The new Italian National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) and its commitment to endorse a new efficient National Immunization Plan in COVID-19 times.

Among the objectives of the WHO Global Vaccination Action Plan 2020-2025, there is the establishment, in all countries, of a National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG), an independent body with the aim of supporting and harmonising vaccination policies. Italy firstly established a NITAG in 2017; it contributed to the nation's immunization policies but fell short of its goal of becoming a true reference group. The newly appointed NITAG, made up of 28 independent experts, has the ambitious goal to promote the new National Immunization Prevention Plan (PNPV), to harmonise the current vaccination schedule with the anti-COVID-19 campaign, and to recover the vaccination coverage decline that occurred during the pandemic. The contact with the ECDC EU/EEA, the WHO Global NITAG networks, and all the national stakeholders needs to be reinforced in order to accomplish these aims. This paper describes the structure, organisation, and strategy of the new Italian NITAG.

Recommendations for modernizing infant vaccination schedules with combination vaccines in Colombia and Peru / Recomendaciones para modernizar los calendarios de vacunación infantil con vacunas combinadas en Colombia y Perú / Recomendações para modernizar os esquemas de vacinação infantil com vacinas combinadas na Colômbia e no Peru

ABSTRACT The objective of this article was to consider the vaccination challenges in Colombia and Peru and the role of pediatric combination vaccines in overcoming these challenges. Barriers to including new vaccines with more antigens remain apparent in parts of these countries, where vaccine-preventable diseases in infants continue to be a major problem. The challenges include the heterogeneity of vaccine coverage within each country and in neighboring countries, which can contribute to poor rates of vaccination coverage; the adverse impact of the inward migration of unvaccinated individuals, which has favored the re-emergence of vaccine-preventable diseases; vaccine shortages; and the impact of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and the associated shifts in health care resources. To improve the coverage of pediatric vaccines in Colombia and Peru, it will be necessary to ensure the widespread integration into vaccine schedules of combination vaccines containing diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, inactivated poliovirus, Haemophilus influenzae type b and hepatitis B antigens with a three-dose primary series delivered at 2, 4 and 6 months of age followed by a booster at 18 months of age. Such vaccines play important roles in preventing diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis; eradicating polio; and providing boosting against H. influenzae type b.

RESUMEN El objetivo de este artículo es considerar los desafíos que se enfrentan en Colombia y Perú con respecto a la vacunación y el papel de las vacunas combinadas pediátricas para superar estos desafíos. Los obstáculos para incluir vacunas nuevas con más antígenos siguen siendo evidentes en algunos lugares de estos países, donde las enfermedades prevenibles por vacunación en menores de 1 año continúan siendo un grave problema. Entre los desafíos se incluye la heterogeneidad de la cobertura de vacunación en cada país y en los países vecinos, lo que puede contribuir con que se registren tasas bajas de cobertura de vacunación; el impacto adverso de la migración interna de personas no vacunadas, lo que ha favorecido la reaparición de enfermedades prevenibles por vacunación; la escasez de vacunas, y el impacto de la pandemia del coronavirus de tipo 2 causante del síndrome respiratorio agudo grave (SARS-CoV-2) y los consiguientes cambios en los recursos de atención médica. Para mejorar la cobertura de las vacunas pediátricas en Colombia y Perú será necesario integrar de manera generalizada en los calendarios de vacunación vacunas combinadas con antígenos de difteria, tétanos, tos ferina acelular, poliovirus inactivados, Haemophilus influenzae tipo b y hepatitis B con una serie primaria de tres dosis administradas a los 2, 4 y 6 meses de edad, seguida de un refuerzo a los 18 meses de edad. Esas vacunas desempeñan un papel esencial en la prevención de la difteria, el tétanos y la tos ferina; la erradicación de la polio; y el refuerzo contra H. influenzae tipo b.

