively developed and tested a de novo algorithm to accurately identify patients by cancer diagnosis, then extract chemotherapy and G-CSF administrations for a retrospective study of prophylactic G-CSF. RESULTS: After identifying patients with cancer and subsequent chemotherapy exposures, we observed only 12% of patients with cancer received chemotherapy, which is fewer than expected based on prior analyses. Therefore, we reversed the initial inclusion criteria to identify chemotherapy receipt, then prior cancer diagnosis, which increased the number of patients from 2,814 to 3,645, or 68% of patients receiving chemotherapy had diagnoses of interest. Additionally, we excluded patients with cancer diagnoses that differed from those of interest in the 183 days before the index date of G-CSF receipt, including early-stage cancers without G-CSF or chemotherapy exposure. By removing this criterion, we retained 77 patients who were previously excluded. Finally, we incorporated a 5-day window to identify all chemotherapy drugs administered (excluding oral prednisone and methotrexate, as these medications may be used for other non-malignant conditions) as patients may fill oral prescriptions days to weeks prior to infusion. This increased the number of patients with chemotherapy exposures of interest to 6,010. The final cohort of included patients, based on G-CSF exposure, increased from 420 from the initial algorithm to 886 using the final algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: Medications used for multiple indications, sensitivity and specificity of administrative codes, and relative timing of medication exposure must all be evaluated to identify patient cohorts receiving chemotherapy from claims data.

Background rates of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring in the United States, 2019-2020.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative conducts active surveillance of adverse events of special interest (AESI) after COVID-19 vaccination. Historical incidence rates (IRs) of AESI are comparators to evaluate safety. METHODS: We estimated IRs of 17 AESI in six administrative claims databases from January 1, 2019, to December 11, 2020: Medicare claims for adults ≥ 65 years and commercial claims (Blue Health Intelligence®, CVS Health, HealthCore Integrated Research Database, IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Database, Optum pre-adjudicated claims) for adults < 65 years. IRs were estimated by sex, age, race/ethnicity (Medicare), and nursing home residency (Medicare) in 2019 and for specific periods in 2020. RESULTS: The study included >100 million enrollees annually. In 2019, rates of most AESI increased with age. However, compared with commercially insured adults, Medicare enrollees had lower IRs of anaphylaxis (11 vs 12-19 per 100,000 person-years), appendicitis (80 vs 117-155), and narcolepsy (38 vs 41-53). Rates were higher in males than females for most AESI across databases and varied by race/ethnicity and nursing home status (Medicare). Acute myocardial infarction (Medicare) and anaphylaxis (all databases) IRs varied by season. IRs of most AESI were lower during March-May 2020 compared with March-May 2019 but returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. However, rates of Bell's palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy, and hemorrhagic/non-hemorrhagic stroke remained lower in multiple databases after May 2020, whereas some AESI (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation) exhibited higher rates after May 2020 compared with 2019. CONCLUSION: AESI background rates varied by database and demographics and fluctuated in March-December 2020, but most returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. It is critical to standardize demographics and consider seasonal and other trends when comparing historical rates with post-vaccination AESI rates in the same database to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety.

Data resource profile: COVid VAXines effects on the aged (COVVAXAGE).

Background: To improve the assessment of COVID-19 vaccine use, safety, and effectiveness in older adults and persons with complex multimorbidity, the COVid VAXines Effects on the Aged (COVVAXAGE) database was established by linking CVS Health and Walgreens pharmacy customers to Medicare claims. Methods: We deterministically linked CVS Health and Walgreens customers who had a pharmacy dispensation/encounter paid for by Medicare to Medicare enrollment and claims records. Linked data include U.S. Medicare claims, Medicare enrollment files, and community pharmacy records. The data currently span 01/01/2016 to 08/31/2022. "Research-ready" files were created, with weekly indicators for vaccinations, censoring, death, enrollment, demographics, and comorbidities. Data are updated quarterly. Results: As of November 2022, records for 27,086,723 CVS Health and 23,510,025 Walgreens unique customer IDs were identified for potential linkage. Approximately 91% of customers were matched to a Medicare beneficiary ID (95% for those aged 65 years or older). In the final linked cohort, there were 38,250,873 unique beneficiaries representing ~60% of the Medicare population. Among those alive and enrolled in Medicare as of January 1, 2020 (n = 33,721,568; average age = 73 years, 74% White, 51% Medicare Fee-for-Service, and 11% dual-eligible for Medicaid), the average follow-up time was 130 weeks. The cohort contains 16,021,055 beneficiaries with evidence a first COVID-19 vaccine dose. Data are stored on the secure Medicare & Medicaid Resource Information Center Health & Aging Data Enclave. Data access: Investigators with funded or in-progress funding applications to the National Institute on Aging who are interested in learning more about the database should contact Dr Vincent Mor [Vincent_mor@brown.edu] and Dr Kaleen Hayes [kaley_hayes@brown.edu]. A data dictionary can be provided under reasonable request. Conclusions: The COVVAXAGE cohort is a large and diverse cohort that can be used for the ongoing evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine use and other research questions relevant to the Medicare population.

