Report from the World Health Organization's immunization and vaccines related implementation research advisory committee (IVIR-AC) meeting, Geneva, 11-13 September 2023.

Evaluating vaccine-related research is critical to maximize the potential of vaccination programmes. The WHO Immunization and Vaccine-related Implementation Research Advisory Committee (IVIR-AC) provides an independent review of research that estimates the performance, impact and value of vaccines, with a particular focus on transmission and economic modelling. On 11-13 September 2023, IVIR-AC was convened for a bi-annual meeting where the committee reviewed research and presentations across eight different sessions. This report summarizes the background information, proceedings and recommendations from that meeting. Sessions ranged in topic from timing of measles supplementary immunization activities, analyses of conditions necessary to meet measles elimination in the South-East Asia region, translating modelled evidence into policy, a risk-benefit analysis of dengue vaccine, COVID-19 scenario modelling in the African region, therapeutic vaccination against human papilloma virus, the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium, and the Immunization Agenda 2030 vaccine impact estimates.

A Practical Guide to Full Value of Vaccine Assessments.

Articulating the wide range of health, social and economic benefits that vaccines offer may help to overcome obstacles in the vaccine development pipeline. A framework to guide the assessment and communication of the value of a vaccine-the Full Value of Vaccine Assessment (FVVA)-has been developed by the WHO. The FVVA framework offers a holistic assessment of the value of vaccines, providing a synthesis of evidence to inform the public health need of a vaccine, describing the supply and demand aspects, its market and its impact from a health, financial and economic perspective. This paper provides a practical guide to how FVVAs are developed and used to support investment in vaccines, ultimately leading to sustained implementation in countries. The FVVA includes a range of elements that can be broadly categorised as synthesis, vaccine development narrative and defining vaccine impact and value. Depending on the features of the disease/vaccine in question, different elements may be emphasised; however, a standardised set of elements is recommended for each FVVA. The FVVA should be developed by an expert group who represent a range of stakeholders, perspectives and geographies and ensure a fair, coherent and evidence-based assessment of vaccine value.

Risk-Factors for Exposure Associated With SARS-CoV-2 Detection After Recent Known or Potential COVID-19 Exposures Among Patients Seeking Medical Care at a Large Urban, Public Hospital in Fulton County, Georgia - A Cross-Sectional Investigation.

We aimed to describe frequency of COVID-19 exposure risk factors among patients presenting for medical care at an urban, public hospital serving mostly uninsured/Medicare/Medicaid clients and risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Consenting, adult patients seeking care at a public hospital from August to November 2020 were enrolled in this cross-sectional investigation. Saliva, anterior nasal and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR. Participant demographics, close contact, and activities ≤14 days prior to enrollment were collected through interview. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Among 1,078 participants, 51.8% were male, 57.0% were aged ≥50 years, 81.3% were non-Hispanic Black, and 7.6% had positive SARS-CoV-2 tests. Only 2.7% reported COVID-19 close contact ≤14 days before enrollment; this group had 6.79 adjusted odds of testing positive (95%CI = 2.78-16.62) than those without a reported exposure. Among participants who did not report COVID-19 close contact, working in proximity to ≥10 people (adjusted OR = 2.17; 95%CI = 1.03-4.55), choir practice (adjusted OR = 11.85; 95%CI = 1.44-97.91), traveling on a plane (adjusted OR = 5.78; 95%CI = 1.70-19.68), and not participating in an essential indoor activity (i.e., grocery shopping, public transit use, or visiting a healthcare facility; adjusted OR = 2.15; 95%CI = 1.07-4.30) were associated with increased odds of testing positive. Among this population of mostly Black, non-Hispanic participants seeking care at a public hospital, we found several activities associated with testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection in addition to close contact with a case. Understanding high-risk activities for SARS-CoV-2 infection among different communities is important for issuing awareness and prevention strategies.

Specimen self-collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing: Patient performance and preferences-Atlanta, Georgia, August-October 2020.

Self-collected specimens can expand access to SARS-CoV-2 testing. At a large inner-city hospital 1,082 participants self-collected saliva and anterior nasal swab (ANS) samples before healthcare workers collected nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples on the same day. To characterize patient preferences for self-collection, this investigation explored ability, comfort, and ease of ANS and saliva self-collection for SARS-CoV-2 testing along with associated patient characteristics, including medical history and symptoms of COVID-19. With nearly all participants successfully submitting a specimen, favorable ratings from most participants (at least >79% in ease and comfort), and equivocal preference between saliva and ANS, self-collection is a viable SARS-CoV-2 testing option.