RESUMO O objetivo deste artigo foi avaliar os desafios da vacinação na Colômbia e no Peru e o papel das vacinas pediátricas combinadas na superação de tais desafios. Os obstáculos para incluir novas vacinas com mais antígenos permanecem visíveis em partes desses países, onde doenças imunopreveníveis em lactentes continuam a ser um grande problema. Os desafios incluem a heterogeneidade da cobertura vacinal dentro de cada país e nos países vizinhos, o que pode contribuir para baixas taxas de cobertura vacinal; o impacto adverso da migração interna de pessoas não vacinadas, o que favoreceu o ressurgimento de doenças imunopreveníveis; a escassez de vacinas; e o impacto da pandemia de síndrome respiratória aguda grave do coronavírus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) e mudanças relacionadas nos recursos de atenção à saúde. Para melhorar a cobertura das vacinas pediátricas na Colômbia e no Peru, será necessário assegurar sua integração generalizada em esquemas de vacinas combinadas contendo antígenos de difteria, tétano, pertussis acelular, poliovírus inativado, Haemophilus influenzae tipo B e hepatite B, com uma série primária de três doses aplicadas aos 2, 4 e 6 meses de idade seguidas de um reforço aos 18 meses de idade. Tais vacinas desempenham papéis importantes na prevenção da difteria, tétano e coqueluche; na erradicação da poliomielite; e no reforço contra H. influenzae tipo b.

The advisory committee on immunization practices' interim recommendation for use of Pfizer-Biontech Covid-19 vaccine in children aged 5­11 years: United States, november 2021

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle­formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On August 23, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (1). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is also recommended for adolescents aged 12­15 years under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) (1). All persons aged ≥12 years are recommended to receive 2 doses (30 µg, 0.3 mL each), administered 3 weeks apart (2,3). As of November 2, 2021, approximately 248 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States.* On October 29, 2021, FDA issued an EUA amendment for a new formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 5­11 years, administered as 2 doses (10 µg, 0.2 mL each), 3 weeks apart (Table) (1). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation† for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5­11 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding recommendations for the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework§ and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.¶ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5­11 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has high efficacy (>90%) against COVID-19 in children aged 5­11 years, and ACIP determined benefits outweigh risks for vaccination. Vaccination is important to protect children against COVID-19 and reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

Capacitación - Actualización del Registro Nominal de Aplicaciones de Vacunas del Calendario Nacional - CIPRES. Encuentro 1

Durante esta primera jornada de actualización, orientada a vacunadores y vacunadoras, sobre el sistema de Registro Nominal de Aplicaciones de Vacunas del Calendario Nacional - CIPRES se tratarán cuestiones referidas al uso del nuevo sistema. A modo de introducción, Rosana Wagner da cuenta de los beneficios de la implementación a nivel provincial del registro nominalizado respecto del acceso de la persona al derecho ser vacunado o vacunada, saber qué vacunas tiene, etc. Por otro lado, destaca que al personal del sistema de salud le permite la búsqueda de la población objetivo nominalizada que falta inmunizar. Para cerrar su intervención, Wagner resalta los lineamientos y requisitos que deben seguir los vacunatorios para su habilitación. En la segunda parte de la capacitación, Erika Bartel, coordinadora del Equipo de Datos del Programa de Control de Enfermedades Inmunoprevenibles brinda una charla teórica donde se dan respuesta a los siguientes interrogantes: ¿Para qué registramos? ¿Quién registran? ¿Qué, cómo y dónde registramos? ¿A dónde van los datos que registramos? ¿Qué información se construye con ellos? ¿Además de necesario, es obligatorio el registro? Por último, se explica de forma pormenorizada la modalidad del registro nominal en el CIPRES, destacando las características y atributos de dicho sistema.

Novavax COVID-19 vaccine local reactions, systemic reactions, adverse events, and serious adverse events

Local reactions were reported by the majority of vaccine recipients and at higher rates than placebo recipients (75.3% vs 20.6% after dose 2). Pain/tenderness at the injection site was the most common and most severe local reaction among vaccine recipients and reported more frequently after dose 2 than after dose 1. Injection site redness and swelling following either dose were reported less frequently but were more common after dose 2 than dose 1. There were no grade 4 local reactions reported. Overall the median time to onset for local reactions was 1-3 days. The median duration of local reactions was 1-3 days in the vaccine group.

COVID-19 advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP) vaccine recommendations

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) provides advice and guidance to the Director of the CDC regarding use of vaccines and related agents for control of vaccine-preventable diseases in the civilian population of the United States. Recommendations made by the ACIP are reviewed by the CDC Director and, if adopted, are published as official CDC/HHS recommendations in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).

