Hybrid Immunity Improves the Immune Response after the Fourth COVID-19 Vaccine Dose in Individuals with Medical Conditions Predisposing to Severe COVID-19.

Data on immune responses following COVID-19 booster vaccinations and subsequent infections in the immunocompromised are limited. We studied antibody responses after the fourth dose and subsequent infections to define patient groups benefiting most from boosters. Fourth vaccine (booster) doses were, in Finland, first recommended for severely immunocompromised individuals, whom we invited to participate in our study in 2022. We assessed spike protein-specific IgG and neutralizing antibodies (NAb) against the ancestral and Omicron BA.1 strains one month after the fourth dose from 488 adult participants and compared them to the levels of 35 healthy controls after three doses. We used Bayesian generalized linear modeling to assess factors explaining antibody levels and assessed vaccine-induced and hybrid immunity six months after the last vaccine dose. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and immunosuppressive therapy (IT) were identified as factors explaining sub-optimal antibody responses. The proportion of participants with a normal antibody response and NAbs was significantly lower regarding CKD patients compared to the controls. By the 6-month sampling point, one-third of the participants became infected (documented by serology and/or molecular tests), which notably enhanced antibody levels in most immunocompromised participants. Impaired antibody responses, especially NAbs against the Omicron lineage, suggest limited protection in individuals with CKD and highlight the need for alternative pharmaceutical preventive strategies. Vaccination strategies should take into account the development of robust hybrid immunity responses also among the immunocompromised.

Tobacco Use and Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccinations in Finland: A Population-Based Study.

INTRODUCTION: People who smoke are at higher risk of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations and deaths and might benefit greatly from high COVID-19 vaccination coverage. Studies on tobacco use and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in the general population are lacking. AIMS AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort study utilizing linked data from 42 935 participants from two national surveys in Finland (FinSote 2018 and 2020). Exposures were smoking and smokeless tobacco (snus) use. The primary outcome was the uptake of two COVID-19 vaccine doses. Secondary outcomes were the uptake of one COVID-19 vaccine dose; three COVID-19 vaccine doses; time between the first and second dose; and time between the second and third dose. We examined the association between tobacco use and COVID-19 vaccine uptake and between-dose spacing in Finland. RESULTS: People who smoke had a 7% lower risk of receiving two COVID-19 vaccine doses (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.91; 0.96) and a 14% lower risk of receiving three doses (95% CI = 0.78; 0.94) compared to never smokers. People who smoked occasionally had a lower risk of receiving three vaccine doses. People who currently used snus had a 28% lower uptake of three doses (95% CI = 0.56; 0.93) compared to never users but we did not find evidence of an association for one or two doses. We did not find evidence of an association between tobacco use and spacing between COVID-19 vaccine doses. CONCLUSIONS: People who smoke tobacco products daily, occasionally, and use snus had a lower uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. Our findings support a growing body of literature on lower vaccination uptake among people who use tobacco products. IMPLICATIONS: People who smoke or use snus might be a crucial target group of public health efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccinations and plan future vaccination campaigns. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05479383.

Factors associated with parental Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination intention of daughter: A national survey in Finland.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines are offered free of charge in Finland to 10-12-year-old children. Nationally about 80% of girls are vaccinated, with regional differences in first dose coverage varying from 62% to 82% in girls born in 2011. This study examined the factors associated with HPV vaccination intention. Furthermore, we assessed the realisation of HPV vaccination among the daughters of the participating parents. METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted for randomly selected parents of girls (N = 6 465) aged 10 to 14 years of age. Data was collected in February and March 2022 in five Finnish high and low coverage municipalities. The national vaccination register was employed to assess realisation of vaccination. RESULTS: Participation rate was 13.7% (n = 883 parents). Almost all parents were aware of the association between HPV and cervical cancer, but only one fifth was aware of other diseases associated with HPV. Adherence to the national vaccination programme, parents' mother tongue, and trusting in official information were associated with positive vaccination intention. The most often reported reason for non-vaccination was fear of adverse effects (22%). Overall, parental attitudes towards HPV vaccination were positive, with 83% of parents indicating their daughter had received or will receive the vaccination. Vaccination realisation was subsequently examined and 88% of the daughters were vaccinated. CONCLUSIONS: Despite low knowledge of HPV-related diseases overall, majority of parents held a positive intention to vaccinate their daughter. Realisation of intention was high in our study, higher than the national uptake. Foreign-origin parents had lower intention to vaccinate their daughters. As information on HPV and its vaccine is available in 11 languages, there is a need to re-think accessibility. In-depth interviews are needed to better explore the reasons behind non-vaccination.

