Assessment of potential adverse events following the 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccines among U.S. adults aged 65 years and older.

BACKGROUND: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. METHODS: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination.

Overview of U.S. COVID-19 vaccine safety surveillance systems.

The U.S. COVID-19 vaccination program, which commenced in December 2020, has been instrumental in preventing morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 disease. Safety monitoring has been an essential component of the program. The federal government undertook a comprehensive and coordinated approach to implement complementary safety monitoring systems and to communicate findings in a timely and transparent way to healthcare providers, policymakers, and the public. Monitoring involved both well-established and newly developed systems that relied on both spontaneous (passive) and active surveillance methods. Clinical consultation for individual cases of adverse events following vaccination was performed, and monitoring of special populations, such as pregnant persons, was conducted. This report describes the U.S. government's COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring systems and programs used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Indian Health Service. Using the adverse event of myocarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination as a model, we demonstrate how the multiple, complementary monitoring systems worked to rapidly detect, assess, and verify a vaccine safety signal. In addition, longer-term follow-up was conducted to evaluate the recovery status of myocarditis cases following vaccination. Finally, the process for timely and transparent communication and dissemination of COVID-19 vaccine safety data is described, highlighting the responsiveness and robustness of the U.S. vaccine safety monitoring infrastructure during the national COVID-19 vaccination program.

Safety of Ancestral Monovalent BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 Vaccines in US Children Aged 6 Months to 17 Years.

Importance: Active monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination provides early detection of rare outcomes that may not be identified in prelicensure trials. Objective: To conduct near-real-time monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated 21 prespecified health outcomes after exposure before early 2023 to BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 ancestral monovalent COVID-19 vaccines in children aged 6 months to 17 years by applying a near-real-time monitoring framework using health care data from 3 commercial claims databases in the US (Optum [through April 2023], Carelon Research [through March 2023], and CVS Health [through February 2023]). Increased rates of each outcome after vaccination were compared with annual historical rates from January 1 to December 31, 2019, and January 1 to December 31, 2020, as well as between April 1 and December 31, 2020. Exposure: Receipt of an ancestral monovalent BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 vaccine dose identified through administrative claims data linked with Immunization Information Systems data. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twenty-one prespecified health outcomes, of which 15 underwent sequential testing and 6 were only monitored descriptively due to lack of historical rates. Results: Among 4 102 016 vaccinated enrollees aged 6 months to 17 years, 2 058 142 (50.2%) were male and 3 901 370 (95.1%) lived in an urban area. Thirteen of 15 sequentially tested outcomes did not meet the threshold for a statistical signal. Statistical signals were detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 vaccination in children aged 12 to 17 years and seizure after vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 in children aged 2 to 4 or 5 years. However, in post hoc sensitivity analyses, a statistical signal for seizure was observed only after mRNA-1273 when 2019 background rates were selected; no statistical signal was observed when 2022 rates were selected. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of pediatric enrollees across 3 commercial health insurance databases, statistical signals detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 (ages 12-17 years) were consistent with previous reports, and seizures after BNT162b2 (ages 2-4 years) and mRNA-1273 vaccinations (ages 2-5 years) should be further investigated in a robust epidemiologic study with confounding adjustment. The US Food and Drug Administration concludes that the known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks of COVID-19 infection.

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 ).

Real-world Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Among US Nursing Home Residents Aged ≥65 Years in the Pre-Delta and High Delta Periods.

Background: Long-term care residents were among the most vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Medicare nursing home residents aged ≥65 years during pre-Delta and high Delta periods. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 13 December 2020 to 20 November 2021 using Medicare claims data. Exposures included 2 and 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. We used inverse probability weighting and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate absolute and relative vaccine effectiveness. Results: Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death was 69.8% (95% CI, 65.9%‒73.3%) during the pre-Delta period and 55.7% (49.5%‒61.1%) during the high Delta period, without adjusting for time since vaccination. We observed substantial waning of effectiveness from 65.1% (54.2%‒73.5%) within 6 months from second-dose vaccination to 45.2% (30.6%‒56.7%) ≥6 months after second-dose vaccination in the high Delta period. Three doses provided 88.7% (73.5%‒95.2%) vaccine effectiveness against death, and the incremental benefit of 3 vs 2 doses was 74.6% (40.4%‒89.2%) during high Delta. Among beneficiaries with a prior COVID-19 infection, 3-dose vaccine effectiveness for preventing death was 78.6% (50.0%‒90.8%), and the additional protection of 3 vs 2 doses was 70.0% (30.1%‒87.1%) during high Delta. Vaccine effectiveness estimates against less severe outcomes (eg, infection) were lower. Conclusions: This nationwide real-world study demonstrated that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provided substantial protection against COVID-19-related death. Two-dose protection waned after 6 months. Third doses during the high Delta period provided significant additional protection for individuals with or without a prior COVID-19 infection.

