RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The 2022-2023 United States influenza season had unusually early influenza activity with high hospitalization rates. Vaccine-matched A(H3N2) viruses predominated, with lower levels of A(H1N1)pdm09 activity also observed. METHODS: Using the test-negative design, we evaluated influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) during the 2022-2023 season against influenza A-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations from October 2022 to March 2023 among adults (aged ≥18 years) with acute respiratory illness (ARI). VE was estimated by comparing odds of seasonal influenza vaccination among case-patients (influenza A test positive by molecular assay) and controls (influenza test negative), applying inverse-propensity-to-be-vaccinated weights. RESULTS: The analysis included 85 389 ED/UC ARI encounters (17.0% influenza A positive; 37.8% vaccinated overall) and 19 751 hospitalizations (9.5% influenza A positive; 52.8% vaccinated overall). VE against influenza A-associated ED/UC encounters was 44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40%-47%) overall and 45% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. VE against influenza A-associated hospitalizations was 35% (95% CI, 27%-43%) overall and 23% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: VE was moderate during the 2022-2023 influenza season, a season characterized with increased burden of influenza and co-circulation with other respiratory viruses. Vaccination is likely to substantially reduce morbidity, mortality, and strain on healthcare resources.
Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Hospitalização , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Eficácia de Vacinas , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Masculino , Feminino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Adulto Jovem , Adolescente , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/imunologia , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1/imunologia , Assistência Ambulatorial/estatística & dados numéricos , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estações do AnoRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial , Vírus Sincicial Respiratório Humano , Infecções Respiratórias , Gravidez , Criança , Humanos , Feminino , Idoso , Infecções por Vírus Respiratório Sincicial/prevenção & controle , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Vacinação , Imunização , Medicamentos GenéricosRESUMO
Studies have reported that prior-season influenza vaccination is associated with higher risk of clinical influenza infection among vaccinees. This effect might arise from incomplete consideration of within-season waning and recent infection. Using data from the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network (2011-2012 to 2018-2019 seasons), we found that repeat vaccinees were vaccinated earlier in a season by one week. After accounting for waning VE, repeat vaccinees were still more likely to test positive for A(H3N2) (OR=1.11, 95%CI:1.02-1.21) but not for influenza B or A(H1N1). We found that clinical infection influenced individuals' decision to vaccinate in the following season while protecting against clinical infection of the same (sub)type. However, adjusting for recent clinical infections did not strongly influence the estimated effect of prior-season vaccination. In contrast, we found that adjusting for subclinical infection could theoretically attenuate this effect. Additional investigation is needed to determine the impact of subclinical infections on VE.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Data on the effectiveness of BA.4/5 bivalent vaccine stratified by age and prior infection are lacking. METHODS: This test-negative study used data from individuals ≥5 years of age testing for SARS-CoV-2 with symptoms (15 September 2022 to 31 January 2023) at a large national retail pharmacy chain. The exposure was receipt of 2-4 wild-type doses and a BNT162b2 BA.4/5 bivalent vaccine (>2 months since last wild-type dose). The outcome was a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Absolute (vs unvaccinated) and relative (vs 2-4 wild-type doses) vaccine effectiveness (VE) were calculated as (1 - adjusted odds ratio from logistic regression) × 100. VE was stratified by age and self-reported prior infection. RESULTS: Overall, 307 885 SARS-CoV-2 tests were included (7916 aged 5-11, 16 329 aged 12-17, and 283 640 aged ≥18 years). SARS-CoV-2 positivity was 39%; 21% were unvaccinated, 70% received 2-4 wild-type doses with no bivalent vaccine, and 9% received a BNT162b2 BA.4/5 bivalent dose. At a median of 1-2 months after BNT162b2 BA.4/5 bivalent vaccination, depending on age group, absolute VE was 22%-60% and was significantly higher among those reporting prior infection (range, 55%-79%) than not (range, no protection to 50%). Relative VE was 31%-64%. CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2 BA.4/5 bivalent showed early additional protection against Omicron-related symptomatic COVID-19, with hybrid immunity offering greater protection.