Effectiveness of Vaccines and Monoclonal Antibodies Against Respiratory Syncytial Virus: Generic Protocol for Register-Based Cohort Study.

Several immunization products are currently being developed against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) for children, pregnant females, and older adults, and some products have already received authorization. Therefore, studies to monitor the effectiveness of these products are needed in the following years. To assist researchers to conduct postmarketing studies, we developed a generic protocol for register-based cohort studies to evaluate immunization product effectiveness against RSV-specific and nonspecific outcomes. To conduct a study on the basis of this generic protocol, the researchers can use any relevant databases or healthcare registers that are available at the study site.

Effectiveness of Immunization Products Against Medically Attended Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection: Generic Protocol for a Test-Negative Case-Control Study.

Monitoring the real-life effectiveness of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) products is of major public health importance. This generic protocol for a test-negative design study aims to address currently envisioned approaches for RSV prevention (monoclonal antibodies and vaccines) to study effectiveness of these products among target groups: children, older adults, and pregnant women. The generic protocol approach was chosen to allow for flexibility in adapting the protocol to a specific setting. This protocol includes severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) and acute respiratory infection (ARI), both due to RSV, as end points. These end points can be applied to studies in hospitals, primarily targeting patients with more severe disease, but also to studies in general practitioner clinics targeting ARI.

Factors associated with parental intention to vaccinate their child against influenza, Finland, February to March, 2022: a web-based survey.

BackgroundInfluenza vaccination for children aged 6 months to 6 years is included in the national vaccination programme in Finland. Although all vaccines in the programme are free of charge, national coverage of influenza vaccination among children under 3 years and 3-6 years during 2020/21 was 43% and 35% respectively, with regional differences.AimTo assess factors underlying parental vaccination intention in order to increase influenza vaccine uptake among children.MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey among parents (n = 17,844) of randomly selected eligible children (aged 6 months-6 years) in February-March 2022 in five Finnish municipalities from regions of high and low coverage. Logistic regressions were used to determine associations between vaccination intention and e.g. sociodemographic factors, attitudes and knowledge. Linkage to the national vaccination register was used to confirm realisation of vaccination intention after the study.ResultsParticipation rate was 13% (n = 2,322 parents). Influenza knowledge, trust in official information, responding parent's education level, adherence to the vaccination programme, number of children and changes in attitudes towards vaccination since COVID-19 were all associated with intention to vaccinate. Vaccination intention for children was 64%, and realised vaccination 51%.ConclusionDespite the low participation rate, both vaccinated and unvaccinated children were represented. Influenza vaccine uptake is not dependent on a single factor. Our results identified the need for open dialogue between parents and healthcare professionals, as the lack of vaccine being offered by healthcare professionals was the most reported reason for not vaccinating.

Brand-specific estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness for the 2021-2022 season in Europe: results from the DRIVE multi-stakeholder study platform.