Interim recommendation of the advisory committee on immunization practices for use of the Novavax COVID-19 Vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years: United States, July 2022

A Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Novavax coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine was presented to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on July 19, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Novavax COVID-19 vaccine be recommended for persons 18 years of age and older during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group were prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (critical), death due to COVID-19 (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a two-dose regimen of Novavax COVID-19 vaccine among persons aged 18 years and older was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach [2-3]. A lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was observed with vaccination compared to placebo (relative risk [RR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06, 0.18, evidence type 1), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 89.6% (95% CI: 82.4%, 93.8%). This was observed with a median follow-up of 2.5 months, during a period of Alpha variant predominance. The vaccine was also associated with a lower risk of severe illness due to COVID-19 (RR 0.00; 95% CI: 0.00, 1.00; evidence type 3), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI: 0%, 100%). The measure of severe COVID-19 was used as surrogate for the GRADE outcome of hospitalization due to COVID-19. No hospitalizations or deaths due to COVID-19 were identified among vaccine recipients or placebo recipients in the per-protocol population.* In terms of harms, the available data indicated that serious adverse events were balanced between the vaccine and placebo arms (RR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.73, 1.16; evidence type 1). Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was associated with vaccination (RR 4.11; 95% CI: 3.70, 4.57; evidence type 1), 16.3% of vaccine recipients and 4% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following either dose 1 or dose 2.

Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE): Novavax COVID-19 vaccine

A Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Novavax coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine was presented to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on July 19, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Novavax COVID-19 vaccine be recommended for persons 18 years of age and older during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group were prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (critical), death due to COVID-19 (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a two-dose regimen of Novavax COVID-19 vaccine among persons aged 18 years and older was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach [2-3]. A lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was observed with vaccination compared to placebo (relative risk [RR] 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06, 0.18, evidence type 1), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 89.6% (95% CI: 82.4%, 93.8%). This was observed with a median follow-up of 2.5 months, during a period of Alpha variant predominance. The vaccine was also associated with a lower risk of severe illness due to COVID-19 (RR 0.00; 95% CI: 0.00, 1.00; evidence type 3), corresponding to a vaccine efficacy of 100% (95% CI: 0%, 100%). The measure of severe COVID-19 was used as surrogate for the GRADE outcome of hospitalization due to COVID-19. No hospitalizations or deaths due to COVID-19 were identified among vaccine recipients or placebo recipients in the per-protocol population.* In terms of harms, the available data indicated that serious adverse events were balanced between the vaccine and placebo arms (RR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.73, 1.16; evidence type 1). Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was associated with vaccination (RR 4.11; 95% CI: 3.70, 4.57; evidence type 1), 16.3% of vaccine recipients and 4% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following either dose 1 or dose 2.

ACIP evidence to recommendations for use of Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, adjuvanted in adults ages 18 years and older under an emergency use authorization

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in late 2019 has led to a global pandemic with dramatic societal and economic impact on individual persons and communities. In the United States, more than 89 million cases and more than 1 million COVID-19-associated deaths have been reported as of July 14, 2022. Persons of all ages are at risk for infection and severe disease. However, the risk for severe illness from COVID-19 is higher in people aged ≥65 years, those living in long-term care facilities, and those with chronic medical conditions. Additionally, there is a disproportionate burden of COVID-19 infections and deaths among racial and ethnic minority communities. Non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino (Hispanic) and American Indian/Alaska Native persons have experienced higher rates of disease, hospitalization and death compared with non-Hispanic White persons. This is likely related to inequities in social determinants of health that put racial and ethnic minority groups at increased risk for COVID-19, including overrepresentation among essential workers who have higher risk of exposure to COVID-19, lower incomes, reduced access to healthcare, or higher rates of comorbid conditions. In the United States, the first vaccines to prevent COVID-19 received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA): Pfizer-BioNTech on December 11, 2020, for persons aged 16 years and older, Moderna on December 18, 2020, for adults aged 18 years and older, and Janssen on February 27, 2021, for adults aged 18 years and older. On July 13, 2022, the FDA issued an EUA for the Novavax COVID-19 vaccine, Adjuvanted for the prevention of COVID-19 in persons ages 18 years and older. Additional background information supporting the interim ACIP recommendation on the use of Novavax COVID-19 vaccine can be found in the relevant publication of the recommendation referenced on the ACIP website.

Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE): Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6­11 years

A Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Moderna coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine for children aged 6­11 years was presented to the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 23, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (2 doses, 50 µg) be recommended for children 6­11 years of age during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group included prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (important), multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (SAEs) (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a two-dose regimen of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine among children aged 6­11 years was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase II/III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach [2]. Symptomatic COVID-19 was less common among the vaccine group compared with the placebo group (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05, 0.81; evidence type 2). A non-inferior geometric mean ratio (GMR) for antibodies in the 6­11-year-olds was observed with vaccination compared to the 18­25-year-olds (GMR 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1, 1.4; evidence type 2). A lower risk of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection also seen in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group (Relative Risk [RR]: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.71; evidence type 3). The available data indicated that SAEs were balanced between the vaccine and placebo arms, but certainty in the estimate was very low (RR 0.99; 95% CI: 0.20, 4.91; evidence type 4); none of these SAEs were assessed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as related to study intervention. Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was associated with vaccination (RR 5.2; 95% CI: 3.6, 7.3; evidence type 1). About 17% of vaccine recipients and 3% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following either dose 1 or dose 2.

Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE): Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for persons aged 12-17 years

A Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Moderna coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine for persons aged 12-17 years was presented to the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 23, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (2 doses, 100 µg) be recommended for persons 12-17 years of age during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group included prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (important), multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (SAEs) (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a two-dose regimen of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine among persons aged 12-17 years was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase II/III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach. A lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was observed among the vaccine group compared with the placebo group (Relative risk [RR]: 0.11; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.50; evidence type 2). Immunobridging data were also assessed in support of efficacy. Among adolescents ages 12 ­ 17 years, the immune response to vaccine was non-inferior to that observed in adults ages 18-25 years ( GMR: 1.1; 95% CI: 0.9, 1.2; evidence type 2). Additionally, a lower risk of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection was observed among the vaccine group compared with the placebo group, though the confidence interval was wide and crossed the null (RR: 0.61 (0.24, 1.54); evidence type 3). The available data indicated that SAEs were more common in vaccine recipients, but certainty in the estimate was very low (RR 1.50; 95% CI: 0.30, 7.40; evidence type 4), and none of these SAEs were assessed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as related to study intervention. Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was associated with vaccination (RR 5.23; 95% CI: 4.05, 6.76; evidence type 1). About 25% of vaccine recipients and 5% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following either dose 1 or dose 2.

Interim recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices for use of Moderna and Pfizer-Biontech Covid-19 vaccines in children aged 6 months­5 years: United States, june 2022

On June 17, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) amendments for the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months­5 years, administered as 2 doses (25 µg [0.25 mL] each), 4 weeks apart, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 6 months­4 years, administered as 3 doses (3 µg [0.2 mL] each), at intervals of 3 weeks between doses 1 and 2 and ≥8 weeks between doses 2 and 3. On June 18, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued separate interim recommendations for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months­5 years and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months­4 years for the prevention of COVID-19.* Both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines met the criteria for immunobridging, which is the comparison of neutralizing antibody levels postvaccination in young children with those in young adults in whom efficacy had been demonstrated. Descriptive efficacy analyses were also conducted for both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines during the period when the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) predominated. No specific safety concerns were identified among recipients of either vaccine. ACIP recommendations for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 6 months­5 years and 6 months­4 years, respectively, are interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. Vaccination is important for protecting children aged 6 months­5 years against COVID-19.

Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE): Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6 months­5 years

A Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Moderna coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine for children aged 6 months­-­­5 years was presented to the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 18, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (2 doses, 25 µg) be recommended for children 6 months-5 years of age during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group included prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (important), multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (SAEs) (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a two-dose regimen of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine among children aged 6 months­5 years was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase II/III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach [2]. A lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was observed with vaccination compared with placebo (relative risk [RR]: 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49, 0.79, evidence type 1). Immunobridging was also assessed. In both age groups, 6­23 months and 2­5 years, the immune response to vaccine was non-inferior to that observed in adults ages 18-25 years (6­23 months GMR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.47; 2­5 years GMR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.17; evidence type 2). There was also a lower risk of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection seen in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group, however the confidence interval crossed the line of no effect (RR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.60,1.19; evidence type 3). The available data indicated that SAEs were more common in vaccine recipients, but certainty in the estimate was very low (RR 2.67; 95% CI: 0.80, 8.84; evidence type 4). Two serious adverse events in one participant were determined by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as potentially related to the vaccination. No specific safety concerns were identified among vaccine recipients aged 6 months­5 years. Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was associated with vaccination (RR 1.87; 95% CI: 1.44, 2.42); evidence type 1). About 7.7% of vaccine recipients and 4.4% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following either dose 1 or dose 2.

Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE): Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 6 months-4 Years

Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) review of the evidence for benefits and harms for Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine for children aged 6 months­­­­4 years was presented to the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 18, 2022. GRADE evidence type indicates the certainty in estimates from the available body of evidence. Evidence certainty ranges from type 1 (high certainty) to type 4 (very low certainty) [1]. The policy question was, "Should vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (3 doses, 3 µg) be recommended for children 6 months­4 years of age during an Emergency Use Authorization?" The potential benefits pre-specified by the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group included prevention of symptomatic laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (critical), hospitalization due to COVID-19 (important), multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) (important), and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (important). The two pre-specified harms were serious adverse events (SAEs) (critical) and reactogenicity grade ≥3 (important). A systematic review of evidence on the efficacy and safety of a three-dose regimen of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine among children aged 6 months­4 years was conducted. The quality of evidence from one Phase II/III randomized controlled trial was assessed using a modified GRADE approach [2]. A lower risk of symptomatic COVID-19 was observed with vaccination compared with placebo, but certainty in the estimate was very low (relative risk [RR]: 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05, 0.77, evidence type 4). Immunobridging was also assessed in support of efficacy. In both age groups, 6­23 months and 2­4 years, the immune response to vaccine was non-inferior to that observed in young adults ages 16-25 years (6­23 months: GMR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.43; 2­4 years: GMR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.50; evidence type 2). The available data indicated that SAEs were balanced comparing vaccine and placebo recipients, but certainty in the estimate was low (RR 0.66; 95% CI: 0.38, 1.15; evidence type 4). One vaccine recipient had two SAEs which were considered potentially related by the investigator and FDA. FDA noted that the events were also consistent with viral myositis. Reactogenicity grade ≥3 was slightly higher in the vaccine group, but the confidence interval crossed the null (RR 1.20; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.64); evidence type 2). About 4.3% of vaccine recipients and 3.6% of placebo recipients reported any grade ≥3 local or systemic reactions following dose 1, dose 2, or dose 3.

The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine's local reactions, systemic reactions, adverse events, and serious adverse events

Local reactions were reported by the majority of vaccine recipients and at higher rates than placebo recipients. Vaccine recipients reported higher rates of local reactions after dose 2 than dose 1. The frequency of local reactions was higher in the older age group (ages 2 to 5 years) than the younger age group (ages 6-23 months) (73.4% vs 54.4% after dose 2). Pain at the injection site was the most frequent and severe reported solicited local reaction among vaccine recipients. After dose 1, the older age group reported pain more frequently than the younger age group (61.4% vs 37.4%); a similar pattern was observed after dose 2 (71.4% vs 46.2%). Axillary (or groin) swelling or tenderness was the second most frequently reported local reaction. Axillary (or groin) swelling or tenderness was reported slightly more frequently in the younger age group than the older age group (9.3% vs 9.1% after dose 2). Injection site redness and swelling following either dose were reported less frequently. Redness and swelling were more common after dose 2. No grade 4 local reactions were reported. Overall, the median onset of local reactions in the vaccine group was 1 day after either dose, with a median duration of 2 days.

