Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 37
Filter
1.
Euro Surveill ; 29(28)2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38994604

ABSTRACT

BackgroundAs Ireland prepared for an autumn 2023 COVID-19 vaccination booster campaign, there was concern that vaccine fatigue would affect uptake, which has been abating.AimThis study aimed to quantify the direct impact of the COVID-19 vaccination programme in Ireland on averted COVID-19-related outcomes including symptomatic presentations to primary care/community testing centres, emergency department (ED) presentations, hospitalisations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and deaths, in individuals aged ≥ 50 years, during Omicron dominance.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective observational COVID-19 vaccine impact study in December 2021-March 2023 in Ireland. We used national data on notified outcomes and vaccine coverage, as well as vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates, sourced from the World Health Organization's live systematic review of VE, to estimate the count and prevented fraction of outcomes in ≥ 50-year-olds averted by the COVID-19 vaccination programme in this age group.ResultsThe COVID-19 vaccination programme averted 48,551 symptomatic COVID-19 presentations to primary care/community testing centres (36% of cases expected in the absence of vaccination), 9,517 ED presentations (53% of expected), 102,160 hospitalisations (81% of expected), 3,303 ICU admissions (89% of expected) and 15,985 deaths (87% of expected).ConclusionsWhen Omicron predominated, the COVID-19 vaccination programme averted symptomatic and severe COVID-19 cases, including deaths due to COVID-19. In line with other international vaccine impact studies, these findings emphasise the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination for population health and the healthcare system and are relevant for informing COVID-19 booster vaccination programmes, pandemic preparedness and communicating the reason for and importance of COVID-19 vaccination in Ireland and internationally.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Hospitalization , Immunization Programs , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Ireland/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Male , Female , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Vaccine Efficacy/statistics & numerical data , Immunization, Secondary/statistics & numerical data
2.
Vaccine ; 2024 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38834428

ABSTRACT

Evaluating how a COVID-19 seasonal vaccination program performed might help to plan future campaigns. This study aims to estimate the relative effectiveness (rVE) against severe COVID-19 of a seasonal booster dose over calendar time and by time since administration. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis among 13,083,855 persons aged ≥60 years who were eligible to receive a seasonal booster at the start of the 2022-2023 vaccination campaign in Italy. We estimated rVE against severe COVID-19 (hospitalization or death) of a seasonal booster dose of bivalent (original/Omicron BA.4-5) mRNA vaccines by two-month calendar interval and at different times post-administration. We used multivariable Cox regression models, including vaccination as time-dependent exposure, to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and rVEs as [(1-HR)X100]. The rVE of a seasonal booster decreased from 64.9% (95% CI: 59.8-69.4) in October-November 2022 to 22.0% (95% CI: 15.4-28.0) in April-May 2023, when the majority of vaccinated persons (67%) had received the booster at least 4-6 months earlier. During the epidemic phase with prevalent circulation of the Omicron BA.5 subvariant, rVE of a seasonal booster received ≤90 days earlier was 83.0% (95% CI: 79.1-86.1), compared to 37.4% (95% CI: 25.5-47.5) during prevalent circulation of the Omicron XBB subvariant. During the XBB epidemic phase, rVE was estimated at 15.8% (95% CI: 9.1-20.1) 181-369 days post-administration of the booster dose. In all the analyses we observed similar trends of rVE between persons aged 60-79 and those ≥80 years, although estimates were somewhat lower for the oldest group. A seasonal booster dose received during the vaccination campaign provided additional protection against severe COVID-19 up to April-May 2023, after which the incidence of severe COVID-19 was much reduced. The results also suggest that the Omicron XBB subvariant might have partly escaped the immunity provided by the seasonal booster targeting the original and Omicron BA.4-5 strains of SARS-CoV-2.

