Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 20
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Vaccine ; 2024 Feb 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38341293

RESUMO

During the COVID-19 pandemic, candidate COVID-19 vaccines were being developed for potential use in the United States on an unprecedented, accelerated schedule. It was anticipated that once available, under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) or FDA approval, COVID-19 vaccines would be broadly used and potentially administered to millions of individuals in a short period of time. Intensive monitoring in the post-EUA/licensure period would be necessary for timely detection and assessment of potential safety concerns. To address this, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) convened an Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) work group focused solely on COVID-19 vaccine safety, consisting of independent vaccine safety experts and representatives from federal agencies - the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group (VaST). This report provides an overview of the organization and activities of VaST, summarizes data reviewed as part of the comprehensive effort to monitor vaccine safety during the COVID-19 pandemic, and highlights selected actions taken by CDC, ACIP, and FDA in response to accumulating post-authorization safety data. VaST convened regular meetings over the course of 29 months, from November 2020 through April 2023; through March 2023 FDA issued EUAs for six COVID-19 vaccines from four different manufacturers and subsequently licensed two of these COVID-19 vaccines. The independent vaccine safety experts collaborated with federal agencies to ensure timely assessment of vaccine safety data during this time. VaST worked closely with the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group; that work group used safety data and VaST's assessments for benefit-risk assessments and guidance for COVID-19 vaccination policy. Safety topics reviewed by VaST included those identified in safety monitoring systems and other topics of scientific or public interest. VaST provided guidance to CDC's COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring efforts, provided a forum for review of data from several U.S. government vaccine safety systems, and assured that a diverse group of scientists and clinicians, external to the federal government, promptly reviewed vaccine safety data. In the event of a future pandemic or other biological public health emergency, the VaST model could be used to strengthen vaccine safety monitoring, enhance public confidence, and increase transparency through incorporation of independent, non-government safety experts into the monitoring process, and through strong collaboration among federal and other partners.

2.
Vaccine ; 41(29): 4249-4256, 2023 06 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37301704

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of COVID-19 vaccination status is necessary to produce reliable COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. Data comparing differences in COVID-19 VE by vaccination sources (i.e., immunization information systems [IIS], electronic medical records [EMR], and self-report) are limited. We compared the number of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by each of these sources to assess agreement as well as differences in VE estimates using vaccination data from each individual source and vaccination data adjudicated from all sources combined. METHODS: Adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized with COVID-like illness at 21 hospitals in 18 U.S. states participating in the IVY Network during February 1-August 31, 2022, were enrolled. Numbers of COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by IIS, EMR, and self-report were compared in kappa agreement analyses. Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was estimated using multivariable logistic regression models to compare the odds of COVID-19 vaccination between SARS-CoV-2-positive case-patients and SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients. VE was estimated using each source of vaccination data separately and all sources combined. RESULTS: A total of 4499 patients were included. Patients with ≥1 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose were identified most frequently by self-report (n = 3570, 79 %), followed by IIS (n = 3272, 73 %) and EMR (n = 3057, 68 %). Agreement was highest between IIS and self-report for 4 doses with a kappa of 0.77 (95 % CI = 0.73-0.81). VE point estimates of 3 doses against COVID-19 hospitalization were substantially lower when using vaccination data from EMR only (VE = 31 %, 95 % CI = 16 %-43 %) than when using all sources combined (VE = 53 %, 95 % CI = 41 %-62%). CONCLUSION: Vaccination data from EMR only may substantially underestimate COVID-19 VE.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Autorrelato , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Eficácia de Vacinas , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Imunização , Vacinação , Hospitalização , RNA Mensageiro
3.
Vaccine ; 40(48): 6979-6986, 2022 11 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36374708

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls. METHODS: Adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group. RESULTS: 5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls. CONCLUSIONS: Despite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Adulto , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Teste para COVID-19 , Eficácia de Vacinas , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Hospitalização , Síndrome
4.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(Suppl 2): S159-S166, 2022 10 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35675695

RESUMO

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Ad26COVS1 , Adulto , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Hospitalização , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
5.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22276228

