A Propensity Score Approach and a Partitioned Approach for the Self-Controlled Case Series Design to Evaluate Safety of a 2-dose Vaccine Series: Application to myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

The assumption that serious adverse events (SAEs) do not affect subsequent exposure might not hold when evaluating 2-dose vaccine safety through a self-controlled case series (SCCS) design. To address this, we developed: 1) propensity score SCCS (PS-SCCS) using a propensity score model involving SAEs during the risk interval after dose 1 (${R}_1\Big)$, and 2) partitioned SCCS (P-SCCS) estimating relative incidence (RI) separately for doses 1 and 2. In simulations, both provided unbiased RIs. Conversely, standard SCCS overestimated RI after dose 2. We applied these approaches to assess myocarditis/pericarditis risks after 2-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in 12-39-year-olds. For BNT162b2, PS-SCCS yielded RIs of 1.85 (95% CI, 0.75-4.59) and 11.05 (95% CI, 6.53-18.68) 14 days after doses 1 and 2 respectively; standard SCCS provided similar RI after dose 1 and RI of 12.92 (95% CI, 7.56-22.09) after dose 2. For mRNA-1273, standard SCCS showed RIs of 1.96 (95% CI, 0.56-6.91) after dose 1 and 7.87 (95% CI, 3.33-18.57) after dose 2. As no mRNA-1273 recipients with SAEs during ${R}_1$ received dose 2, P-SCCS was used, yielding similar RI after dose 1 and RI of 6.48 (95% CI, 2.83-14.83) after dose 2. mRNA vaccines were associated with elevated myocarditis/pericarditis risks following dose 2 in 12-39-year-olds.

Ischemic Stroke After Bivalent COVID-19 Vaccination: Self-Controlled Case Series Study.

BACKGROUND: The potential association between bivalent COVID-19 vaccination and ischemic stroke remains uncertain, despite several studies conducted thus far. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of ischemic stroke following bivalent COVID-19 vaccination during the 2022-2023 season. METHODS: A self-controlled case series study was conducted among members aged 12 years and older who experienced ischemic stroke between September 1, 2022, and March 31, 2023, in a large health care system. Ischemic strokes were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes in emergency departments and inpatient settings. Exposures were Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna bivalent COVID-19 vaccination. Risk intervals were prespecified as 1-21 days and 1-42 days after bivalent vaccination; all non-risk-interval person-time served as the control interval. The incidence of ischemic stroke was compared in the risk interval and control interval using conditional Poisson regression. We conducted overall and subgroup analyses by age, history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and coadministration of influenza vaccine. When an elevated risk was detected, we performed a chart review of ischemic strokes and analyzed the risk of chart-confirmed ischemic stroke. RESULTS: With 4933 ischemic stroke events, we found no increased risk within the 21-day risk interval for the 2 vaccines and by subgroups. However, risk of ischemic stroke was elevated within the 42-day risk interval among individuals aged younger than 65 years with coadministration of Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent and influenza vaccines on the same day; the relative incidence (RI) was 2.13 (95% CI 1.01-4.46). Among those who also had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the RI was 3.94 (95% CI 1.10-14.16). After chart review, the RIs were 2.34 (95% CI 0.97-5.65) and 4.27 (95% CI 0.97-18.85), respectively. Among individuals aged younger than 65 years who received Moderna bivalent vaccine and had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the RI was 2.62 (95% CI 1.13-6.03) before chart review and 2.24 (95% CI 0.78-6.47) after chart review. Stratified analyses by sex did not show a significantly increased risk of ischemic stroke after bivalent vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: While the point estimate for the risk of chart-confirmed ischemic stroke was elevated in a risk interval of 1-42 days among individuals younger than 65 years with coadministration of Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent and influenza vaccines on the same day and among individuals younger than 65 years who received Moderna bivalent vaccine and had a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the risk was not statistically significant. The potential association between bivalent vaccination and ischemic stroke in the 1-42-day analysis warrants further investigation among individuals younger than 65 years with influenza vaccine coadministration and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Furthermore, the findings on ischemic stroke risk after bivalent COVID-19 vaccination underscore the need to evaluate monovalent COVID-19 vaccine safety during the 2023-2024 season.

Factors associated with uptake of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in a large US health care system.

BACKGROUND: Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were developed to provide protection against the original SARS-CoV-2 strain and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 variants, but uptake in the United States has been low. Sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake have been documented, but it is unclear if similar disparities persist among individuals who previously completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) including youth aged 5-17 years and adults aged ≥18 years who were KPSC members and had completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. Individuals were followed from index date (date of eligibility for bivalent vaccine) to 03/31/2023 to ascertain receipt of any dose of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine or until disenrollment from KPSC or death. Multivariable robust Poisson regression was conducted to assess the adjusted relative risk and 95 % confidence intervals of factors associated with receipt of bivalent vaccine. RESULTS: The final cohorts included 305,339 youth and 2,534,619 adults, of whom 19.5 % and 30.7 %, respectively, had received bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with being more likely to receive bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included older age, Asian race, more prior year outpatient and virtual visits, Charlson score ≥1, and immunocompromised status. Factors associated with being less likely to receive a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included age 12-17 vs 5-11 years, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity, ≥1 prior year inpatient or emergency department visits, prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adults only), Medicaid insurance, and higher neighborhood deprivation index. CONCLUSION: Even among youth and adults who had previously received a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine, sociodemographic and clinical disparities were observed in receipt of bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. These findings are critical to inform equitable strategies for the implementation of the updated monovalent COVID-19 vaccine targeting the Omicron XBB strain.