Association of COVID-19 vs Influenza With Risk of Arterial and Venous Thrombotic Events Among Hospitalized Patients.

Importance: The incidence of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism in persons with COVID-19 remains unclear. Objective: To measure the 90-day risk of arterial thromboembolism and venous thromboembolism in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 before or during COVID-19 vaccine availability vs patients hospitalized with influenza. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of 41 443 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (April-November 2020), 44 194 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (December 2020-May 2021), and 8269 patients hospitalized with influenza (October 2018-April 2019) in the US Food and Drug Administration Sentinel System (data from 2 national health insurers and 4 regional integrated health systems). Exposures: COVID-19 or influenza (identified by hospital diagnosis or nucleic acid test). Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital diagnosis of arterial thromboembolism (acute myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) and venous thromboembolism (deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism) within 90 days. Outcomes were ascertained through July 2019 for patients with influenza and through August 2021 for patients with COVID-19. Propensity scores with fine stratification were developed to account for differences between the influenza and COVID-19 cohorts. Weighted Cox regression was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for outcomes during each COVID-19 vaccine availability period vs the influenza period. Results: A total of 85 637 patients with COVID-19 (mean age, 72 [SD, 13.0] years; 50.5% were male) and 8269 with influenza (mean age, 72 [SD, 13.3] years; 45.0% were male) were included. The 90-day absolute risk of arterial thromboembolism was 14.4% (95% CI, 13.6%-15.2%) in patients with influenza vs 15.8% (95% CI, 15.5%-16.2%) in patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, 1.0%-2.3%]) and 16.3% (95% CI, 16.0%-16.6%) in patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (risk difference, 1.9% [95% CI, 1.1%-2.7%]). Compared with patients with influenza, the risk of arterial thromboembolism was not significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.97-1.11]) or during vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 1.00-1.14]). The 90-day absolute risk of venous thromboembolism was 5.3% (95% CI, 4.9%-5.8%) in patients with influenza vs 9.5% (95% CI, 9.2%-9.7%) in patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (risk difference, 4.1% [95% CI, 3.6%-4.7%]) and 10.9% (95% CI, 10.6%-11.1%) in patients with COVID-19 during vaccine availability (risk difference, 5.5% [95% CI, 5.0%-6.1%]). Compared with patients with influenza, the risk of venous thromboembolism was significantly higher among patients with COVID-19 before vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.43-1.79]) and during vaccine availability (adjusted HR, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.68-2.12]). Conclusions and Relevance: Based on data from a US public health surveillance system, hospitalization with COVID-19 before and during vaccine availability, vs hospitalization with influenza in 2018-2019, was significantly associated with a higher risk of venous thromboembolism within 90 days, but there was no significant difference in the risk of arterial thromboembolism within 90 days.

Risk of myocarditis and pericarditis after the COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in the USA: a cohort study in claims databases.

BACKGROUND: Several passive surveillance systems reported increased risks of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination, especially in young men. We used active surveillance from large health-care databases to quantify and enable the direct comparison of the risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, after mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, examining the primary outcome of myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, identified using the International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes, occurring 1-7 days post-vaccination, evaluated in COVID-19 mRNA vaccinees aged 18-64 years using health plan claims databases in the USA. Observed (O) incidence rates were compared with expected (E) incidence rates estimated from historical cohorts by each database. We used multivariate Poisson regression to estimate the adjusted incidence rates, specific to each brand of vaccine, and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. We used meta-analyses to pool the adjusted incidence rates and IRRs across databases. FINDINGS: A total of 411 myocarditis or pericarditis, or both, events were observed among 15 148 369 people aged 18-64 years who received 16 912 716 doses of BNT162b2 and 10 631 554 doses of mRNA-1273. Among men aged 18-25 years, the pooled incidence rate was highest after the second dose, at 1·71 (95% CI 1·31 to 2·23) per 100 000 person-days for BNT162b2 and 2·17 (1·55 to 3·04) per 100 000 person-days for mRNA-1273. The pooled IRR in the head-to-head comparison of the two mRNA vaccines was 1·43 (95% CI 0·88 to 2·34), with an excess risk of 27·80 per million doses (-21·88 to 77·48) in mRNA-1273 recipients compared with BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: An increased risk of myocarditis or pericarditis was observed after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and was highest in men aged 18-25 years after a second dose of the vaccine. However, the incidence was rare. These results do not indicate a statistically significant risk difference between mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2, but it should not be ruled out that a difference might exist. Our study results, along with the benefit-risk profile, continue to support vaccination using either of the two mRNA vaccines. FUNDING: US Food and Drug Administration.