RESUMO

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of a primary COVID-19 vaccine series plus a booster dose with a primary series alone for the prevention of Omicron variant COVID-19 hospitalization. Design: Multicenter observational case-control study using the test-negative design to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE). Setting: Twenty-one hospitals in the United States (US). Participants: 3,181 adults hospitalized with an acute respiratory illness between December 26, 2021 and April 30, 2022, a period of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1, BA.2) predominance. Participants included 1,572 (49%) case-patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 and 1,609 (51%) control patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Median age was 64 years, 48% were female, and 21% were immunocompromised; 798 (25%) were vaccinated with a primary series plus booster, 1,326 (42%) were vaccinated with a primary series alone, and 1,057 (33%) were unvaccinated. Main Outcome Measures: VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated for a primary series plus a booster and a primary series alone by comparing the odds of being vaccinated with each of these regimens versus being unvaccinated among cases versus controls. VE analyses were stratified by immune status (immunocompetent; immunocompromised) because the recommended vaccine schedules are different for these groups. The primary analysis evaluated all COVID-19 vaccine types combined and secondary analyses evaluated specific vaccine products. Results: Among immunocompetent patients, VE against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization for a primary series plus one booster of any vaccine product dose was 77% (95% CI: 71-82%), and for a primary series alone was 44% (95% CI: 31-54%) (p<0.001). VE was higher for a boosted regimen than a primary series alone for both mRNA vaccines used in the US (BNT162b2: primary series plus booster VE 80% (95% CI: 73-85%), primary series alone VE 46% (95% CI: 30-58%) [p<0.001]; mRNA-1273: primary series plus booster VE 77% (95% CI: 67-83%), primary series alone VE 47% (95% CI: 30-60%) [p<0.001]). Among immunocompromised patients, VE for a primary series of any vaccine product against Omicron COVID-19 hospitalization was 60% (95% CI: 41-73%). Insufficient sample size has accumulated to calculate effectiveness of boosted regimens for immunocompromised patients. Conclusions: Among immunocompetent people, a booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine provided additional benefit beyond a primary vaccine series alone for preventing COVID-19 hospitalization due to the Omicron variant.

6.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 9(5): ofac131, 2022 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35450083

RESUMO

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is common among older adults hospitalized with influenza, yet data are limited on the impact of DM on risk of severe influenza-associated outcomes. Methods: We included adults aged ≥65 years hospitalized with influenza during 2012-2013 through 2016-2017 from the Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Network (FluSurv-NET), a population-based surveillance system for laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations conducted in defined counties within 13 states. We calculated population denominators using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services county-specific DM prevalence estimates and National Center for Health Statistics population data. We present pooled rates and rate ratios (RRs) of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, pneumonia diagnosis, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital death for persons with and without DM. We estimated RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using meta-analysis with site as a random effect in order to control for site differences in the estimates. Results: Of 31 934 hospitalized adults included in the analysis, 34% had DM. Compared to those without DM, adults with DM had higher rates of influenza-associated hospitalization (RR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.43-1.72]), ICU admission (RR, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.67-2.04]), pneumonia (RR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.42-1.73]), mechanical ventilation (RR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.74-2.20]), and in-hospital death (RR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.23-1.80]). Conclusions: Older adults with DM have higher rates of severe influenza-associated outcomes compared to those without DM. These findings reinforce the importance of preventing influenza virus infections through annual vaccination, and early treatment of influenza illness with antivirals in older adults with DM.

7.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22273535

RESUMO

BackgroundWe estimated SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron-specific effectiveness of 2 and 3 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses in adults against symptomatic illness in US outpatient settings. MethodsBetween October 1, 2021, and February 12, 2022, research staff consented and enrolled eligible participants who had fever, cough, or loss of taste or smell and sought outpatient medical care or clinical SARS-CoV-2 testing within 10 days of illness onset. Using the test-negative design, we compared the odds of receiving 2 or 3 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses among SARS-CoV-2 cases versus controls using logistic regression. Regression models were adjusted for study site, age, onset week, and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated as (1 - adjusted odds ratio) x 100%. ResultsAmong 3847 participants included for analysis, 574 (32%) of 1775 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the Delta predominant period and 1006 (56%) of 1794 participants tested positive during the Omicron predominant period. When Delta predominated, VE against symptomatic illness in outpatient settings was 63% (95% CI: 51% to 72%) among mRNA 2-dose recipients and 96% (95% CI: 93% to 98%) for 3-dose recipients. When Omicron predominated, VE was 21% (95% CI: -6% to 41%) among 2-dose recipients and 62% (95% CI: 48% to 72%) among 3-dose recipients. ConclusionsIn this adult population, 3 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses provided substantial protection against symptomatic illness in outpatient settings when the Omicron variant became the predominant cause of COVID-19 in the U.S. These findings support the recommendation for a 3rd mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose.