Introduction: Development of Robust and Innovative Vaccine Effectiveness (DRIVE) was a European public-private partnership (PPP) that aimed to provide annual, brand-specific estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) for regulatory and public health purposes. DRIVE was launched in 2017 under the umbrella of the Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) and conducted IVE studies from its pilot season in 2017-2018 to its final season in 2021-2022. Methods: In 2021-2022, DRIVE conducted four primary care-based test-negative design (TND) studies (Austria, Italy, Iceland, and England; involving >1,000 general practitioners), nine hospital-based TND studies (France, Iceland, Italy, Romania, and Spain, for a total of 21 hospitals), and one population-based cohort study in Finland. In the TND studies, patients with influenza-like illness (primary care) or severe acute respiratory infection (hospital) were enrolled, and laboratory tested for influenza using RT-PCR. Study contributor-specific IVE was calculated using logistic regression, adjusting for age, sex, and calendar time, and pooled by meta-analysis. Results: In 2021-2022, pooled confounder-adjusted influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) estimates against laboratory-confirmed influenza (LCI) overall and per type and subtype/lineage was produced, albeit with wide confidence intervals (CI). The limited circulation of influenza in Europe did not allow the network to reach the optimal sample size to produce precise IVE estimates for all the brands included. The most significant IVE estimates were 76% (95% CI 23%-93%) for any vaccine and 81% (22%-95%) for Vaxigrip Tetra in adults ≥65 years old and 64% (25%-83%) for Fluenz Tetra in children (TND primary care setting), 85% (12%-97%) for any vaccine in adults 18-64 years (TND hospital setting), and 38% (1%-62%) in children 6 months-6 years (population-based cohort, mixed setting). Discussion: Over five seasons, DRIVE collected data on >35,000 patients, more than 60 variables, and 13 influenza vaccines. DRIVE demonstrated that estimating brand-specific IVE across Europe is possible, but achieving sufficient sample size to obtain precise estimates for all relevant stratifications remains a challenge. Finally, DRIVE's network of study contributors and lessons learned have greatly contributed to the development of the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness platform COVIDRIVE.

Changes in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and population immunity in Finland, 2020-2022.

Studying the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies (seroprevalence) allows for assessing the impact of epidemic containment measures and vaccinations and estimating the number of infections regardless of viral testing. We assessed antibody-mediated immunity to SARS-CoV-2 induced by infections and vaccinations from April 2020 to December 2022 in Finland by measuring serum IgG to SARS-CoV-2 nucleoprotein (N-IgG) and spike glycoprotein from randomly selected 18-85-year-old subjects (n = 9794). N-IgG seroprevalence remained at <7% until the last quartile (Q) of 2021. After the emergence of the Omicron variant, N-IgG seroprevalence increased rapidly and was 31% in Q1/2022 and 54% in Q4/2022. Seroprevalence was highest in the youngest age groups from Q2/2022 onwards. We did not observe regional differences in seroprevalence in 2022. We estimated that 51% of the Finnish 18-85-year-old population had antibody-mediated hybrid immunity induced by a combination of vaccinations and infections by the end of 2022. In conclusion, major shifts in the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting population immunity could be observed by serological testing.

Incidence of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Factors Associated With Complete COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Migrant Origin Persons in Finland.

Objective: We examined incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccine uptake and factors associated with complete COVID-19 vaccine uptake among persons of migrant origin in Finland. Methods: Data on laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccine doses between March 2020 and November 2021 were linked to FinMonik register sample (n = 13,223) and MigCOVID (n = 3,668) survey data using unique personal identifier. Logistic regression was the main method of analyses. Results: Among FinMonik sample, complete COVID-19 vaccine uptake was lower among persons of Russia/former Soviet Union, Estonia, and rest of Africa and higher among persons of Southeast Asia, rest of Asia, and the Middle East/North Africa than among persons originating from Europe/North America/Oceania. Male sex, younger age, migration age (<18 years) and shorter length of residence were associated with lower vaccine uptake among FinMonik sample, whereas younger age, being economically inactive, poorer language skills, experiences of discrimination and psychological distress were associated with lower vaccine uptake among MigCOVID sub-sample. Conclusion: Our Findings point to a further need of tailored and targeted communication and community outreach strategies to increase vaccine uptake among persons of migrant origin.

Nationwide health, socio-economic and genetic predictors of COVID-19 vaccination status in Finland.