3.
Int J Epidemiol ; 53(3)2024 Apr 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38847783

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Surveillance data and vaccination registries are widely used to provide real-time vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates, which can be biased due to underreported (i.e. under-ascertained and under-notified) infections. Here, we investigate how the magnitude and direction of this source of bias in retrospective cohort studies vary under different circumstances, including different levels of underreporting, heterogeneities in underreporting across vaccinated and unvaccinated, and different levels of pathogen circulation. METHODS: We developed a stochastic individual-based model simulating the transmission dynamics of a respiratory virus and a large-scale vaccination campaign. Considering a baseline scenario with 22.5% yearly attack rate and 30% reporting ratio, we explored fourteen alternative scenarios, each modifying one or more baseline assumptions. Using synthetic individual-level surveillance data and vaccination registries produced by the model, we estimated the VE against documented infection taking as reference either unvaccinated or recently vaccinated individuals (within 14 days post-administration). Bias was quantified by comparing estimates to the known VE assumed in the model. RESULTS: VE estimates were accurate when assuming homogeneous reporting ratios, even at low levels (10%), and moderate attack rates (<50%). A substantial downward bias in the estimation arose with homogeneous reporting and attack rates exceeding 50%. Mild heterogeneities in reporting ratios between vaccinated and unvaccinated strongly biased VE estimates, downward if cases in vaccinated were more likely to be reported and upward otherwise, particularly when taking as reference unvaccinated individuals. CONCLUSIONS: In observational studies, high attack rates or differences in underreporting between vaccinated and unvaccinated may result in biased VE estimates. This study underscores the critical importance of monitoring data quality and understanding biases in observational studies, to more adequately inform public health decisions.


Subject(s)
Bias , Vaccine Efficacy , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , Registries , Stochastic Processes
4.
BMC Public Health ; 24(1): 1569, 2024 Jun 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38862939

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As of 2024, vaccination remains the main mitigation measure against COVID-19, but there are contradictory results on whether people living with HIV (PLWH) are less protected by vaccines than people living without HIV (PLWoH). In this study we compared the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation following full vaccination in PLWH and PLWoH. METHODS: We linked data from the vaccination registry, the COVID-19 surveillance system and from healthcare/pharmacological registries in four Italian regions. We identified PLWH fully vaccinated (14 days post completion of the primary cycle) and matched them at a ratio of 1:4 with PLWoH by week of vaccine administration, age, sex, region of residence and comorbidities. Follow-up started on January 24, 2021, and lasted for a maximum of 234 days. We used the Kaplan-Meier estimator to calculate the cumulative incidence of infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation in both groups, and we compared risks using risk differences and ratios taking PLWoH as the reference group. RESULTS: We matched 42,771 PLWH with 171,084 PLWoH. The overall risk of breakthrough infection was similar in both groups with a rate ratio (RR) of 1.10 (95% confidence interval (CI):0.80-1.53). The absolute difference between groups at the end of the study period was 8.28 events per 10,000 person-days in the PLWH group (95%CI:-18.43-40.29). There was a non-significant increase the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation among PLWH (RR:1.90; 95%CI:0.93-3.32) which corresponds to 6.73 hospitalisations per 10,000 individuals (95%CI: -0.57 to 14.87 per 10,000). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest PLWH were not at increased risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 hospitalisation following a primary cycle of mRNA vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Hospitalization , Humans , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Italy/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Adult , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Registries , Young Adult , Risk Factors , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Incidence , Breakthrough Infections
5.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 18(4): e13292, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38654485

ABSTRACT

Using a common protocol across seven countries in the European Union/European Economic Area, we estimated XBB.1.5 monovalent vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death in booster-eligible ≥ 65-year-olds, during October-November 2023. We linked electronic records to construct retrospective cohorts and used Cox models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios and derive VE. VE for COVID-19 hospitalisation and death was, respectively, 67% (95%CI: 58-74) and 67% (95%CI: 42-81) in 65- to 79-year-olds and 66% (95%CI: 57-73) and 72% (95%CI: 51-85) in ≥ 80-year-olds. Results indicate that periodic vaccination of individuals ≥ 65 years has an ongoing benefit and support current vaccination strategies in the EU/EEA.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , European Union , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccine Efficacy , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Aged , Male , Aged, 80 and over , Female , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Retrospective Studies , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , Europe/epidemiology , Electronic Health Records
6.
J Urban Health ; 101(2): 289-299, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38498248