Stroke Risk After COVID-19 Bivalent Vaccination Among US Older Adults.

Importance: In January 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Food and Drug Administration noted a safety concern for ischemic stroke among adults aged 65 years or older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine. Objective: To evaluate stroke risk after administration of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, (2) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine on the same day (concomitant administration), and (3) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: Self-controlled case series including 11 001 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (among 5 397 278 vaccinated individuals). The study period was August 31, 2022, through February 4, 2023. Exposures: Receipt of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (primary) or (2) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine (secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures: Stroke risk (nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, combined outcome of nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke) during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window after vaccination vs the 43- to 90-day control window. Results: There were 5 397 278 Medicare beneficiaries who received either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (median age, 74 years [IQR, 70-80 years]; 56% were women). Among the 11 001 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there were no statistically significant associations between either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine and the outcomes of nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window vs the 43- to 90-day control window (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 0.72-1.12). Among the 4596 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after concomitant administration of either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window for the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.13 [95% CI, 0.05-6.22]) and a statistically significant association between vaccination and transient ischemic attack during the 1- to 21-day risk window for the Moderna mRNA-1273.222 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.06-1.74]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.33 [95% CI, 0.46-6.20]). Among the 21 345 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after administration of a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window (IRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.43-2.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there was no evidence of a significantly elevated risk for stroke during the days immediately after vaccination.

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).

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.

HIV risk behavior profiles among men who have sex with men interested in donating blood: Findings from the Assessing Donor Variability and New Concepts in Eligibility study.

BACKGROUND: Individual risk assessment allows donors to be evaluated based on their own behaviors. Study objectives were to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk behaviors in men who have sex with men (MSM) and estimate the proportion of the study population who would not be deferred for higher risk HIV sexual behaviors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional survey and biomarker assessment were conducted in eight U.S. cities. Participants were sexually active MSM interested in blood donation aged 18-39 years, assigned male sex at birth. Participants completed surveys during two study visits to define eligibility, and self-reported sexual and HIV prevention behaviors. Blood was drawn at study visit 1 and tested for HIV and the presence of tenofovir, one of the drugs in oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Associations were assessed between HIV infection status or HIV PrEP use and behaviors, including sex partners, new partners, and anal sex. RESULTS: A total of 1566 MSM completed the visit 1 questionnaire and blood draw and 1197 completed the visit 2 questionnaire. Among 1562 persons without HIV, 789 (50.4%) were not taking PrEP. Of those not taking PrEP, 66.2% reported one sexual partner or no anal sex and 69% reported no new sexual partners or no anal sex with a new partner in the past 3 months. CONCLUSION: The study found that questions were able to identify sexually active, HIV-negative MSM who report lower risk sexual behaviors. About a quarter of enrolled study participants would be potentially eligible blood donors using individual risk assessment questions.

Risk of Severe COVID-19 in Prevalent Users of Alpha-1 Adrenergic Receptor Antagonists: A National Case-Control Study of Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonists prevent cytokine storm in mouse sepsis models. This led to the hypothesis that alpha-1 blockers may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is characterized by hypercytokinemia and progressive respiratory failure. METHODS: We performed an observational case-control study in male Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, with or without benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and treated with alpha-1 receptor blockers or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for outcomes of uncomplicated and severe COVID-19 hospitalization (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death). RESULTS: There were 20,963 cases of hospitalized COVID-19 matched to 101,161 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. In the primary analysis (males with BPH), there was no difference in risk of uncomplicated COVID-19 hospitalization (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.996-1.17) or hospitalization with severe complications (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.08). In the secondary analysis (males with or without BPH), the corresponding aORs were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96-1.09) (uncomplicated) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.91-1.07) (complicated), respectively. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. Of note, there was no difference in risk of severe COVID-19 hospitalization when comparing non-selective vs selective alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.10), higher- vs lower-dose alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.08), or current vs remote alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalent use of alpha-1 receptor blockers was not associated with a protective or harmful effect on risk of uncomplicated or severe hospitalized COVID-19.