Understanding factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination can highlight issues in public health systems. Using machine learning, we considered the effects of 2,890 health, socio-economic and demographic factors in the entire Finnish population aged 30-80 and genome-wide information from 273,765 individuals. The strongest predictors of vaccination status were labour income and medication purchase history. Mental health conditions and having unvaccinated first-degree relatives were associated with reduced vaccination. A prediction model combining all predictors achieved good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.801; 95% confidence interval, 0.799-0.803). The 1% of individuals with the highest predicted risk of not vaccinating had an observed vaccination rate of 18.8%, compared with 90.3% in the study population. We identified eight genetic loci associated with vaccination uptake and derived a polygenic score, which was a weak predictor in an independent subset. Our results suggest that individuals at higher risk of suffering the worst consequences of COVID-19 are also less likely to vaccinate.

Qualitative Insights into Vaccine Uptake of Nursing Staff in Long-Term Care Facilities in Finland.

Vaccine hesitancy and refusal have undermined COVID-19 vaccination efforts of nursing staff. This study aimed to identify behavioral factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake among unvaccinated nursing staff in long-term care facilities (LTCF) in Finland. Methodology: The study was based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data were collected through qualitative in-depth interviews among nursing staff and managers of LTCFs. The analysis was based on thematic analysis. We identified seven behavioral domains, with several themes, that reduced the staff's intention to get vaccinated: knowledge (information overload, inability to identify trustworthy information sources, lack of vaccine-specific and understandable scientific information), beliefs about consequences (incorrect perceptions about the vaccine effectiveness, and lack of trust in the safety of the vaccine), social influences (influence of family and friends), reinforcement (limited abilities of the management to encourage vaccination), beliefs about capabilities (pregnancy or desire to get pregnant), psychological factors (coping with changing opinion), and emotions (confusion, suspicion, disappointment, and fatigue). We also identified three behavioral domains that encouraged vaccine uptake: social influences (trust in health authorities), environmental context and resources (vaccination logistics), and work and professional role (professional pride). The study findings can help authorities to develop tailored vaccine promotion strategies for healthcare workers in LTCFs.

Incidence of sinus thrombosis with thrombocytopenia-A nation-wide register study.

Safe vaccination is essential for mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Two adenoviral vector vaccines, ChAdOx1 nCov-19 (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson&Johnson/Janssen) have shown to be effective and they are distributed globally, but reports on serious cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) associated with thrombocytopenia, have emerged. Our objective was to evaluate the background incidence of CVST with thrombocytopenia and to compare it to incidences following COVID-19 vaccines. We conducted a register-based nation-wide cohort study in Finland, including all 5.5 million individuals alive in Finland, 1 Jan 2020. COVID-19 vaccinations registered in the National Vaccination Register served as the exposure. We detected CVST admissions or hospital visits recorded in the hospital discharge register from Jan 1, 2020 through April 2, 2021. We confirmed the diagnosis of CVST and thrombocytopenia (platelet count <150,000 per cubic millimeter) using radiology reports and laboratory data. By Poisson regression, we compared the baseline incidences to the risks within four weeks after COVID-19 vaccinations. Out of the 167 CVST episodes identified in the registers, 117 were confirmed as CVST, 18 of which coincided with thrombocytopenia (baseline incidence 0.18 per 28 days per million persons). We found 2 episodes of CVST with thrombocytopenia within 28 days of the first ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccination (among 200,397 vaccinated, aged 16 or above). No cases were found following the first mRNA vaccine dose among 782,604 vaccinated. The background incidence of CVST combined with thrombocytopenia was minuscule compared to the incidence during the weeks following the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 vaccination. Accurate estimation of the baseline incidence is essential in the critical appraisal of the benefit-risk of any vaccination program.

Sudden Hearing Loss Following Vaccination Against COVID-19.