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Farmácia , Humanos , Adolescente , Adulto , Pré-Escolar , Vacina BNT162 , Vacinas de mRNA , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Vacinas CombinadasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: During the 2022-2023 influenza season, the United States experienced the highest influenza-associated pediatric hospitalization rate since 2010-2011. Influenza A/H3N2 infections were predominant. METHODS: We analyzed acute respiratory illness (ARI)-associated emergency department or urgent care (ED/UC) encounters or hospitalizations at 3 health systems among children and adolescents aged 6 months-17 years who had influenza molecular testing during October 2022-March 2023. We estimated influenza A vaccine effectiveness (VE) using a test-negative approach. The odds of vaccination among influenza-A-positive cases and influenza-negative controls were compared after adjusting for confounders and applying inverse-propensity-to-be-vaccinated weights. We developed overall and age-stratified VE models. RESULTS: Overall, 13 547 of 44 787 (30.2%) eligible ED/UC encounters and 263 of 1862 (14.1%) hospitalizations were influenza-A-positive cases. Among ED/UC patients, 15.2% of influenza-positive versus 27.1% of influenza-negative patients were vaccinated; VE was 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44-52%) overall, 53% (95% CI, 47-58%) among children aged 6 months-4 years, and 38% (95% CI, 30-45%) among those aged 9-17 years. Among hospitalizations, 17.5% of influenza-positive versus 33.4% of influenza-negative patients were vaccinated; VE was 40% (95% CI, 6-61%) overall, 56% (95% CI, 23-75%) among children ages 6 months-4 years, and 46% (95% CI, 2-70%) among those 5-17 years. CONCLUSIONS: During the 2022-2023 influenza season, vaccination reduced the risk of influenza-associated ED/UC encounters and hospitalizations by almost half (overall VE, 40-48%). Influenza vaccination is a critical tool to prevent moderate-to-severe influenza illness in children and adolescents.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adolescente , Criança , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Estações do Ano , Eficácia de Vacinas , Hospitalização , Vacinação , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , HospitaisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Assessing variant-specific COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) and severity can inform public health risk assessments and decisions about vaccine composition. BA.2.86 and its descendants, including JN.1 (referred to collectively as "JN lineages"), emerged in late 2023 and exhibited substantial divergence from co-circulating XBB lineages. METHODS: We analyzed patients hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness at 26 hospitals in 20 U.S. states admitted October 18, 2023-March 9, 2024. Using a test-negative, case-control design, we estimated effectiveness of an updated 2023-2024 (Monovalent XBB.1.5) COVID-19 vaccine dose against sequence-confirmed XBB and JN lineage hospitalization using logistic regression. Odds of severe outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission and invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) or death, were compared for JN versus XBB lineage hospitalizations using logistic regression. RESULTS: 585 case-patients with XBB lineages, 397 case-patients with JN lineages, and 4,580 control-patients were included. VE in the first 7-89 days after receipt of an updated dose was 54.2% (95% CI = 36.1%-67.1%) against XBB lineage hospitalization and 32.7% (95% CI = 1.9%-53.8%) against JN lineage hospitalization. Odds of ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.80; 95% CI = 0.46-1.38) and IMV or death (aOR 0.69; 95% CI = 0.34-1.40) were not significantly different among JN compared to XBB lineage hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: Updated 2023-2024 COVID-19 vaccination provided protection against both XBB and JN lineage hospitalization, but protection against the latter may be attenuated by immune escape. Clinical severity of JN lineage hospitalizations was not higher relative to XBB.
RESUMO
The test-negative design (TND) has been commonly used to study vaccine effectiveness (notably regarding COVID-19 and influenza vaccines) and has been recently proposed as a valid design to study causal risk factors of diseases during an outbreak. In April 2022, mpox (previously monkeypox) led to a worldwide outbreak that resulted in an international public health emergency. The TND could be used to study vaccine effectiveness and risk factors of mpox using epidemiologic databases, and a few studies have already done so. However, several issues prevent such study design from being valid for this end. Problems stem from stigma surrounding mpox, which impacts a person's decision to look for healthcare. This poses a challenge to the "similar healthcare seeking behaviour" assumption that is central for test negative studies. Further limitations include the differential diagnoses of mpox, which have notable differences from mpox that may be easily detected by clinicians or patients but are unlikely to be included in epidemiologic databases or electronic health records. Herein I discuss caveats regarding the use of the TND in the context of the mpox outbreak, as well as potential steps that may allow it to be used effectively.