8.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22272516

RESUMO

We used daily real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) results from 67 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a household transmission study to examine the trajectory of cycle threshold (Ct) values, an inverse correlate of viral RNA concentration, from nasal specimens collected between April 2020 and May 2021. Ct values varied over the course of infection, across RT-PCR platforms, and by participant age. Specimens collected from children and adolescents showed higher Ct values and adults aged [≥]50 years showed lower Ct values than adults aged 18-49 years. Ct values were lower on days when participants reported experiencing symptoms.

9.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-22271788

RESUMO

BackgroundInfluenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 are significant causes of respiratory illness in children. MethodsInfluenza and COVID-19-associated hospitalizations among children <18 years old were analyzed from FluSurv-NET and COVID-NET, two population-based surveillance systems with similar catchment areas and methodology. The annual COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate per 100 000 during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic (October 1, 2020-September 30, 2021) was compared to influenza-associated hospitalization rates during the 2017-18 through 2019-20 influenza seasons. In-hospital outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death, were compared. ResultsAmong children <18 years old, the COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate (48.2) was higher than influenza-associated hospitalization rates: 2017-18 (33.5), 2018-19 (33.8), and 2019-20 (41.7). The COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate was higher among adolescents 12-17 years old (COVID-19: 59.9; influenza range: 12.2-14.1), but similar or lower among children 5-11 (COVID-19: 25.0; influenza range: 24.3-31.7) and 0-4 (COVID-19: 66.8; influenza range: 70.9-91.5) years old. Among children <18 years old, a higher proportion with COVID-19 required ICU admission compared with influenza (26.4% vs 21.6%; p<0.01). Pediatric deaths were uncommon during both COVID-19- and influenza-associated hospitalizations (0.7% vs 0.5%; p=0.28). ConclusionsIn the setting of extensive mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic, the annual COVID-19-associated hospitalization rate during 2020-2021 was higher among adolescents and similar or lower among children <12 years old compared with influenza during the three seasons before the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 adds substantially to the existing burden of pediatric hospitalizations and severe outcomes caused by influenza and other respiratory viruses. SummaryAnnual hospitalization rates and proportions of hospitalized children experiencing severe outcomes were as high or higher for COVID-19 during October 2020-September 2021 compared with influenza during the three seasons before the COVID-19 pandemic, based on U.S. population-based surveillance data.

10.
J Infect Dis ; 225(10): 1694-1700, 2022 05 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34932114

RESUMO

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Doença Crônica , Hospitalização , Humanos , Vacinas Sintéticas , Vacinas de mRNA
11.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 112(2): 210-223, 2022 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34656074

RESUMO

Changes that accompany older age can alter the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and likelihood of adverse effects (AEs) of a drug. However, older adults, especially the oldest or those with multiple chronic health conditions, polypharmacy, or frailty, are often under-represented in clinical trials of new drugs. Deficits in the current conduct of clinical evaluation of drugs for older adults and potential steps to fill those knowledge gaps are presented in this communication. The most important step is to increase clinical trial enrollment of older adults who are representative of the target treatment population. Unnecessary eligibility criteria should be eliminated. Physical and financial barriers to participation should be removed. Incentives could be created for inclusion of older adults. Enrollment goals should be established based on intended treatment indications, prevalence of the condition, and feasibility. Relevant clinical pharmacology data need to be obtained early enough to guide dosing and reduce risk for participation of older adults. Relevant PK and PD data as well as patient-centered outcomes should be measured during trials. Trial data should be analyzed for differences in PK, PD, effectiveness, and safety arising from differences in age or from the presence of conditions common in older adults. Postmarket evaluations with real-world evidence and drug labeling updates throughout the product lifecycle reflecting new knowledge are also needed. A comprehensive plan is needed to ensure adequate evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of drugs in older adults.


