Effects of PCV10 and PCV13 on pneumococcal serotype 6C disease, carriage, and antimicrobial resistance.

BACKGROUND: The cross-protection of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) against serotype 6C is not clearly documented, although 6C represents a substantial burden of pneumococcal disease in recent years. A systematic review by the World Health Organization that covered studies through 2016 concluded that available data were insufficient to determine if either PCV10 (which contains serotype 6B but not 6A) or PCV13 (containing serotype 6A and 6B) conferred protection against 6C. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and observational studies published between January 2010 - August 2022 (Medline/Embase), covering the direct, indirect, and overall effect of PCV10 and PCV13 against 6C invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD), non-IPD, nasopharyngeal carriage (NPC), and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). RESULTS: Of 2548 publications identified, 112 were included. Direct vaccine effectiveness against 6C IPD in children ranged between 70 and 85 % for ≥ 1 dose PCV13 (n = 3 studies), was 94 % in fully PCV13 vaccinated children (n = 2), and -14 % for ≥ 1 dose of PCV10 (n = 1). Compared to PCV7, PCV13 efficacy against 6C NPC in children was 66 % (n = 1). Serotype 6C IPD rates or NPC prevalence declined post-PCV13 in most studies in children (n = 5/6) and almost half of studies in adults (n = 5/11), while it increased post-PCV10 for IPD and non-IPD in all studies (n = 6/6). Changes in AMR prevalence were inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to PCV10, PCV13 vaccination consistently protected against 6C IPD and NPC in children, and provided some level of indirect protection to adults, supporting that serotype 6A but not 6B provides cross-protection to 6C. Vaccine policy makers and regulators should consider the effects of serotype 6A-containing PCVs against serotype 6C disease in their decisions.

Effect of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines on viral respiratory infections: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: In addition to preventing pneumococcal disease, emerging evidence indicates that pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) might indirectly reduce viral respiratory tract infections (RTI) by affecting pneumococcal-viral interactions. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of interventional and observational studies published during 2000-2022 on vaccine efficacy/adjusted effectiveness (VE) and overall effect of PCV7, PCV9, PCV10, or PCV13 against viral RTI. RESULTS: Sixteen of 1671 records identified were included. Thirteen publications described effects of PCVs against viral RTIs in children. VE against influenza ranged between 41-86% (n=4), except for the 2010-2011 influenza season. In a randomized controlled trial, PCV9 displayed efficacy against any viral RTI, human seasonal coronavirus, parainfluenza, and human metapneumovirus. Data in adults were limited (n=3). PCV13 VE ranged between 4-25% against viral lower RTI, 32-35% against COVID-19 outcomes, 24-51% against human seasonal coronavirus, and 13-36% against influenza A lower RTI, with some 95%CI spanning zero. No protection was found against adenovirus or rhinovirus in children or adults. CONCLUSIONS: PCVs were associated with protection against some viral RTI, with the strongest evidence for influenza in children. Limited evidence for adults was generally consistent with pediatric data. Restricting public health evaluations to confirmed pneumococcal outcomes may underestimate the full impact of PCVs.

Best Practices for Identifying Hospitalized Lower Respiratory Tract Infections Using Administrative Data: A Systematic Literature Review of Validation Studies.

INTRODUCTION: Estimating the burden of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) increasingly relies on administrative databases using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, but no standard methodology exists. We defined best practices for ICD-based algorithms that estimate LRTI incidence in adults. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of validation studies assessing the use of ICD code-based algorithms to identify hospitalized LRTIs in adults, published in Medline, EMBASE, and LILACS between January 1996 and January 2022, according to PRISMA guidelines. We assessed sensitivity, specificity, and other accuracy measures of different algorithms. RESULTS: We included 26 publications that used a variety of ICD code-based algorithms and gold standard criteria, and 18 reported sensitivity and/or specificity. Sensitivity was below 80% in 72% (38/53) of algorithms and specificity exceeded 90% in 77% (37/48). Algorithms for all-cause LRTI (n = 18) that included only pneumonia codes in primary position (n = 3) had specificity greater than 90% but low sensitivity (55-72%). Sensitivity increased by 5-15%, with minimal loss in specificity, with the addition of primary codes for severe pneumonia (e.g. sepsis) while pneumonia codes were in secondary position, and by 13% with codes from LRTI-related infections (e.g. viral) or other respiratory diseases (e.g. empyema). Sensitivity increased by 8% when pneumonia codes were in any position, but specificity was not reported. In hospital-acquired pneumonia and pneumococcal-specific pneumonia, algorithms containing only nosocomial- or pathogen-specific ICD codes had poor sensitivity, which improved when broader pneumonia codes were added, in particular codes for unspecified organisms. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review highlights that most ICD code-based algorithms are relatively specific, but miss a substantial number of hospitalized LRTI adult cases. Best practices to estimate LRTI incidence in this population include the use of all pneumonia ICD codes for any LRTI outcome and, to a lesser extent, those for other LRTI-related infections or respiratory diseases.