Importance: Spontaneous adverse reaction reports of sudden hearing loss have been observed, and a population-based cohort study conducted in Israel showed an increase in the incidence of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) following vaccination with messenger RNA COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech). However, in this setting, the possibility of confounding remained. Objective: To assess a potential association between COVID-19 vaccinations and SSNHL. Design, Setting, and Participants: This register-based country-wide retrospective cohort study of 5.5 million Finnish residents was conducted from January 1, 2019, to April 20, 2022, and included all individuals who were identified from the population information system who were alive or born during the study period except individuals who had SSNHL during 2015 to 2018 according to specialized care derived diagnosis codes for SSNHL (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] code H91.2) as a primary or secondary diagnosis. Exposures: The a priori primary risk period was 0 to 54 days following each COVID-19 vaccination. The risk periods for different vaccine doses did not overlap so that a later vaccine exposure ended the previous risk period. The secondary risk period was from 55 days following each COVID-19 vaccination until a subsequent COVID-19 vaccination. A secondary analysis included a risk time from 0 to 54 days following a positive polymerase chain reaction test result for SARS-CoV-2. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidences of SSNHL following COVID-19 vaccination were compared with the incidences before the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland. The Poisson regression model included calendar time, age, sex, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, other chronic diseases, and the number of visits in primary health care. Results: For the 5.5 million Finnish residents included in the study, the comparison time comprised 6.5 million person-years, the primary risk time of 1.7 million person-years, and the secondary risk time of 2.1 million person-years. Before the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland, 18.7/100 000 people received a diagnosis of SSNHL annually. The study data suggested no increased risk for SSNHL following any COVID-19 vaccination. In particular, adjusted incidence rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals for the BNT162b2 vaccine's 3 doses were 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6-1.0), 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2), and 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-1.4), respectively. There was no association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and an increased incidence of SSNHL. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study show no evidence of an increased risk of SSNHL following COVID-19 vaccination. The study accounted for previous disease and other potential confounding factors. These results are based on diagnosis codes in specialized care but still need to be verified in settings that are capable of evaluating the degree of hearing loss.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of recombinant haemagglutinin (HA) seasonal influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 10 studies on recombinant HA influenza vaccine met our inclusion criteria. One study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher relative vaccine efficacy (rVE) in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza during the 2014-15 season compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years (rVE = 30%, 95% CI 10%-47%, moderate-certainty evidence). In a subgroup analysis, higher rVE was reported for influenza A (rVE = 36%, 95% CI 14% to 53%), but not for B (non-significant). Another study reported higher efficacy for the trivalent recombinant HA vaccine compared with placebo (VE = 45%, 95% CI 19-63, 1 RCT, low-certainty evidence) in adults aged 18-55 years. With the exception of a higher rate of chills (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.03-1.72), the safety profile of recombinant HA vaccines was comparable to that of traditional influenza vaccines. The evidence base for the efficacy and effectiveness of recombinant HA influenza vaccines is limited at present, although one study found that the quadrivalent recombinant HA influenza vaccine had higher rVE compared with traditional quadrivalent vaccination in adults aged ≥50 years.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

This review sought to assess the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of high-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (HD-IIV) for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals aged 18 years or older. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were included. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 36 studies were included. HD-IIV was shown to have higher relative vaccine efficacy in preventing influenza compared with standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV3) in older adults (Vaccine effectiveness (VE) = 24%, 95% CI 10-37, one RCT). One NRSI demonstrated significant effect for HD-IIV3 against influenza B (VE = 89%, 95% CI 47-100), but not for influenza A(H3N2) (VE = 22%, 95% CI -82 to 66) when compared with no vaccination in older adults. HD-IIV3 showed significant relative effect compared with SD-IIV3 for influenza-related hospitalisation (VE = 11.8%, 95% CI 6.4-17.0, two NRSIs), influenza- or pneumonia-related hospitalisation (VE = 13.7%, 95% CI 9.5-17.7, three NRSIs), influenza-related hospital encounters (VE = 13.1%, 95% CI 8.4-17.7, five NRSIs), and influenza-related office visits (VE = 3.5%, 95% CI 1.5-5.5, two NRSIs). For safety, HD-IIV were associated with significantly higher rates of local and systemic adverse events compared with SD-IIV (combined local reactions, pain at injection site, swelling, induration, headache, chills and malaise). From limited data, compared with SD-IIV, HD-IIV were found to be more effective in the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza, for a range of proxy outcome measures, and associated with more adverse events.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of cell-based seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through strain-specific vaccination. In this study, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of cell-based trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Certainty of evidence for key outcomes was assessed using the GRADE methodology. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 868 full-text articles were assessed for relevance. Of these, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. No relative efficacy data were identified for the direct comparison of cell-based vaccines compared with traditional vaccines (egg-based). Efficacy data were available comparing cell-based trivalent influenza vaccines with placebo in adults (aged 18-49 years). Overall vaccine efficacy was 70% against any influenza subtype (95% CI 61%-77%, two RCTS), 82% against influenza A(H1N1) (95% CI 71%-89%, 2 RCTs), 72% against influenza A(H3N2) (95% CI 39%-87%, 2 RCTs) and 52% against influenza B (95% CI 30%-68%, 2 RCTs). Limited and heterogeneous data were presented for effectiveness when compared with no vaccination. One NRSI compared cell-based trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination with traditional trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination, finding a small but significant difference in favour of cell-based vaccines for influenza-related hospitalisation, hospital encounters and physician office visits. The safety profile of cell-based trivalent vaccines was comparable to traditional trivalent influenza vaccines. Compared with placebo, cell-based trivalent influenza vaccines have demonstrated greater efficacy in adults aged 18-49 years. Overall cell-based vaccines are well-tolerated in adults, however, evidence regarding the effectiveness of these vaccines compared with traditional seasonal influenza vaccines is limited.