Assuntos
Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos , Polimedicação , Idoso , Avaliação de Medicamentos , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Efeitos Colaterais e Reações Adversas Relacionados a Medicamentos/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Prevalência
12.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21268319

RESUMO

The novel coronavirus pandemic incited unprecedented demand for assays that detect viral nucleic acids, viral proteins, and corresponding antibodies. The 320 molecular diagnostics in receipt of FDA emergency use authorization mainly focus on viral detection; however, no currently approved test can be used to infer infectiousness, i.e., the presence of replicable virus. As the number of tests conducted increased, persistent SARS-CoV-2 RNA positivity by RT-PCR in some individuals led to concerns over quarantine guidelines. To this end, we attempted to design an assay that reduces the frequency of positive test results from individuals who do not shed culturable virus. We describe multiplex quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) assays that detect genomic RNA (gRNA) and subgenomic RNA (sgRNA) species of SARS-CoV-2, including spike (S), nucleocapsid (N), membrane (M), envelope (E), and ORF8. The absolute copy number of each RNA target was determined in longitudinal specimens from a household transmission study. Calculated viral RNA levels over the 14-day follow up period were compared with antigen testing and self-reported symptoms to characterize the clinical and molecular dynamics of infection and infer predictive values of these qRT-PCR assays relative to culture isolation. When detection of sgS RNA was added to the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, we found a qRT-PCR positive result was 98% predictive of a positive culture (negative predictive value was 94%). Our findings suggest sgRNA presence correlates with active infection, may help identify individuals shedding culturable virus, and that similar multiplex assays can be adapted to current and future variants.

13.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21262356

RESUMO

BackgroundAs of August 21, 2021, >60% of the U.S. population aged [≥]18 years were fully vaccinated with vaccines highly effective in preventing hospitalization due to Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). Infection despite full vaccination (vaccine breakthrough) has been reported, but characteristics of those with vaccine breakthrough resulting in hospitalization and relative rates of hospitalization in unvaccinated and vaccinated persons are not well described, including during late June and July 2021 when the highly transmissible Delta variant predominated. MethodsFrom January 1-June 30, 2021, cases defined as adults aged [≥]18 years with laboratory-confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection were identified from >250 acute care hospitals in the population-based COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET). Through chart review for sampled cases, we examine characteristics associated with vaccination breakthrough. From January 24-July 24, 2021, state immunization information system data linked to both >37,000 cases representative cases and the defined surveillance catchment area population were used to compare weekly hospitalization rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Unweighted case counts and weighted percentages are presented. ResultsFrom January 1 - June 30, 2021, fully vaccinated cases increased from 1 (0.01%) to 321 (16.1%) per month. Among 4,732 sampled cases, fully vaccinated persons admitted with COVID-19 were older compared with unvaccinated persons (median age 73 years [Interquartile Range (IQR) 65-80] v. 59 years [IQR 48-70]; p<0.001), more likely to have 3 or more underlying medical conditions (201 (70.8%) v. 2,305 (56.1%), respectively; p<0.001) and be residents of long-term care facilities [37 (14.5%) v. 146 (5.5%), respectively; p<0.001]. From January 24 - July 24, 2021, cumulative hospitalization rates were 17 times higher in unvaccinated persons compared with vaccinated persons (423 cases per 100,000 population v. 26 per 100,000 population, respectively); rate ratios were 23, 22 and 13 for those aged 18-49, 50-64, and [≥]65 years respectively. For June 27 - July 24, hospitalization rates were [≥]10 times higher in unvaccinated persons compared with vaccinated persons for all age groups across all weeks. ConclusionPopulation-based hospitalization rates show that unvaccinated adults aged [≥]18 years are 17 times more likely to be hospitalized compared with vaccinated adults. Rates are far higher in unvaccinated persons in all adult age groups, including during a period when the Delta variant was the predominant strain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Vaccines continue to play a critical role in preventing serious COVID-19 illness and remain highly effective in preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations.

14.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21262121

RESUMO

OBJECTIVESExamine age differences in SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk from primary cases and infection risk among household contacts, and symptoms among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODSPeople with SARS-CoV-2 infection in Nashville, Tennessee and central and western Wisconsin and their household contacts were followed daily for 14 days to ascertain symptoms and secondary transmission events. Households were enrolled between April 2020 and April 2021. Secondary infection risks (SIR) by age of the primary case and contacts were estimated using generalized estimating equations. RESULTSThe 226 primary cases were followed by 198 (49%) secondary SARS-CoV-2 infections among 404 household contacts. Age group-specific SIR among contacts ranged from 36% to 53%, with no differences by age. SIR was lower from primary cases aged 12-17 years than from primary cases 18-49 years (risk ratio [RR] 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.91). SIR was 55% and 45%, respectively, among primary case-contact pairs in the same versus different age group (RR 1.47; 95% CI 0.98-2.22). SIR was highest among primary case-contacts pairs aged [≥]65 years (76%) and 5-11 years (69%). Among secondary SARS-CoV-2 infections, 19% were asymptomatic; there was no difference in the frequency of asymptomatic infections by age group. CONCLUSIONSBoth children and adults can transmit and are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. SIR did not vary by age, but further research is needed to understand age-related differences in probability of transmission from primary cases by age.