ABSTRACT

This study analysed the evolution of the association of socioeconomic deprivation (SED) with SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 outcomes in urban Italy during the vaccine rollout in 2021. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis between January and November 2021, comprising of 16,044,530 individuals aged ≥ 20 years, by linking national COVID-19 surveillance system data to the Italian SED index calculated at census block level. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) of infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes by SED tercile relative to the least deprived tercile, over three periods defined as low (0-10%); intermediate (> 10-60%) and high (> 60-74%) vaccination coverage. We found patterns of increasing relative socioeconomic inequalities in infection, hospitalisation and death as COVID-19 vaccination coverage increased. Between the low and high coverage periods, IRRs for the most deprived areas increased from 1.09 (95%CI 1.03-1.15) to 1.28 (95%CI 1.21-1.37) for infection; 1.48 (95%CI 1.36-1.61) to 2.02 (95%CI 1.82-2.25) for hospitalisation and 1.57 (95%CI 1.36-1.80) to 1.89 (95%CI 1.53-2.34) for death. Deprived populations in urban Italy should be considered as vulnerable groups in future pandemic preparedness plans to respond to COVID-19 in particular during mass vaccination roll out phases with gradual lifting of social distancing measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Hospitalization , SARS-CoV-2 , Socioeconomic Factors , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Italy/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Male , Female , Adult , Aged , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Health Status Disparities , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
7.
Elife ; 132024 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38416129

ABSTRACT

Background: The aim of our study was to test the hypothesis that the community contact tracing strategy of testing contacts in households immediately instead of at the end of quarantine had an impact on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in schools in Reggio Emilia Province. Methods: We analysed surveillance data on notification of COVID-19 cases in schools between 1 September 2020 and 4 April 2021. We have applied a mediation analysis that allows for interaction between the intervention (before/after period) and the mediator. Results: Median tracing delay decreased from 7 to 3.1 days and the percentage of the known infection source increased from 34-54.8% (incident rate ratio-IRR 1.61 1.40-1.86). Implementation of prompt contact tracing was associated with a 10% decrease in the number of secondary cases (excess relative risk -0.1 95% CI -0.35-0.15). Knowing the source of infection of the index case led to a decrease in secondary transmission (IRR 0.75 95% CI 0.63-0.91) while the decrease in tracing delay was associated with decreased risk of secondary cases (1/IRR 0.97 95% CI 0.94-1.01 per one day of delay). The direct effect of the intervention accounted for the 29% decrease in the number of secondary cases (excess relative risk -0.29 95%-0.61 to 0.03). Conclusions: Prompt contact testing in the community reduces the time of contact tracing and increases the ability to identify the source of infection in school outbreaks. Although there are strong reasons for thinking it is a causal link, observed differences can be also due to differences in the force of infection and to other control measures put in place. Funding: This project was carried out with the technical and financial support of the Italian Ministry of Health - CCM 2020 and Ricerca Corrente Annual Program 2023.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Public Health , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Contact Tracing , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Educational Status
8.
Disaster Med Public Health Prep ; 18: e27, 2024 Feb 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38372080

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this work was to study mortality increase in Spain during the first and second academic semesters of 2020, coinciding with the first 2 waves of the Covid-19 pandemic; by sex, age, and education. METHODS: An observational study was carried out, using linked populations and deaths' data from 2017 to 2020. The mortality rates from all causes and leading causes other than Covid-19 during each semester of 2020, compared to the 2017-2019 averages for the same semester, was also estimated. Mortality rate ratios (MRR) and differences were used for comparison. RESULTS: All-cause mortality rates increased in 2020 compared to pre-covid, except among working-age, (25-64 years) highly-educated women. Such increases were larger in lower-educated people between the working age range, in both 2020 semesters, but not at other ages. In the elderly, the MMR in the first semester in women and men were respectively, 1.14, and 1.25 among lower-educated people, and 1.28 and 1.23 among highly-educated people. In the second semester, the MMR were 1.12 in both sexes among lower-educated people and 1.13 in women and 1.16 in men among highly-educated people. CONCLUSION: Lower-educated people within working age and highly-educated people at older ages showed the greatest increase in all-cause mortality in 2020, compared to the pre-pandemic period.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Male , Humans , Female , Aged , Adult , Middle Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , Spain/epidemiology , Educational Status , Mortality
9.
Euro Surveill ; 29(1)2024 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38179626