Benefit-risk assessment of Covid-19 vaccine, MRNA (MRNA-1273) for males age 18-64 years.

Since the authorization of the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, real-world evidence has indicated its effectiveness in preventing COVID-19 cases. However, increased cases of mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis have been reported, predominantly in young adults and adolescents. The Food and Drug Administration conducted a benefit-risk assessment to inform the review of the Biologics License Application for use of the Moderna vaccine among individuals ages 18 and older. We modeled the benefit-risk per million individuals who receive two complete doses of the vaccine. Benefit endpoints were vaccine-preventable COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths. The risk endpoints were vaccine-related myocarditis/pericarditis cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths. The analysis was conducted on the age-stratified male population due to data signals and previous work showing males to be the main risk group. We constructed six scenarios to evaluate the impact of uncertainty associated with pandemic dynamics, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against novel variants, and rates of vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis cases on the model results. For our most likely scenario, we assumed the US COVID-19 incidence was for the week of December 25, 2021, with a VE of 30% against cases and 72% against hospitalization with the Omicron-dominant strain. Our source for estimating vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rates was FDA's CBER Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) System databases. Overall, our results supported the conclusion that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh its risks. Remarkably, we predicted vaccinating one million 18-25 year-old males would prevent 82,484 cases, 4,766 hospitalizations, 1,144 ICU admissions, and 51 deaths due to COVID-19, comparing to 128 vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis cases, 110 hospitalizations, zero ICU admissions, and zero deaths. Uncertainties in the pandemic trajectory, effectiveness of vaccine against novel variants, and vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rate are important limitations of our analysis. Also, the model does not evaluate potential long-term adverse effects due to either COVID-19 or vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis.

Evaluation of potential adverse events following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among adults aged 65 years and older: Two self-controlled studies in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Our near-real-time safety monitoring of 16 adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination identified potential elevation in risk for six AEs following primary series and monovalent booster dose administration. The crude association with AEs does not imply causality. Accordingly, we conducted robust evaluation of potential associations. METHODS: We conducted two self-controlled case series studies of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) in U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years. Adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated following primary series doses for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), pulmonary embolism (PE), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC); and following monovalent booster doses for AMI, PE, ITP, Bell's Palsy (BP) and Myocarditis/Pericarditis (Myo/Peri). RESULTS: The primary series study included 3,360,981 individuals who received 6,388,542 primary series doses; the booster study included 6,156,100 individuals with one monovalent booster dose. The AMI IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.91 to 1.18) and 1.06 (95 % CI: 1.003 to 1.12), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.01 (95 % CI: 0.82 to 1.26) and 1.05 (95 % CI: 0.998 to 1.11), respectively. The hospital inpatient PE IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.19 (95 % CI: 1.03 to 1.38) and 0.86 (95 % CI: 0.78 to 0.95), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.15 (95 % CI: 0.94 to 1.41) and 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.79 to 0.96), respectively. The studies' results do not support that exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines elevate the risk of ITP, DIC, Myo/Peri, and BP. CONCLUSION: We did not find an increased risk for AMI, ITP, DIC, BP, and Myo/Peri and there was not consistent evidence for PE after exposure to COVID-19 mRNA primary series or monovalent booster vaccines. These results support the favorable safety profile of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines administered in the U.S. elderly population.

Use of Immunization Information Systems in Ascertainment of COVID-19 Vaccinations for Claims-Based Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness Studies.