RESUMO
Prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 can provide protection against infection and severe COVID-19. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-existing immunity on the vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. We systematically reviewed and meta-analysed 66 test-negative design (TND) studies that examined VE against infection or severe disease (hospitalization, ICU admission, or death) for primary vaccination series. Pooled VE among studies that included people with prior COVID-19 infection was lower against infection (pooled VE: 77%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 72%, 81%) and severe disease (pooled VE: 86%; 95% CI: 83%, 89%), compared with studies that excluded people with prior COVID-19 infection (pooled VE against infection: 87%; 95% CI: 85%, 89%; pooled VE against severe disease: 93%; 95% CI: 91%, 95%). There was a negative correlation between VE estimates against infection and severe disease, and the cumulative incidence of cases before the start of the study or incidence rates during the study period. We found clear empirical evidence that higher levels of pre-existing immunity were associated with lower VE estimates. Prior infections should be treated as both a confounder and effect modificatory when the policies target the whole population or stratified by infection history, respectively.
RESUMO
The test-negative design (TND) is an observational study design to evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) that enrolls individuals receiving diagnostic testing for a target disease as part of routine care. VE is estimated as one minus the adjusted odds ratio of testing positive versus negative comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Although the TND is related to case-control studies, it is distinct in that the ratio of test-positive cases to test-negative controls is not typically pre-specified. For both types of studies, sparse cells are common when vaccines are highly effective. We consider the implications of these features on power for the TND. We use simulation studies to explore three hypothesis-testing procedures and associated sample size calculations for case-control and TND studies. These tests, all based on a simple logistic regression model, are a standard Wald test, a continuity-corrected Wald test, and a score test. The Wald test performs poorly in both case-control and TND when VE is high because the number of vaccinated test-positive cases can be low or zero. Continuity corrections help to stabilize the variance but induce bias. We observe superior performance with the score test as the variance is pooled under the null hypothesis of no group differences. We recommend using a score-based approach to design and analyze both case-control and TND. We propose a modification to the TND score sample size to account for additional variability in the ratio of controls over cases. This work enhances our understanding of the data generating mechanism in a test-negative design (TND) and how it is distinct from that of a case-control study due to its passive recruitment of controls.
Assuntos
Projetos de Pesquisa , Humanos , Tamanho da Amostra , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Eficácia de Vacinas/estatística & dados numéricos , Modelos Logísticos , Simulação por Computador , Razão de Chances , Vacinação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto/métodos , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in the elderly is limited, and results are controversial. There are also few reports from China. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative case-control study design to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated visits among elderly (aged ≥ 60 years) across four influenza seasons in Ningbo, China, from 2018 to 19 to 2021-22. Influenza-positive cases and negative controls were randomly matched in a 1:1 ratio according to age, sex, hospital, and date of influenza testing. We used logistic regression models to compare vaccination odds ratios (ORs) in cases to controls. We calculated the VE as [100% × (1-adjusted OR)] and calculated the 95% confidence interval (CI) around the estimate. RESULTS: A total of 30,630 elderly patients tested for influenza with virus nucleic acid or antigen during the study period. After exclusions, we included 1 825 influenza-positive cases and 1 825 influenza-negative controls. Overall, the adjusted VE for influenza-related visits was 63.5% (95% CI, 56.3-69.5%), but varied by season. Influenza VE was 59.8% (95% CI, 51.5-66.7%) for influenza A and 89.6% (95% CI, 77.1-95.3%) for influenza B. The VE for ages 60-69 and 70-79 was 65.2% (95% CI, 55.4-72.9%) and 69.8% (95% CI, 58.7-77.9%), respectively, but only 45.4% (95% CI, 6.2-68.2%) for ages 80 and over. CONCLUSIONS: Standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine has shown good protection in the elderly in China. However, protection may not be satisfactory in people aged 80 years and older.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Eficácia de Vacinas , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados , Humanos , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/diagnóstico , Idoso , Masculino , Feminino , China/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados/administração & dosagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , População do Leste AsiáticoRESUMO
Influenza A viruses circulated in Europe from September 2023 to January 2024, with influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 predominance. We provide interim 2023/24 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) estimates from two European studies, covering 10 countries across primary care (EU-PC) and hospital (EU-H) settings. Interim IVE was higher against A(H1N1)pdm09 than A(H3N2): EU-PC influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 IVE was 53% (95%â¯CI:â¯41â¯toâ¯63) and 30% (95%â¯CI:â¯-3â¯toâ¯54) against influenza A(H3N2). For EU-H, these were 44% (95%â¯CI:â¯30â¯toâ¯55) and 14% (95%â¯CI:â¯-32â¯toâ¯43), respectively.