ABSTRACT

To monitor relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against COVID-19-related hospitalisation of the first, second and third COVID-19 booster (vs complete primary vaccination), we performed monthly Cox regression models using retrospective cohorts constructed from electronic health registries in eight European countries, October 2021-July 2023. Within 12 weeks of administration, each booster showed high rVE (≥ 70% for second and third boosters). However, as of July 2023, most of the relative benefit has waned, particularly in persons ≥ 80-years-old, while some protection remained in 65-79-year-olds.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Retrospective Studies , Vaccine Efficacy , Europe/epidemiology , Hospitalization
10.
JAMA Netw Open ; 6(10): e2336854, 2023 10 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37792377

ABSTRACT

Importance: Protein recombinant vaccine NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax) against COVID-19 was authorized for its use in adults in late 2021, but evidence on its estimated effectiveness in a general population is lacking. Objective: To estimate vaccine effectiveness of a primary cycle with NVX-CoV2373 against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study linking data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system in Italy during a period of Omicron predominance. All adults starting a primary vaccination with NVX-CoV2373 between February 28 and September 4, 2022, were included, with follow-up ending on September 25, 2022. Data were analyzed in February 2023. Exposures: Partial (1 dose only) vaccination and full vaccination (2 doses) with NVX-CoV-2373. Main Outcomes and Measures: Notified SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. Poisson regression models were used to estimate effectiveness against both outcomes. Adjusted estimated vaccine effectiveness was calculated as (1 - incidence rate ratio) × 100. Results: The study included 20 903 individuals who started the primary cycle during the study period. Median (IQR) age of participants was 52 (39-61) years, 10 794 (51.6%) were female, and 20 592 participants (98.5%) had no factors associated with risk for severe COVID-19. Adjusted estimated vaccine effectiveness against notified SARS-CoV-2 infection in those partially vaccinated with NVX-CoV2373 was 23% (95% CI, 13%-33%) and was 31% (95% CI, 22%-39%) in those fully vaccinated. Estimated vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 31% (95% CI, 16%-44%) in those partially vaccinated and 50% (95% CI, 40%-58%) in those fully vaccinated. Estimated effectiveness during the first 4 months after completion of the primary cycle decreased against SARS-CoV-2 infection but remained stable against symptomatic COVID-19. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that, in an Omicron-dominant period, protein recombinant vaccine NVX-CoV2373 was associated with protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. The use of this vaccine could remain an important element in reducing the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Vaccines, Synthetic
11.
Euro Surveill ; 28(40)2023 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37796443

ABSTRACT

International comparisons of COVID-19 incidence rates have helped gain insights into the characteristics of the disease, benchmark disease impact, shape public health measures and inform potential travel restrictions and border control measures. However, these comparisons may be biased by differences in COVID-19 surveillance systems and approaches to reporting in each country. To better understand these differences and their impact on incidence comparisons, we collected data on surveillance systems from six European countries: Belgium, England, France, Italy, Romania and Sweden. Data collected included: target testing populations, access to testing, case definitions, data entry and management and statistical approaches to incidence calculation. Average testing, incidence and contextual data were also collected. Data represented the surveillance systems as they were in mid-May 2021. Overall, important differences between surveillance systems were detected. Results showed wide variations in testing rates, access to free testing and the types of tests recorded in national databases, which may substantially limit incidence comparability. By systematically including testing information when comparing incidence rates, these comparisons may be greatly improved. New indicators incorporating testing or existing indicators such as death or hospitalisation will be important to improving international comparisons.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Incidence , COVID-19/epidemiology , Europe/epidemiology , Italy , Romania
12.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(8): e13181, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37599801