Importance: Safety and effectiveness studies of COVID-19 vaccines are being conducted using clinical data, including administrative claims. However, claims data only partially capture administered COVID-19 vaccine doses for numerous reasons, such as vaccination at sites that do not generate claims for reimbursement. Objective: To evaluate the extent to which Immunization Information Systems (IIS) data linked to claims data enhances claims-based COVID-19 vaccine capture for a commercially insured population and to estimate the magnitude of misclassification of vaccinated individuals as having unvaccinated status in the linked IIS and claims data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used claims data from a commercial health insurance database and obtained vaccination data from IIS repositories in 11 US states. Participants were individuals younger than 65 years who resided in 1 of 11 states of interest and who were insured in health plans from December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated proportion of individuals with at least 1 dose of any COVID-19 vaccine and proportion of individuals with a completed vaccine series based on general population guidelines. Vaccination status estimates were calculated and compared using claims data alone and linked IIS and claims data. Remaining misclassification of vaccination status was assessed by comparing linked IIS and claims data estimates with estimates from external surveillance data sources (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] and state Department of Health [DOH]) and capture-recapture analysis. Results: This cohort study included 5 112 722 individuals (mean [SD] age, 33.5 [17.6] years; 2 618 098 females [51.2%]) from 11 states. Characteristics of those who received at least 1 vaccine dose and those who completed a vaccine series were similar to the overall study population. The proportion with at least 1 vaccine dose increased from 32.8% using claims data alone to 48.1% when the data were supplemented with IIS vaccination records. Vaccination estimates using linked IIS and claims data varied widely by state. The percentage of individuals who completed a vaccine series increased from 24.4% to 41.9% after the addition of IIS vaccine records and varied across states. The percentages of underrecording using linked IIS and claims data were 12.1% to 47.1% lower than those using CDC data, 9.1% to 46.9% lower than the state DOH, and 9.2% to 50.9% lower than capture-recapture analysis. Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this study suggested that supplementing COVID-19 claims records with IIS vaccination records substantially increased the number of individuals who were identified as vaccinated, yet potential underrecording remained. Improvements in reporting vaccination data to IIS infrastructures could allow frequent updates of vaccination status for all individuals and all vaccines.

Evaluation of association of anti-PEG antibodies with anaphylaxis after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism for anaphylaxis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination has been widely debated; understanding this serious adverse event is important for future vaccines of similar design. A mechanism proposed is type I hypersensitivity (i.e., IgE-mediated mast cell degranulation) to polyethylene glycol (PEG). Using an assay that, uniquely, had been previously assessed in patients with anaphylaxis to PEG, our objective was to compare anti-PEG IgE in serum from mRNA COVID-19 vaccine anaphylaxis case-patients and persons vaccinated without allergic reactions. Secondarily, we compared anti-PEG IgG and IgM to assess alternative mechanisms. METHODS: Selected anaphylaxis case-patients reported to U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System December 14, 2020-March 25, 2021 were invited to provide a serum sample. mRNA COVID-19 vaccine study participants with residual serum and no allergic reaction post-vaccination ("controls") were frequency matched to cases 3:1 on vaccine and dose number, sex and 10-year age category. Anti-PEG IgE was measured using a dual cytometric bead assay (DCBA). Anti-PEG IgG and IgM were measured using two different assays: DCBA and a PEGylated-polystyrene bead assay. Laboratorians were blinded to case/control status. RESULTS: All 20 case-patients were women; 17 had anaphylaxis after dose 1, 3 after dose 2. Thirteen (65 %) were hospitalized and 7 (35 %) were intubated. Time from vaccination to serum collection was longer for case-patients vs controls (post-dose 1: median 105 vs 21 days). Among Moderna recipients, anti-PEG IgE was detected in 1 of 10 (10 %) case-patients vs 8 of 30 (27 %) controls (p = 0.40); among Pfizer-BioNTech recipients, it was detected in 0 of 10 case-patients (0 %) vs 1 of 30 (3 %) controls (p >n 0.99). Anti-PEG IgE quantitative signals followed this same pattern. Neither anti-PEG IgG nor IgM was associated with case status with both assay formats. CONCLUSION: Our results support that anti-PEG IgE is not a predominant mechanism for anaphylaxis post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

Safety of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine in Children Aged 5 to 17 Years.