Assuntos
Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vírus da Influenza B , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Vacinação , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Estações do Ano , Hospitais , Atenção Primária à SaúdeRESUMO
The Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network reports mid-season 2023/24 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 63% (95%â¯CI: 51-72) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, lower for clade 5a.2a.1 (56%; 95%â¯CI: 33-71) than clade 5a.2a (67%; 95%â¯CI: 48-80), and lowest against influenza A(H3N2) (40%; 95%â¯CI: 5-61). The Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine protected comparably well, with VE of 47% (95%â¯CI: 21-65) against medically attended COVID-19, higher among people reporting a prior confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at 67% (95%â¯CI: 28-85).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Estações do Ano , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2/genética , Eficácia de Vacinas , Canadá/epidemiologia , Vigilância de Evento Sentinela , Vacinação , Estudos de Casos e ControlesRESUMO
BackgroundScarce European data in early 2021 suggested lower vaccine effectiveness (VE) against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron lineages than previous variants.AimWe aimed to estimate primary series (PS) and first booster VE against symptomatic BA.1/BA.2 infection and investigate potential biases.MethodsThis European test-negative multicentre study tested primary care patients with acute respiratory symptoms for SARS-CoV-2 in the BA.1/BA.2-dominant period. We estimated PS and booster VE among adults and adolescents (PS only) for all products combined and for Comirnaty alone, by time since vaccination, age and chronic condition. We investigated potential bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination and explored effect modification and confounding by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsAmong adults, PS VE was 37% (95%â¯CI: 24-47%) overall and 60% (95%â¯CI: 44-72%), 43% (95%â¯CI: 26-55%) and 29% (95%â¯CI: 13-43%) < 90, 90-179 and ≥ 180 days post vaccination, respectively. Booster VE was 42% (95%â¯CI: 32-51%) overall and 56% (95%â¯CI: 47-64%), 22% (95%â¯CI: 2-38%) and 3% (95%â¯CI: -78% to 48%), respectively. Primary series VE was similar among adolescents. Restricting analyses to Comirnaty had little impact. Vaccine effectiveness was higher among older adults. There was no signal of bias due to correlation between COVID-19 and influenza vaccination. Confounding by previous infection was low, but sample size precluded definite assessment of effect modification.ConclusionPrimary series and booster VE against symptomatic infection with BA.1/BA.2 ranged from 37% to 42%, with similar waning post vaccination. Comprehensive data on previous SARS-CoV-2 infection would help disentangle vaccine- and infection-induced immunity.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Adolescente , Idoso , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacina BNT162 , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Eficácia de Vacinas , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Atenção Primária à SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Following historically low influenza activity during the 2020-2021 season, the United States saw an increase in influenza circulating during the 2021-2022 season. Most viruses belonged to the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b 2a.2 subclade. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative case-control analysis among adults ≥18 years of age at 3 sites within the VISION Network. Encounters included emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits or hospitalizations with ≥1 acute respiratory illness (ARI) discharge diagnosis codes and molecular testing for influenza. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated by comparing the odds of influenza vaccination ≥14 days before the encounter date between influenza-positive cases (type A) and influenza-negative and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-negative controls, applying inverse probability-to-be-vaccinated weights, and adjusting for confounders. RESULTS: In total, 86 732 ED/UC ARI-associated encounters (7696 [9%] cases) and 16 805 hospitalized ARI-associated encounters (649 [4%] cases) were included. VE against influenza-associated ED/UC encounters was 25% (95% confidence interval (CI), 20%-29%) and 25% (95% CI, 11%-37%) against influenza-associated hospitalizations. VE against ED/UC encounters was lower in adults ≥65 years of age (7%; 95% CI, -5% to 17%) or with immunocompromising conditions (4%; 95% CI, -45% to 36%). CONCLUSIONS: During an influenza A(H3N2)-predominant influenza season, modest VE was observed. These findings highlight the need for improved vaccines, particularly for A(H3N2) viruses that are historically associated with lower VE.