Systematic review of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59® adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccines for the prevention of laboratory-confirmed influenza in individuals ≥18 years of age.

The most effective means of preventing seasonal influenza is through vaccination. In this systematic review, we investigated the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of MF59® adjuvanted trivalent and quadrivalent influenza vaccines to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza. A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic databases and grey literature sources up to 7 February 2020. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) were eligible for inclusion. The search returned 28,846 records, of which 48 studies on MF59® adjuvanted vaccines met our inclusion criteria. No efficacy trials were identified. In terms of vaccine effectiveness (VE), MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were effective in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza in older adults (aged ≥65 years) compared with no vaccination (VE = 45%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23%-61%, 5 NRSIs across 3 influenza seasons). By subtype, significant effect was found for influenza A(H1N1) (VE = 61%, 95% CI 44%-73%) and B (VE = 29%, 95% CI 5%-46%), but not for A(H3N2). In terms of relative VE, there was no significant difference comparing MF59® adjuvanted trivalent vaccines with either non-adjuvanted trivalent or quadrivalent vaccines. Compared with traditional trivalent influenza vaccines, MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were associated with a greater number of local adverse events (RR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.50-2.39) and systemic reactions (RR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.38). In conclusion, MF59® adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccines were found to be more effective than 'no vaccination'. Based on limited data, there was no significant difference comparing the effectiveness of MF59® adjuvanted vaccines with their non-adjuvanted counterparts.

Strong Neutralizing Antibody Responses to SARS-CoV-2 Variants Following a Single Vaccine Dose in Subjects With Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Background: Previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection primes the immune system; thus individuals who have recovered from infection have enhanced immune responses to subsequent vaccination (hybrid immunity). However, it remains unclear how well hybrid immunity induced by severe or mild infection can cross-neutralize emerging variants. We aimed to compare the strength and breadth of antibody responses in vaccinated recovered and uninfected subjects. Methods: We measured spike-specific immunoglobulin (Ig)G and neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) from vaccinated subjects including 320 with hybrid immunity and 20 without previous infection. From 29 subjects with a previous severe or mild infection, we also measured NAb responses against Alpha (B.1.1.7), Beta (B.1.351), Delta (B.1.617.2), and Omicron (B.1.1.529/BA.1) variants following vaccination. Results: A single vaccine dose induced 2-fold higher anti-spike IgG concentrations and up to 4-fold higher neutralizing potency of antibodies in subjects with a previous infection compared with vaccinated subjects without a previous infection. Hybrid immunity was more enhanced after a severe than a mild infection, with sequentially decreasing NAb titers against Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants. We found similar IgG concentrations in subjects with a previous infection after 1 or 2 vaccine doses. Conclusions: Hybrid immunity induced strong IgG responses, particularly after severe infection. However, the NAb titers were low against heterologous variants, especially against Omicron.