15.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21259776

RESUMO

BackgroundAs SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage increases in the United States (US), there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe Covid-19 and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes. MethodsIn a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11 - May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent Covid-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with Covid-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. ResultsAmong 1210 participants, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 20.6% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 was most common variant (59.7% of sequenced viruses). Full vaccination (receipt of two vaccine doses [≥]14 days before illness onset) had been received by 45/590 (7.6%) cases and 215/620 (34.7%) controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 86.9% (95% CI: 80.4 to 91.2%). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.3%; 95% CI: 78.9 to 99.7%). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough Covid hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were [≥]50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (59.2%; 95% CI: 11.9 to 81.1%) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI: 85.5 to 94.7%). ConclusionDuring March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing Covid-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

16.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21255473

RESUMO

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused substantial morbidity and mortality. ObjectivesTo describe monthly demographic and clinical trends among adults hospitalized with COVID-19. DesignPooled cross-sectional. Setting99 counties within 14 states participating in the Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET). PatientsU.S. adults (aged [≥]18 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during March 1-December 31, 2020. MeasurementsMonthly trends in weighted percentages of interventions and outcomes including length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit admissions (ICU), invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), vasopressor use and in-hospital death (death). Monthly hospitalization, ICU and death rates per 100,000 population. ResultsAmong 116,743 hospitalized adults, median age was 62 years. Among 18,508 sampled adults, median LOS decreased from 6.4 (March) to 4.6 days (December). Remdesivir and systemic corticosteroid use increased from 1.7% and 18.9% (March) to 53.8% and 74.2% (December), respectively. Frequency of ICU decreased from 37.8% (March) to 20.5% (December). IMV (27.8% to 8.7%), vasopressors (22.7% to 8.8%) and deaths (13.9% to 8.7%) decreased from March to October; however, percentages of these interventions and outcomes remained stable or increased in November and December. Percentage of deaths significantly decreased over time for non-Hispanic White patients (p-value <0.01) but not non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic patients. Rates of hospitalization (105.3 per 100,000), ICU (20.2) and death (11.7) were highest during December. LimitationsCOVID-NET covers approximately 10% of the U.S. population; findings may not be generalizable to the entire country. ConclusionsAfter initial improvement during April-October 2020, trends in interventions and outcomes worsened during November-December, corresponding with the 3rd peak of the U.S. pandemic. These data provide a longitudinal assessment of trends in COVID-19-associated outcomes prior to widespread COVID-19 vaccine implementation.

17.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 7(11): ofaa528, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33274249

RESUMO

Using a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated hospitalization surveillance network, we found that 42.5% of hospitalized COVID-19 cases with available data from March 1-June 30, 2020, received ≥1 COVID-19 investigational treatment. Hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and remdesivir were used frequently; however, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin use declined over time, while use of remdesivir increased.

18.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20161810

RESUMO

BackgroundIdentification of risk factors for COVID-19-associated hospitalization is needed to guide prevention and clinical care. ObjectiveTo examine if age, sex, race/ethnicity, and underlying medical conditions is independently associated with COVID-19-associated hospitalizations. DesignCross-sectional. Setting70 counties within 12 states participating in the Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) and a population-based sample of non-hospitalized adults residing in the COVID-NET catchment area from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. ParticipantsU.S. community-dwelling adults ([≥]18 years) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations, March 1- June 23, 2020. MeasurementsAdjusted rate ratios (aRR) of hospitalization by age, sex, race/ethnicity and underlying medical conditions (hypertension, coronary artery disease, history of stroke, diabetes, obesity [BMI [≥]30 kg/m2], severe obesity [BMI[≥]40 kg/m2], chronic kidney disease, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). ResultsOur sample included 5,416 adults with COVID-19-associated hospitalizations. Adults with (versus without) severe obesity (aRR:4.4; 95%CI: 3.4, 5.7), chronic kidney disease (aRR:4.0; 95%CI: 3.0, 5.2), diabetes (aRR:3.2; 95%CI: 2.5, 4.1), obesity (aRR:2.9; 95%CI: 2.3, 3.5), hypertension (aRR:2.8; 95%CI: 2.3, 3.4), and asthma (aRR:1.4; 95%CI: 1.1, 1.7) had higher rates of hospitalization, after adjusting for age, sex, and race/ethnicity. In models adjusting for the presence of an individual underlying medical condition, higher hospitalization rates were observed for adults [≥]65 years, 45-64 years (versus 18-44 years), males (versus females), and non-Hispanic black and other race/ethnicities (versus non-Hispanic whites). LimitationsInterim analysis limited to hospitalizations with underlying medical condition data. ConclusionOur findings elucidate groups with higher hospitalization risk that may benefit from targeted preventive and therapeutic interventions.