ABSTRACT

Background: The difficulty in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections has not only been the major obstacle to control the COVID-19 pandemic but also to quantify changes in the proportion of infections resulting in hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, or death. Methods: We developed a model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and vaccination informed by official estimates of the time-varying reproduction number to estimate infections that occurred in Italy between February 2020 and 2022. Model outcomes were compared with the Italian National surveillance data to estimate changes in the SARS-CoV-2 infection ascertainment ratio (IAR), infection hospitalization ratio (IHR), infection ICU ratio (IIR), and infection fatality ratio (IFR) in five different sub-periods associated with the dominance of the ancestral lineages and Alpha, Delta, and Omicron BA.1 variants. Results: We estimate that, over the first 2 years of pandemic, the IAR ranged between 15% and 40% (range of 95%CI: 11%-61%), with a peak value in the second half of 2020. The IHR, IIR, and IFR consistently decreased throughout the pandemic with 22-44-fold reductions between the initial phase and the Omicron period. At the end of the study period, we estimate an IHR of 0.24% (95%CI: 0.17-0.36), IIR of 0.015% (95%CI: 0.011-0.023), and IFR of 0.05% (95%CI: 0.04-0.08). Conclusions: Since 2021, changes in the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant, vaccination rollout, and the shift of infection to younger ages have reduced SARS-CoV-2 infection ascertainment. The same factors, combined with the improvement of patient management and care, contributed to a massive reduction in the severity and fatality of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Hospitalization
13.
Euro Surveill ; 28(32)2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37561053

ABSTRACT

During predominant circulation of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron XBB.1.5 and other XBB sublineages (April-June 2023), we found that a second or third booster of Comirnaty bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine, versus a first booster received at least 120 days earlier, was effective in preventing severe COVID-19 for more than 6 months post-administration in persons 60 years and above. In view of autumn 2023 vaccination campaigns, use of bivalent Original/Omicron BA.4-5 mRNA vaccines might be warranted until monovalent COVID-19 vaccines targeting Omicron XBB.1 sublineages become available.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Italy/epidemiology , mRNA Vaccines , RNA, Messenger , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Middle Aged , Aged
14.
Lancet Infect Dis ; 23(12): 1349-1359, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37478877

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence is available on the additional protection conferred by second mRNA vaccine boosters against severe COVID-19 caused by omicron BA.5 infection, and whether the adapted bivalent boosters provide additional protection compared with the monovalent ones. In this study, we aimed to estimate the relative effectiveness of a second booster with monovalent or bivalent mRNA vaccines against severe COVID-19 in Italy. METHODS: Linking data from the Italian vaccination registry and the SARS-CoV-2 surveillance system, between Sept 12, 2022, and Jan 7, 2023, we matched 1:1 each person aged 60 years or older receiving a second booster with a person who had received the first booster only at least 120 days earlier. We used hazard ratios, estimated through Cox proportional hazard models, to compare the hazard of severe COVID-19 between the first booster group and each type of second booster (monovalent mRNA vaccine targeting the original strain of SARS-CoV-2, bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting the original strain plus omicron BA.1 [bivalent original/BA.1], and bivalent mRNA vaccine targeting the original strain plus omicron BA.4 and BA.5 [bivalent original/BA.4-5]). Relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) was calculated as (1-hazard ratio) × 100. FINDINGS: We analysed a total of 2 129 559 matched pairs. The estimated rVE against severe COVID-19 with the bivalent original/BA.4-5 booster was 50·6% (95% CI 46·0-54·8) in the overall time interval 14-118 days post-administration. Overall, rVE was 49·3% (43·6-54·4) for the bivalent original/BA.1 booster and 26·9% (11·8-39·3) for the monovalent booster. For the bivalent original/BA.4-5 booster, we did not observe relevant differences in rVE between the 60-79-year age group (overall, 53·6%; 46·8-59·5) and those aged 80 years or older (overall, 48·3%; 41·9-54·0). INTERPRETATION: These findings suggest that a second booster with mRNA vaccines provides additional protection against severe COVID-19 due to omicron BA.5 (the predominant circulating subvariant in Italy during the study period) in people aged 60 years or older. Although rVE decreased over time, a second booster with the original/BA.4-5 mRNA vaccine, currently the most used in Italy, was found to be still providing protection 4 months post-administration. FUNDING: NextGenerationEU-MUR-PNRR Extended Partnership initiative on Emerging Infectious Diseases (project number PE00000007, INF-ACT). TRANSLATION: For the Italian translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Italy/epidemiology , RNA, Messenger/genetics , Vaccines, Combined , mRNA Vaccines
15.
Front Public Health ; 11: 1143189, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37151598