Risk Factors for Not Completing a 2-Dose Primary Series of Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccination in a Large Health Care System in Southern California: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination is crucial in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. Messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccines were initially authorized as a 2-dose primary series and have been widely used in the United States; completing the 2-dose primary series offers protection against infection, severe illness, and death. Understanding the risk factors for not completing the 2-dose primary series is critical to evaluate COVID-19 vaccination programs and promote completion of the 2-dose primary series. OBJECTIVE: This study examined potential risk factors for not completing a 2-dose primary series of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among members aged ≥18 years from a large integrated health care system, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, from December 14, 2020, to June 30, 2022. Noncompletion of the 2-dose primary series was defined as not completing the second dose within 6 months after receipt of the first dose. Crude noncompletion rates were estimated overall and by demographic characteristics, health care use patterns, comorbidity, and community-level socioeconomic factors. A Poisson regression model was fit to examine associations of individual-level and community-level risk factors with noncompletion of the 2-dose primary series. RESULTS: Among 2.5 million recipients of ≥1 dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, 3.3% (n=81,202) did not complete the second dose within 6 months. Members aged 25-44 years, 65-74 years, and ≥75 years were less likely to not complete the 2-dose primary series than those aged 18-24 years, while members aged 45-64 years were more likely to not complete the 2-dose primary series (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.13, 95% CI 1.10-1.15). Male sex was associated with a higher risk of noncompletion (aRR 1.17, 95% CI 1.15-1.19). Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity were associated with a lower risk of noncompletion (range aRR 0.78-0.91). Having Medicaid and prior influenza vaccination were associated with a higher risk of noncompletion. Having SARS-CoV-2 infection, experiencing an adverse event, or having an inpatient and emergency department visit during the minimum recommended dose intervals were associated with a higher risk of not completing the 2-dose primary series (aRR 1.98, 95% CI 1.85-2.12; 1.99, 95% CI 1.43-2.76; and 1.85, 95% CI 1.77-1.93, respectively). Those who received the first dose after June 30, 2021, were more likely to not complete the 2-dose primary series within 6 months of receipt of the first dose. CONCLUSIONS: Despite limitations such as being a single-site study and the inability to consider social factors such as employment and vaccine attitudes, our study identified several risk factors for not completing a 2-dose primary series of mRNA vaccination, including being male; having Medicaid coverage; and experiencing SARS-CoV-2 infection, adverse events, or inpatient and emergency department visits during the minimum recommended dose intervals. These findings can inform future efforts in developing effective strategies to enhance vaccination coverage and improve the completion rate of necessary doses.

Next-generation universal hereditary cancer screening: implementation of an automated hereditary cancer screening program for patients with advanced cancer undergoing tumor sequencing in a large HMO.

Variants in hereditary cancer risk genes are frequently identified following tumor-based DNA sequencing and represent an opportunity to diagnose hereditary cancer. We implemented an automated hereditary cancer screening program in a large HMO for all patients who underwent tumor-based DNA sequencing to identify patients with hereditary cancer and determine if this approach augmented existing genetic counseling approaches driven by personal/family history criteria. Regular automated searches of a centralized tumor DNA variant database were performed for ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, PALB2, and/or PMS2 variants, and germline hereditary cancer gene panel testing was offered to patients with tumor variants who had never undergone germline testing. Patients completing germline testing due to their tumor DNA test results were considered part of the tumor DNA safety net. Patients previously completing germline testing via traditional genetic counseling and tumor DNA safety net were compared for demographics, tumor type, presence of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant, and whether NCCN criteria were met for hereditary cancer genetic testing. Germline P/LP variants were common in both groups. Patients who received germline testing through traditional genetic counseling were more likely to have cardinal hereditary tumors than the tumor DNA safety net group. Patients identified with hereditary cancer through traditional genetic counseling were more likely to meet NCCN personal/family history criteria for germline testing than the tumor DNA safety net group (99% versus 34%). A universal tumor DNA safety net screen is an important diagnostic strategy which augments traditional genetic counseling approaches based on personal/family history.

Correction to: Understanding the Bariatric Patient Perspective in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study.

In the original article the list of author names and affiliations were incorrect.

Understanding the Bariatric Patient Perspective in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute funded the National Patient Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study (PBS). Understanding the experience of postoperative patients was a key component of this study. METHODS: Nine focus groups were conducted in Southern California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and Ohio and in a national advocacy conference for patients with obesity. Participants were identified and recruited in both clinical and community settings. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using an iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify global overarching themes. RESULTS: There were 76 focus group participants. Participants were mostly women (81.4%), had primarily undergone gastric sleeve (47.0%), were non-Hispanic white (51.4%), had some college education (44.3%), and made $100,000 annual income or less (65.7%). Qualitative findings included negative reactions patients received from friends, family, and co-workers once they disclosed that they had bariatric surgery to lose weight; and barriers to follow-up care included insurance coverage, emotional and situational challenges, and physical pain limiting mobility. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the other qualitative findings in this area. The approach to bariatric surgery should be expanded to provide long-term comprehensive care that includes in-depth postoperative lifetime monitoring of emotional and physical health.