The advisory committee on immunization practices' recommendation for use of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in adults aged ≥18 years and considerations for extended intervals for administration of primary series doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines: United States, february 2022

The mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. During December 2020, the vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for use among persons aged ≥18 years (1), which was adopted by CDC. During December 19, 2020­January 30, 2022, approximately 204 million doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine were administered in the United States (2) as a primary series of 2 intramuscular doses (100 µg [0.5 mL] each) 4 weeks apart. On January 31, 2022, FDA approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine (Spikevax, ModernaTX, Inc.) in persons aged ≥18 years (3). On February 4, 2022, the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group conclusions regarding recommendations for the use of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine were presented to ACIP at a public meeting. The Work Group's deliberations were based on the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework,* which incorporates the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach† to rank evidence quality. In addition to initial clinical trial data, ACIP considered new information gathered in the 12 months since issuance of the interim recommendations, including additional follow-up time in the clinical trial, real-world vaccine effectiveness studies, and postauthorization vaccine safety monitoring. ACIP also considered comparisons of mRNA vaccine effectiveness and safety in real-world settings when first doses were administered 8 weeks apart instead of the original intervals used in clinical trials (3 weeks for BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] COVID-19 vaccine and 4 weeks for Moderna COVID-19 vaccine). Based on this evidence, CDC has provided guidance that an 8-week interval might be optimal for some adolescents and adults. The additional information gathered since the issuance of the interim recommendations increased certainty that the benefits of preventing symptomatic and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death outweigh vaccine-associated risks of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. On February 4, 2022, ACIP modified its interim recommendation to a standard recommendation§ for use of the fully licensed Moderna COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years.

Vaccine uptake in the general population

This guideline aims to increase the uptake of all vaccines provided on the NHS routine UK immunisation schedule by everyone who is eligible. It supports the aims of the NHS Long Term Plan, which includes actions to improve immunisation coverage by GPs (including the changes to vaccinations and immunisations detailed in the 2021/2022 and 2022/23 GP contracts) and support a narrowing of health inequalities.

ACIP update to the evidence to recommendations for a Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 booster in children ages 5-11 years

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has led to a global pandemic with substantial societal and economic impacts on individual persons and communities. In the United States, more than 82 million cases and more than 998,000 COVID-19-associated deaths have been reported as of May 16, 2022. Persons of all ages are at risk for infection and severe disease. While children <18 years of age infected with SARS-CoV-2 are less likely to develop severe illness compared with adults, children are still at risk of developing severe illness and complications from COVID-19 and contribute to transmission in households and communities. A disproportionate burden of COVID-19 infections and deaths occur among racial and ethnic minority communities, including among children. Non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic/Latino and American Indian/American Native persons have experienced higher rates of disease, hospitalization and death compared with non-Hispanic Whites. This is likely related to inequities in social determinants of health that put racial and ethnic minority groups at increased risk for COVID-19, including income disparities, reduced access to healthcare, or higher rates of comorbid conditions. On October 29, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons ages 5-11 years for prevention of COVID-19. The vaccine was safe and met non-inferiority criteria for immunobridging compared with young adults ages 16-25 years in a randomized controlled clinical trial that included 2,268 participants randomized 2:1 to receive either vaccine or placebo. On May 17, 2022, the FDA amended the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, authorizing the use of a single booster dose for administration to individuals 5 through 11 years of age at least five months after completion of a primary series with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Following FDA's regulatory action, CDC expanded eligibility of COVID-19 vaccine booster doses to everyone 5 years of age and older on May 19, 2022. Additional background information supporting the ACIP recommendation on the use of additional or booster doses of COVID-19 vaccine can be found in the relevant publication of the recommendation referenced on the ACIP website.

Use of the Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine: updated interim recommendations from the advisory committee on immunization practices: United States, December 2021