Epidemiologic, Immunologic, and Virus Characteristics in Patients With Paired Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Serology and Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Testing.

BACKGROUND: The natural history and clinical progression of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections can be better understood using combined serological and reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. METHODS: Nasopharyngeal swabs and serum were collected at a single time-point from patients at an urban, public hospital during August-November 2020 and tested for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR, viral culture, and anti-spike pan-immunoglobulin antibody testing. Participant demographics and symptoms were collected through interview. The χ 2 and Fisher exact tests were used to identify associations between RT-PCR and serology results with presence of viable virus and frequency of symptoms. RESULTS: Among 592 participants, 129 (21.8%) had evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR or serology. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was strongly associated with lack of viable virus (P = .016). COVID-19 symptom frequency was similar for patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative and patients testing RT-PCR positive/seropositive. Patients testing RT-PCR positive/seronegative reported headaches, fatigue, diarrhea, and vomiting at rates not statistically significantly different from those testing RT-PCR negative/seropositive. CONCLUSIONS: While patients testing SARS-CoV-2 seropositive were unlikely to test positive for viable virus and were therefore at low risk for forward transmission, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms were common. Paired SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antibody testing provides more nuanced understanding of patients' COVID-19 status.

Effects of Patient Characteristics on Diagnostic Performance of Self-Collected Samples for SARS-CoV-2 Testing.

We evaluated the performance of self-collected anterior nasal swab (ANS) and saliva samples compared with healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens used to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We used the same PCR diagnostic panel to test all self-collected and healthcare worker-collected samples from participants at a public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Among 1,076 participants, 51.9% were men, 57.1% were >50 years of age, 81.2% were Black (non-Hispanic), and 74.9% reported >1 chronic medical condition. In total, 8.0% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Compared with nasopharyngeal swab samples, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 59% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 68%. Among participants tested 3-7 days after symptom onset, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 80% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 85%. Sensitivity varied by specimen type and patient characteristics. These findings can help physicians interpret PCR results for SARS-CoV-2.

Rapid Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Detention Facility, Louisiana, USA, May-June, 2020.

To assess transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a detention facility experiencing a coronavirus disease outbreak and evaluate testing strategies, we conducted a prospective cohort investigation in a facility in Louisiana, USA. We conducted SARS-CoV-2 testing for detained persons in 6 quarantined dormitories at various time points. Of 143 persons, 53 were positive at the initial test, and an additional 58 persons were positive at later time points (cumulative incidence 78%). In 1 dormitory, all 45 detained persons initially were negative; 18 days later, 40 (89%) were positive. Among persons who were SARS-CoV-2 positive, 47% (52/111) were asymptomatic at the time of specimen collection; 14 had replication-competent virus isolated. Serial SARS-CoV-2 testing might help interrupt transmission through medical isolation and quarantine. Testing in correctional and detention facilities will be most effective when initiated early in an outbreak, inclusive of all exposed persons, and paired with infection prevention and control.

Identification of Presymptomatic and Asymptomatic Cases Using Cohort-Based Testing Approaches at a Large Correctional Facility-Chicago, Illinois, USA, May 2020.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to cause significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Correctional and detention facilities are at high risk of experiencing outbreaks. We aimed to evaluate cohort-based testing among detained persons exposed to laboratory-confirmed cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in order to identify presymptomatic and asymptomatic cases. METHODS: During 1-19 May 2020, 2 testing strategies were implemented in 12 tiers or housing units of the Cook County Jail, Chicago, Illinois. Detained persons were approached to participate in serial testing (n = 137) and offered tests at 3 time points over 14 days (day 1, days 3-5, and days 13-14). The second group was offered a single test and interview at the end of a 14-day quarantine period (day 14 group) (n = 87). RESULTS: 224 detained persons were approached for participation and, of these, 194 (87%) participated in ≥1 interview and 172 (77%) had ≥1 test. Of the 172 tested, 19 were positive for SARS-CoV-2. In the serial testing group, 17 (89%) new cases were detected, 16 (84%) on day 1, 1 (5%) on days 3-5, and none on days 13-14; in the day 14 group, 2 (11%) cases were identified. More than half (12/19; 63%) of the newly identified cases were presymptomatic or asymptomatic. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the utility of cohort-based testing promptly after initiating quarantine within a housing tier. Cohort-based testing efforts identified new SARS-CoV-2 asymptomatic and presymptomatic infections that may have been missed by symptom screening alone.