Importance: Active monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination offers early detection of rare outcomes that may not be identified in prelicensure trials. Objective: To conduct near-real-time monitoring of health outcomes following BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population aged 5 to 17 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based study was conducted under a public health surveillance mandate from the US Food and Drug Administration. Participants aged 5 to 17 years were included if they received BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination through mid 2022 and had continuous enrollment in a medical health insurance plan from the start of an outcome-specific clean window until the COVID-19 vaccination. Surveillance of 20 prespecified health outcomes was conducted in near real time within a cohort of vaccinated individuals from the earliest Emergency Use Authorization date for the BNT162b2 vaccination (December 11, 2020) and was expanded as more pediatric age groups received authorization through May and June 2022. All 20 health outcomes were monitored descriptively, 13 of which additionally underwent sequential testing. For these 13 health outcomes, the increased risk of each outcome after vaccination was compared with a historical baseline with adjustments for repeated looks at the data as well as a claims processing delay. A sequential testing approach was used, which declared a safety signal when the log likelihood ratio comparing the observed rate ratio against the null hypothesis exceeded a critical value. Exposure: Exposure was defined as receipt of a BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine dose. The primary analysis assessed primary series doses together (dose 1 + dose 2), and dose-specific secondary analyses were conducted. Follow-up time was censored for death, disenrollment, end of the outcome-specific risk window, end of the study period, or a receipt of a subsequent vaccine dose. Main Outcomes: Twenty prespecified health outcomes: 13 were assessed using sequential testing and 7 were monitored descriptively because of a lack of historical comparator data. Results: This study included 3 017 352 enrollees aged 5 to 17 years. Of the enrollees across all 3 databases, 1 510 817 (50.1%) were males, 1 506 499 (49.9%) were females, and 2 867 436 (95.0%) lived in an urban area. In the primary sequential analyses, a safety signal was observed only for myocarditis or pericarditis after primary series vaccination with BNT162b2 in the age group 12 to 17 years across all 3 databases. No safety signals were observed for the 12 other outcomes assessed using sequential testing. Conclusions and Relevance: Among 20 health outcomes that were monitored in near real time, a safety signal was identified for only myocarditis or pericarditis. Consistent with other published reports, these results provide additional evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are safe in children.

A Retrospective Review of Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Advisory Committee Meetings in the Context of the FDA's Benefit-Risk Framework.

The US FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) is responsible for the regulation of biologically derived products. FDA has established Advisory Committees (AC) as vehicles to seek external expert advice on scientific and technical matters related to the development and evaluation of products regulated by the agency. We aimed to identify and evaluate common topics discussed in CBER AC meetings during the regulatory decision-making process for biological products and medical devices. We analyzed the content of 119 CBER-led AC meetings between 2009 and 2021 listed on the FDA AC webpage. We reviewed publicly available meeting materials such as briefing documents, summaries, and transcripts. Using a structured review codebook based on FDA benefit-risk guidance, we identified important considerations within the benefit-risk dimensions discussed at the AC meetings: therapeutic context, benefit, risk and risk management, and benefit-risk trade-off, where evidence and uncertainty are critical parts of the FDA benefit-risk framework. Based on a detailed review of 24 topics discussed in 23 selected AC meetings conducted between 2016 and 2021, the two most frequently discussed considerations were "Uncertainty about assessment of the safety profile" and "Uncertainty about assessment of the benefit based on clinical trial data" (16/24 times each) as defined in our codebook. Most of the reviewed meetings discussed Investigational New Drug or Biologics License Applications of products. This review could help sponsors better plan and design studies by contextualizing how the benefit-risk dimensions were embedded in the AC discussions and the considerations that went into the final AC recommendations.

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.

Modeling the Risk of HIV Transfusion Transmission.

BACKGROUND: Blood donations are routinely screened for HIV to prevent an infectious unit from being released to the blood supply. Despite improvements to blood screening assays, donations from infected donors remain undetectable during the window period (WP), when the virus has not yet replicated above the lower limit of detection (LOD) of a screening assay. To aid in the quantitative risk assessments of WP donations, a dose-response model describing the probability of transfusion-transmission of HIV over a range of viral RNA copies was developed. METHODS: An exponential model was chosen based on data fit and parsimony. A data set from a HIV challenge study using a nonhuman primate model and another data set from reported human blood transfusions associated with HIV infected donors were separately fit to the model to generate parameter estimates. A Bayesian framework using No-U-Turn Sampling (NUTS) and Monte Carlo simulations was performed to generate posterior distributions quantifying uncertainty in parameter estimation and model predictions. RESULTS: The parameters of the exponential model for both nonhuman primate and human data were estimated with a mean (95% credible intervals) of 2.70 × 10 -2 (7.74 × 10 -3 , 6.06 × 10 -2 ) and 7.56 × 10 -4 (3.68 × 10 -4 , 1.31 × 10 -3 ), respectively. The predicted ID 50 for the animal and human models was 26 (12, 90) and 918 (529, 1886) RNA copies transfused, respectively. CONCLUSION: This dose-response model can be used in a quantitative framework to estimate the probability of transfusion-transmission of HIV through WP donations. These models can be especially informative when assessing risk from blood components with low viral load.