19.
Preprint em Inglês | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-20103390

RESUMO

BackgroundAs of May 15, 2020, the United States has reported the greatest number of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases and deaths globally. ObjectiveTo describe risk factors for severe outcomes among adults hospitalized with COVID-19. DesignCohort study of patients identified through the Coronavirus Disease 2019-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network. Setting154 acute care hospitals in 74 counties in 13 states. Patients2491 patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during March 1-May 2, 2020. MeasurementsAge, sex, race/ethnicity, and underlying medical conditions. ResultsNinety-two percent of patients had [≥]1 underlying condition; 32% required intensive care unit (ICU) admission; 19% invasive mechanical ventilation; 15% vasopressors; and 17% died during hospitalization. Independent factors associated with ICU admission included ages 50-64, 65-74, 75-84 and [≥]85 years versus 18-39 years (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.53, 1.65, 1.84 and 1.43, respectively); male sex (aRR 1.34); obesity (aRR 1.31); immunosuppression (aRR 1.29); and diabetes (aRR 1.13). Independent factors associated with in-hospital mortality included ages 50-64, 65-74, 75-84 and [≥]85 years versus 18-39 years (aRR 3.11, 5.77, 7.67 and 10.98, respectively); male sex (aRR 1.30); immunosuppression (aRR 1.39); renal disease (aRR 1.33); chronic lung disease (aRR 1.31); cardiovascular disease (aRR 1.28); neurologic disorders (aRR 1.25); and diabetes (aRR 1.19). Race/ethnicity was not associated with either ICU admission or death. LimitationData were limited to patients who were discharged or died in-hospital and had complete chart abstractions; patients who were still hospitalized or did not have accessible medical records were excluded. ConclusionIn-hospital mortality for COVID-19 increased markedly with increasing age. These data help to characterize persons at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated outcomes and define target groups for prevention and treatment strategies. Funding SourceThis work was supported by grant CK17-1701 from the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention through an Emerging Infections Program cooperative agreement and by Cooperative Agreement Number NU38OT000297-02-00 awarded to the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

20.
J Infect Dis ; 218(2): 189-196, 2018 06 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29361005

RESUMO

Background: The effectiveness of influenza vaccine during 2015-2016 was reduced in some age groups as compared to that in previous 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) virus (A[H1N1]pdm09 virus)-predominant seasons. We hypothesized that the age at first exposure to specific influenza A(H1N1) viruses could influence vaccine effectiveness (VE). Methods: We estimated the effectiveness of influenza vaccine against polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated medically attended illness from the 2010-2011 season through the 2015-2016 season, according to patient birth cohort using data from the Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network. Birth cohorts were defined a priori on the basis of likely immunologic priming with groups of influenza A(H1N1) viruses that circulated during 1918-2015. VE was calculated as 100 × [1 - adjusted odds ratio] from logistic regression models comparing the odds of vaccination among influenza virus-positive versus influenza test-negative patients. Results: A total of 2115 A(H1N1)pdm09 virus-positive and 14 696 influenza virus-negative patients aged ≥6 months were included. VE was 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 56%-66%) against A(H1N1)pdm09-associated illness during the 2010-2011 through 2013-2014 seasons, compared with 47% (95% CI, 36%-56%) during 2015-2016. During 2015-2016, A(H1N1)pdm09-specific VE was 22% (95% CI, -7%-43%) among adults born during 1958-1979 versus 61% (95% CI, 54%-66%) for all other birth cohorts combined. Conclusion: Findings suggest an association between reduced VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-related illness during 2015-2016 and early exposure to specific influenza A(H1N1) viruses.


Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/imunologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/genética , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/isolamento & purificação , Influenza Humana/virologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase , RNA Viral/genética , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...