Survival Disparities of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in a Community-Based Inner-City Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) comprises approximately 30% of all non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Multiple studies have demonstrated race-based disparities in survival among patients with DLBCL across all stages of disease, in the era both before and after rituximab. The etiology for the racial disparities in survival among patients with DLBCL is still unknown. Moreover, the Revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI), a tool that predicts the DLBCL patients' outcome, has not yet been validated in African Americans (AA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of patients diagnosed with DLBCL from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, from our tumor registry in a single community-based inner-city cancer center. We abstracted demographic, clinical, histopathologic, treatment, and R-IPI variables. A total of 181 patients (47.5%) with biopsy-proven DLBCL were included in the retrospective analysis. The median age was 65 years, 47% were men, 41% were AA, and 44% were white. RESULTS: The AA group had a younger median age, higher lactate dehydrogenase levels, higher frequency of B symptoms, and higher HIV infection than the non-AA group. The AA group had significantly decreased median overall survival than the non-AA group (15.7 months; 95% confidence interval, 10.3 to 23.9, vs. 93.6 months; 95% confidence interval, 61.5 to 142.6, respectively; P < .001). The survival disparities persisted after excluding patients with HIV and who did not receive chemotherapy. In addition, AA race predicts a reduced survival by univariate and multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: AA with DLBCL may have a poorer prognosis than the non-AA population. Further studies should investigate the biology of DLBCL in the AA population.

Access to internet, smartphone usage, and acceptability of mobile health technology among cancer patients.

PURPOSE: The use of mobile health (mHealth) technologies to augment patient care enables providers to communicate remotely with patients enhancing the quality of care and patient engagement. Few studies evaluated predictive factors of its acceptance and subsequent implementation, especially in medically underserved populations. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 151 cancer patients was conducted at an academic medical center in the USA. A trained interviewer performed structured interviews regarding the barriers and facilitators of patients' current and desired use of mHealth technology for healthcare services. RESULTS: Of the 151 participants, 35.8% were male and ages ranged from 21 to 104 years. 73.5% of participants currently have daily access to internet, and 68.2% currently own a smartphone capable of displaying mobile applications. Among all participants, acceptability of a daily mHealth application was significantly higher in patients with a college-level degree (OR 2.78, CI95% 1.25-5.88) and lower in patients > 80 years of age (OR 0.05, CI95% 0.01-0.23). Differences in acceptability when adjusted for current smartphone use and daily access to internet were nonsignificant. Among smartphone users, the desire to increase cancer knowledge was associated with a higher likelihood of utilizing a mHealth application (OR 261.53, CI95% 10.13-6748.71). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that factors such as age, educational achievement, and access to internet are significant predictors of acceptability of a mHealth application among cancer patients. Healthcare organizations should consider these factors when launching patient engagement platforms.

Prevalence of disability among adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2016-2017.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of disabilities is rising steadily, reflecting an aging population and an increasing burden of chronic conditions affecting quality of life. There are scant national data on the prevalence of disability among individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The main objective was to estimate the prevalence of common disabilities among US-based individuals diagnosed with COPD. METHODS: Data from the BRFSS, a national telephone survey examining health-related behaviors in 2016-2017 were analyzed. The study population consisted of individuals with self-reported COPD (N = 38352 in 2016 and N = 35423 in 2017). The prevalence of disabilities in hearing, vision, cognition, mobility, and independent living were obtained and adjusted with sampling weights. Healthcare access measures were described by type of disability. RESULTS: Mobility disability had the highest prevalence of 45.9 (44.8-47.0) % in 2016 and 48.4 (47.3-49.5) % in 2017 among respondents with COPD. The prevalence of disabilities was highest among those 45-64 years old, except for hearing and cognition. Hearing disabilities were most prevalent among males with COPD while cognitive and mobility disabilities were most prevalent among females with COPD. While differences in the prevalence of disabilities were observed, access to health care was similar by disability type and age group among respondents. CONCLUSION: Contrary to expectation, the highest prevalence of disabilities was found not to be among those 65 years old and above. Further research is needed to explain this age-specific shift in the burden of disability, as long-term care planning and prevention support systems should be informed by the demographical patterns of disabilities among individuals with COPD.