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the differences in incidence, non-intensive care unit (non-ICU) and intensive care unit (ICU) hospital admissions, and COVID-19-related mortality between the "inner areas" of Italy and its metropolitan areas. Study design: Retrospective population-based study conducted from the beginning of the pandemic in Italy (20 February 2020) to 31 March 2022. Methods: The municipalities of Italy were classified into metropolitan areas, peri-urban/intermediate areas and "inner areas" (peripheral/ultra-peripheral). The exposure variable was residence in an "inner area" of Italy. Incidence of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, non-ICU and ICU hospital admissions and death within 30 days from diagnosis were the outcomes of the study. COVID-19 vaccination access was also evaluated. Crude and age-standardized rates were calculated for all the study outcomes. The association between the type of area of residence and each outcome under study was evaluated by calculating the ratios between the standardized rates. All the analyses were stratified by period of observation (original Wuhan strain, Alpha variant, Delta variant, Omicron variant). Results: Incidence and non-ICUs admissions rates were lower in "inner areas." ICU admission and mortality rates were much lower in "inner areas" in the early phases of the pandemic, but this protection progressively diminished, with a slight excess risk observed in the "inner areas" during the Omicron period. The greater vaccination coverage in metropolitan areas may explain this trend. Conclusion: Prioritizing healthcare planning through the strengthening of the primary prevention policies in the peripheral areas of Italy is fundamental to guarantee health equity policies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19 Vaccines , Socioeconomic Factors
16.
Euro Surveill ; 28(8)2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36820640

ABSTRACT

Effectiveness against severe COVID-19 of a second booster dose of the bivalent (original/BA.4-5) mRNA vaccine 7-90 days post-administration, relative to a first booster dose of an mRNA vaccine received ≥ 120 days earlier, was ca 60% both in persons ≥ 60 years never infected and in those infected > 6 months before. Relative effectiveness in those infected 4-6 months earlier indicated no significant additional protection (10%; 95% CI: -44 to 44). A second booster vaccination 6 months after the latest infection may be warranted.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Italy/epidemiology , RNA, Messenger , Vaccination , mRNA Vaccines
17.
Int J Infect Dis ; 129: 135-141, 2023 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36708869

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: During 2022, Omicron became the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant in Europe. This study aims to assess the impact of such variant on severe disease from SARS-CoV-2 compared with the Delta variant in Italy. METHODS: Using surveillance data, we assessed the risk of developing severe COVID-19 with Omicron infection compared with Delta in individuals aged ≥12 years using a multilevel negative binomial model adjusting for sex, age, vaccination status, occupation, previous infection, weekly incidence, and geographical area. We also analyzed the interaction between the sequenced variant, age, and vaccination status. RESULTS: We included 21,645 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection where genome sequencing found Delta (10,728) or Omicron (10,917), diagnosed from November 15, 2021 to February 01, 2022. Overall, 3,021 cases developed severe COVID-19. We found that Omicron cases had a reduced risk of severe COVID-19 compared with Delta cases (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.86). The largest difference was observed in cases aged 40-59 (IRR = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.55-0.79), while no protective effect was found in those aged 12-39 (IRR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.79-1.33). Vaccination was associated with a lower risk of developing severe COVID-19 in both variants. CONCLUSION: The Omicron variant is associated with a lower risk of severe COVID-19 compared to infection with the Delta variant, but the degree of protection varies with age.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Italy/epidemiology , Europe
18.
Vaccine ; 41(1): 76-84, 2023 01 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36400660