Patterns of non-communicable comorbidities at start of tuberculosis treatment in three regions of the Philippines: The St-ATT cohort.

Diabetes and undernutrition are common risk factors for tuberculosis (TB), associated with poor treatment outcomes and exacerbated by TB. Limited data exist describing patterns and risk factors of multiple comorbidities in persons with TB. Nine-hundred participants (69.6% male) were enrolled in the Starting Anti-TB Treatment (St-ATT) cohort, including 133 (14.8%) initiating treatment for multi-drug resistant TB (MDR-TB). Comorbidities were defined as: diabetes, HbA1c ≥6.5% and/or on medication; hypertension, systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg and/or on medication; anaemia (moderate/severe), haemoglobin <11g/dL; and, undernutrition (moderate/severe) body-mass-index <17 kg/m2. The most common comorbidities were undernutrition 23.4% (210/899), diabetes 22.5% (199/881), hypertension 19.0% (164/864) and anaemia 13.5% (121/899). Fifty-eight percent had ≥1 comorbid condition (496/847), with 17.1% having ≥2; most frequently diabetes and hypertension (N = 57, 6.7%). Just over half of diabetes (54.8%) and hypertension (54.9%) was previously undiagnosed. Poor glycemic control in those on medication (HbA1c≥8.0%) was common (N = 50/73, 68.5%). MDR-TB treatment was associated with increased odds of diabetes (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 2.48, 95% CI: 1.55-3.95); but decreased odds of hypertension (AOR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.39-0.78). HIV infection was only associated with anaemia (AOR = 4.51, 95% CI: 1.01-20.1). Previous TB treatment was associated with moderate/severe undernutrition (AOR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.40-2.80), as was duration of TB-symptoms before starting treatment and household food insecurity. No associations for sex, alcohol or tobacco use were observed. MDR-TB treatment was marginally associated with having ≥2 comorbidities (OR = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.97-2.39). TB treatment programmes should plan for large proportions of persons requiring diagnosis and management of comorbidities with the potential to adversely affect TB treatment outcomes and quality of life. Dietary advice and nutritional management are components of comprehensive care for the above conditions as well as TB and should be included in planning of patient-centred services.

Harms Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions Aimed at Modifying Microbiota: A Systematic Review.

Background: Probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics are used increasingly, although the safety and potential harms of these interventions are poorly understood. Purpose: To examine how harms-related information is reported in publications of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics. Data Sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science (without language restrictions) from 1 January 2015 to 20 March 2018. Study Selection: RCTs assessing the safety or efficacy of at least 1 intervention involving probiotics, prebiotics, or synbiotics alone or in combination with another intervention compared with any control (such as a placebo or an antibiotic) for any clinical condition. Data Extraction: 4 reviewers independently assessed study characteristics, the reporting of harms, and the presentation of safety results. Data Synthesis: Of 384 trials conducted in healthy volunteers (n = 136) or patients with any of several medical conditions (n = 248), 339 (88%) were published in specialty journals. Trials most often evaluated probiotics (n = 265 [69%]). Studies in persons with medical conditions enrolled outpatients (n = 195) and high-risk patients (n = 53). No harms-related data were reported for 106 trials (28%), safety results were not reported for 142 (37%), and the number of serious adverse events (SAEs) per study group was not given for 309 (80%). Of 242 studies mentioning harms-related results, 37% (n = 89) used only generic statements to describe AEs and 16% (n = 38) used inadequate metrics. Overall, 375 trials (98%) did not give a definition for AEs or SAEs, the number of participant withdrawals due to harms, or the number of AEs and SAEs per study group with denominators. Limitation: Journal publication processes may have affected the completeness of reporting; only English-language publications were examined. Conclusion: Harms reporting in published reports of RCTs assessing probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics often is lacking or inadequate. We cannot broadly conclude that these interventions are safe without reporting safety data. Primary Funding Source: No specific funding.