On February 27, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine (Janssen Biotech, Inc., a Janssen Pharmaceutical company, Johnson & Johnson), and on February 28, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation for its use as a single-dose primary vaccination in persons aged ≥18 years (1,2). On April 13, 2021, CDC and FDA recommended a pause in the use of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine after reports of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS), a rare condition characterized by low platelets and thrombosis, including at unusual sites such as the cerebral venous sinus (cerebral venous sinus thrombosis [CVST]), after receipt of the vaccine.* ACIP rapidly convened two emergency meetings to review reported cases of TTS, and 10 days after the pause commenced, ACIP reaffirmed its interim recommendation for use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years, but included a warning regarding rare clotting events after vaccination, primarily among women aged 18­49 years (3). In July, after review of an updated benefit-risk assessment accounting for risks of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and TTS, ACIP concluded that benefits of vaccination with Janssen COVID-19 vaccine outweighed risks. Through ongoing safety surveillance and review of reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), additional cases of TTS after receipt of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, including deaths, were identified. On December 16, 2021, ACIP held an emergency meeting to review updated data on TTS and an updated benefit-risk assessment. At that meeting, ACIP made a recommendation for preferential use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines over the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine, including both primary and booster doses administered to prevent COVID-19, for all persons aged ≥18 years. The Janssen COVID-19 vaccine may be considered in some situations, including for persons with a contraindication to receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Since June 2020, ACIP has convened 23 public meetings to review data on the epidemiology of COVID-19 and the use of COVID-19 vaccines, including nine during which Janssen COVID-19 vaccine-related data were reviewed. The ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group, comprising experts in infectious diseases, vaccinology, vaccine safety, public health, and ethics, has held weekly meetings to review COVID-19 surveillance data, evidence for vaccine efficacy and safety, and implementation considerations for COVID-19 vaccines. In addition, the COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Technical Work Group (VaST), consisting of independent vaccine safety experts and established to provide expert consultation on COVID-19 vaccine safety issues, has reviewed safety data from the COVID-19 vaccination program during weekly meetings. After TTS was first identified in the United States in April 2021, a benefit-risk assessment for the use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine was presented to ACIP using an adapted Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) framework.† In the setting of limited COVID-19 vaccine supply in the United States at that time, ACIP reaffirmed its interim recommendations for the use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years under FDA's EUA, which was updated to include a warning that rare clotting events might occur after vaccination, primarily among women aged 18­49 years (3). Updates to the benefit-risk assessment were also reviewed by ACIP in June 2021, after an increased risk for myocarditis, particularly in males aged 12­29 years, was observed after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines; and again, in July 2021, after an increased number of cases of GBS were identified following administration of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (4,5). After each review, ACIP determined that the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in preventing COVID-19 morbidity and associated mortality outweighed the risks for these rare, but serious adverse events; however, the balance of benefits and risks varied by age and sex. Ongoing postauthorization safety surveillance identified additional TTS cases and associated deaths after Janssen COVID-19 vaccination, and updated safety data were reviewed by VaST in December 2021. The COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group also reviewed an updated benefit-risk assessment of COVID-19 vaccines in the setting of new safety findings and sufficient COVID-19 vaccine supply in the United States. In addition, FDA updated the EUA fact sheets with additional TTS data in December 2021.§ A summary of the data reviewed and discussions from both VaST and the ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group were presented to ACIP during their emergency meeting on December 16, 2021.

Determinants of vaccine coverage and timeliness in a northern Pakistani village.

The incidence of vaccine preventable disease in Pakistan remains high despite a long-standing Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI). We describe vaccine completeness, timeliness and determinants of coverage from a remote rural cohort (2012-2014). Vaccination histories were taken from EPI records. Vaccination was complete if all doses were received according to the EPI schedule and timely if doses were not ≥3 days early or ≥ 28 days late. Three models are presented: a multivariable logistic regression of household demographic and socioeconomic factors associated with complete vaccination, a multivariable mixed effects logistic regression assessing whether or not the vaccine was administered late (versus on-time), and a mixed effects multivariable Poisson regression model analysing the interval (in days) between vaccine doses. Of 959 enrolled children with full vaccination histories, 88.2 and 65.1% were fully vaccinated following either the pentavalent or DPT/HBV schedules if measles was excluded; coverage dropped to 50.0 and 27.1% when both doses of measles were included. Sixty-four (6.7%) were unvaccinated. Coverage and timeliness declined with subsequent doses. Migrating into the village after 1995 (95%CI 1.88 to 5.17) was associated with late vaccination. Being male, having an older father, and having parents with at least some formal education reduced the likelihood of a late dose. The interval between doses was consistent at 5 weeks (compared with the 4 weeks recommended by EPI). None of the socio-demographic variables were related to the likelihood of receiving full coverage. Vaccine coverage in Oshikhandass was higher than national averages. Measles vaccine coverage and timeliness were low; special consideration should be paid to this vaccine. The local vaccination schedule differed from the EPI, but the consistency suggests good local administration.