ABSTRACT

Several countries started a 2nd booster COVID-19 vaccination campaign targeting the elderly population, but evidence around its effectiveness is still scarce. This study aims to estimate the relative effectiveness of a 2nd booster dose of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the population aged ≥ 80 years in Italy, during predominant circulation of the Omicron BA.2 and BA.5 subvariants. We linked routine data from the national vaccination registry and the COVID-19 surveillance system. On each day between 11 April and 6 August 2022, we matched 1:1, according to several demographic and clinical characteristics, individuals who received the 2nd booster vaccine dose with individuals who received the 1st booster vaccine dose at least 120 days earlier. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to compare the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) between the two groups, calculating the relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) as (1 - risk ratio)X100. Based on the analysis of 831,555 matched pairs, we found that a 2nd booster dose of mRNA vaccine, 14-118 days post administration, was moderately effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to a 1st booster dose administered at least 120 days earlier [14.3 %, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 2.2-20.2]. RVE decreased from 28.5 % (95 % CI: 24.7-32.1) in the time-interval 14-28 days to 7.6 % (95 % CI: -14.1 to 18.3) in the time-interval 56-118 days. However, RVE against severe COVID-19 was higher (34.0 %, 95 % CI: 23.4-42.7), decreasing from 43.2 % (95 % CI: 30.6-54.9) to 27.2 % (95 % CI: 8.3-42.9) over the same time span. Although RVE against SARS-CoV-2 infection was much reduced 2-4 months after a 2nd booster dose, RVE against severe COVID-19 was about 30 %, even during prevalent circulation of the Omicron BA.5 subvariant. The cost-benefit of a 3rd booster dose for the elderly people who received the 2nd booster dose at least four months earlier should be carefully evaluated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Aged , Humans , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Italy/epidemiology , mRNA Vaccines
19.
PLoS One ; 17(10): e0275667, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36215304

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The role of school contacts in the spread of the virus and the effectiveness of school closures in controlling the epidemic is still debated. We aimed to quantify the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the school setting by type of school, characteristics of the index case and calendar period in the Province of Reggio Emilia (RE), Italy. The secondary aim was to estimate the speed of implementation of contact tracing. METHODS: A population-based analysis of surveillance data on all COVID-19 cases occurring in RE, Italy, from 1 September 2020, to 4 April 2021, for which a school contact and/or exposure was suspected. An indicator of the delay in contact tracing was calculated as the time elapsed since the index case was determined to be positive and the date on which the swab test for classmates was scheduled (or most were scheduled). RESULTS: Overall, 30,184 and 13,608 contacts among classmates and teachers/staff, respectively, were identified and were recommended for testing, and 43,214 (98.7%) underwent the test. Secondary transmission occurred in about 40% of the investigated classes, and the overall secondary case attack rate was 4%. This rate was slightly higher when the index case was a teacher but with almost no differences by type of school, and was stable during the study period. Speed of implementation of contact tracing increased during the study period, with the time from index case identification to testing of contacts being reduced from seven to three days. The ability to identify the possible source of infection in the index case also increased. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the spread of the Alpha variant during the study period in RE, the secondary case attack rate remained stable from school reopening in September 2020 until the beginning of April 2021.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Contact Tracing , Humans , Incidence
20.
Euro Surveill ; 27(36)2022 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36082685

ABSTRACT

As in 2018, when a large West Nile virus (WNV) epidemic occurred, the 2022 vector season in Italy was marked by an early onset of WNV circulation in mosquitoes and birds. Human infections were limited until early July, when we observed a rapid increase in the number of cases. We describe the epidemiology of human infections and animal and vector surveillance for WNV and compare the more consolidated data of June and July 2022 with the same period in 2018.


Subject(s)
Culicidae , West Nile Fever , West Nile virus , Animals , Birds , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Mosquito Vectors , West Nile Fever/epidemiology , West Nile Fever/veterinary
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...