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H1N1 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pré-Escolar , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Estações do Ano , Eficácia de Vacinas , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Assistência Ambulatorial , Hospitais , Estudos de Casos e ControlesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The 2022-2023 United States influenza season had unusually early influenza activity with high hospitalization rates. Vaccine-matched A(H3N2) viruses predominated, with lower levels of A(H1N1)pdm09 activity also observed. METHODS: Using the test-negative design, we evaluated influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) during the 2022-2023 season against influenza-A-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits and hospitalizations from October 2022-March 2023 among adults (age ≥18 years) with acute respiratory illness (ARI). VE was estimated by comparing odds of seasonal influenza vaccination among case-patients (influenza A test-positive by molecular assay) and controls (influenza test-negative), applying inverse-propensity-to-be-vaccinated weights. RESULTS: The analysis included 85,389 ED/UC ARI encounters (17.0% influenza-A-positive; 37.8% vaccinated overall) and 19,751 hospitalizations (9.5% influenza-A-positive; 52.8% vaccinated overall). VE against influenza-A-associated ED/UC encounters was 44% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 40-47%) overall and 45% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. VE against influenza-A-associated hospitalizations was 35% (95%CI: 27-43%) overall and 23% and 41% among adults aged 18-64 and ≥65 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: VE was moderate during the 2022-2023 influenza season, a season characterized with increased burden of influenza and co-circulation with other respiratory viruses. Vaccination is likely to substantially reduce morbidity, mortality, and strain on healthcare resources.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Two- and 3-dose BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, including Delta and Omicron variants, was assessed among adolescents in Canada, where first and second doses were spaced longer than the manufacturer-specified 3-week interval. METHODS: Test-negative design estimated VE against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection ≥14 days after vaccination among 12-17-year-olds in Quebec and British Columbia, Canada, between 5 September 2021 and 30 April 2022 (epidemiological weeks 36-17). VE was explored by the interval between first and second doses, time since the second dose, and with a third dose. RESULTS: The VE against Delta was ≥90% until at least 5 months after the second dose. The VE against Omicron decreased from about 65%-75% at 2-3 weeks to ≤50% by the third month after vaccination, restored to approximately 65% by a third dose. Although confidence intervals overlapped, VE against Omicron was about 5%-7% higher (absolute) when first and second doses were spaced ≥8 versus 3-4 weeks apart. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescents, 2 BNT162b2 doses provided strong and sustained protection against Delta but reduced and rapidly waning VE against Omicron. A longer interval between first and second doses and a third dose marginally improved Omicron protection.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescente , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacina BNT162 , Colúmbia BritânicaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the United States, influenza activity during the 2021-2022 season was modest and sufficient enough to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) for the first time since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We estimated influenza VE against laboratory-confirmed outpatient acute illness caused by predominant A(H3N2) viruses. METHODS: Between October 2021 and April 2022, research staff across 7 sites enrolled patients aged ≥6 months seeking outpatient care for acute respiratory illness with cough. Using a test-negative design, we assessed VE against influenza A(H3N2). Due to strong correlation between influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination, participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from VE estimations. Estimates were adjusted for site, age, month of illness, race/ethnicity, and general health status. RESULTS: Among 6260 participants, 468 (7%) tested positive for influenza only, including 440 (94%) for A(H3N2). All 206 sequenced A(H3N2) viruses were characterized as belonging to genetic group 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.2, which has antigenic differences from the 2021-2022 season A(H3N2) vaccine component that belongs to clade 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.1. After excluding 1948 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 4312 patients were included in analyses of influenza VE; 2463 (57%) were vaccinated against influenza. Effectiveness against A(H3N2) for all ages was 36% (95% confidence interval, 20%-49%) overall. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination in 2021-2022 provided protection against influenza A(H3N2)-related outpatient visits among young persons.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Vírus da Influenza A Subtipo H3N2 , Estações do Ano , Eficácia de Vacinas , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinação , Vírus da Influenza BRESUMO
BACKGROUND: A major goal of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination is to prevent severe outcomes (hospitalizations and deaths). We estimated the effectiveness of messenger RNA (mRNA) and ChAdOx1 COVID-19 vaccines against severe outcomes in 4 Canadian provinces between December 2020 and September 2021. METHODS: We conducted this multiprovincial, retrospective, test-negative study among community-dwelling adults aged ≥18 years in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Manitoba using linked provincial databases and a common study protocol. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate province-specific vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization and/or death. Estimates were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: We included 2 508 296 tested participants, with 31 776 COVID-19 hospitalizations and 5842 deaths. Vaccine effectiveness was 83% after a first dose and 98% after a second dose against both hospitalization and death (separately). Against severe outcomes, effectiveness was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-94%) ≥84 days after a first dose of mRNA vaccine, increasing to 98% (95% CI, 96%-99%) ≥112 days after a second dose. Vaccine effectiveness against severe outcomes for ChAdOx1 was 88% (95% CI, 75%-94%) ≥56 days after a first dose, increasing to 97% (95% CI, 91%-99%) ≥56 days after a second dose. Lower 1-dose effectiveness was observed for adults aged ≥80 years and those with comorbidities, but effectiveness became comparable after a second dose. Two doses of vaccines provided very high protection for both homologous and heterologous schedules and against Alpha, Gamma, and Delta variants. CONCLUSIONS: Two doses of mRNA or ChAdOx1 vaccine provide excellent protection against severe outcomes.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Adolescente , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Colúmbia Britânica , Hospitalização , RNA MensageiroRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although several coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines initially showed high efficacy, there have been concerns because of waning immunity and the emergence of variants with immune escape capacity. METHODS: A test-negative design case-control study was conducted in 16 healthcare facilities in Japan during the Delta-dominant period (August-September 2021) and the Omicron-dominant period (January-March 2022). Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection was calculated for 2 doses for the Delta-dominant period and 2 or 3 doses for the Omicron-dominant period compared with unvaccinated individuals. RESULTS: The analysis included 5795 individuals with 2595 (44.8%) cases. Among vaccinees, 2242 (55.8%) received BNT162b2 and 1624 (40.4%) received messenger RNA (mRNA)-1273 at manufacturer-recommended intervals. During the Delta-dominant period, VE was 88% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82-93) 14 days to 3 months after dose 2 and 87% (95% CI, 38-97) 3 to 6 months after dose 2. During the Omicron-dominant period, VE was 56% (95% CI, 37-70) 14 days to 3 months since dose 2, 52% (95% CI, 40-62) 3 to 6 months after dose 2, 49% (95% CI, 34-61) 6+ months after dose 2, and 74% (95% CI, 62-83) 14+ days after dose 3. Restricting to individuals at high risk of severe COVID-19 and additional adjustment for preventive measures (ie, mask wearing/high-risk behaviors) yielded similar estimates, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In Japan, where most are infection-naïve, and strict prevention measures are maintained regardless of vaccination status, 2-dose mRNA vaccines provided high protection against symptomatic infection during the Delta-dominant period and moderate protection during the Omicron-dominant period. Among individuals who received an mRNA booster dose, VE recovered to a high level.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Japão/epidemiologia , Vacina BNT162 , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Eficácia de Vacinas , RNA MensageiroRESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to use infection testing databases to rapidly estimate effectiveness of prior infection in preventing reinfection ($P{E}_S$) by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants. Mathematical modeling was used to demonstrate a theoretical foundation for applicability of the test-negative, case-control study design to derive $P{E}_S$. Apart from the very early phase of an epidemic, the difference between the test-negative estimate for $P{E}_S$ and true value of $P{E}_S$ was minimal and became negligible as the epidemic progressed. The test-negative design provided robust estimation of $P{E}_S$ and its waning. Assuming that only 25% of prior infections are documented, misclassification of prior infection status underestimated $P{E}_S$, but the underestimate was considerable only when >50% of the population was ever infected. Misclassification of latent infection, misclassification of current active infection, and scale-up of vaccination all resulted in negligible bias in estimated $P{E}_S$. The test-negative design was applied to national-level testing data in Qatar to estimate $P{E}_S$ for SARS-CoV-2. $P{E}_S$ against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Beta variants was estimated at 97.0% (95% CI: 93.6-98.6) and 85.5% (95% CI: 82.4-88.1), respectively. These estimates were validated using a cohort study design. The test-negative design offers a feasible, robust method to estimate protection from prior infection in preventing reinfection.