Meningococcal Vaccination Rates Among People With a New Diagnosis of HIV Infection in the US

Evaluation of preventive medicine amongst people living with human immunodeficiency virus attending a hospital-based care setting

BACKGROUND

With improved outcomes in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) due to the use of anti-retroviral therapy, ensuring adequate preventative healthcare and management of HIV-related comorbidities is essential.

AIMS

To evaluate adherence with recommended guidelines for comorbidity and immunisation status screening amongst people living with HIV within a hospital-based setting across two timepoints.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective case series was conducted at a hospital between 2011 and 2021. Inclusion criteria were ≥18 years, confirmed diagnosis of HIV and commencement of care within study period. Medical data were reviewed over two 12-month periods to capture comorbidity screening and vaccination adherence using established guidelines (Australasian Society for HIV, Viral Hepatitis and Sexual Health Medicine, Alfred Screening tool and Australian Technical Advisory Group recommendations). Descriptive statistics were obtained with IBM spss (version 29.0).

RESULTS

Of 102 patients, 82 (80.4%) were male and 55 (53.9%) born overseas. Nineteen (18.6%) patients entered in 2011, with a median of 36.5 months from service entry to exit. Within 12 months of entry 56 (55.4%) participants had influenza vaccination recorded. Within the last 12 months, 94.8% had recorded COVID-19 vaccination, with improvements in pneumococcal (72.3%) and hepatitis B (82.8%) since service entry. Recording of comorbidity screening was >90% for blood pressure, weight and renal function at both timepoints, however, suboptimal (<10%) for substance misuse, cognitive and osteoporosis screening.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a disparity amongst comorbidity screening and documentation of vaccination status. Further measures are required to target improvements in immunisation, bone health, substance misuse and cognitive impairment screening.

Meningococcal Vaccination in High-Risk Patients: A Systematic Approach to Evaluating Coverage and Patient Catch-Up Through Healthcare Databases

Background: Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) can lead to severe and fatal outcomes. Vaccines against meningococcus (serogroups B, MenB; or ACWY, MenACWY) are recommended for patients at high risk of developing IMD. Our aim was to identify high-risk patients through a systematic search of medical codes and to evaluate vaccination coverage by high-risk group. Methods: An observational retrospective study was conducted in patients discharged at Reina Sofía University Hospital (Cordoba, Spain) from 1 January 2000, to 31 December 2023. Selection of high-risk patients was conducted through national administrative and clinical databases and vaccination coverage was determined through the Andalusian electronic vaccine database. Vaccine coverages of MenB and MenACWY were calculated within risk groups. Finally, bivariate analyses were conducted to assess the potential association between coverage, sex, and the year of admission. Results: A total of 2689 patients with 2710 high-risk conditions for IMD were identified from the databases searched. Of the 1755 requiring MenB vaccination, only 624 (35.6%) had received one dose and 558 (31.8%) two doses. Of the 2710 requiring MenACWY vaccination, only 784 (28.9%) had received one dose and 520 (19.2%) two doses. Patients with properdin-complement deficiencies showed the lowest vaccination rates (<10%). For the rest of the high-risk groups, vaccination coverages were significantly lower when the condition was diagnosed before the immunization guideline recommendations (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The identification of high-risk patients through databases using R-coded algorithms is both feasible and effective for identifying and catching-up patients for vaccination. The population at risk of IMD lacks adequate meningococcal vaccination coverage. Our methodology can serve to identify patients in other regions and for different vaccines.

Inequalities in the risk and prevention of invasive meningococcal disease in the United States - A systematic literature review

Vaccination remains the most effective strategy to prevent invasive meningococcal disease (IMD), with MenACWY, MenB and MenABCWY recommended for adolescents/young adults in the United States (US). However, vaccination coverage remains suboptimal, which could be related to population inequalities. To understand the impact of IMD risk, prevention and control inequalities, a global systematic literature review (Medline, Embase, 2012-2022) was conducted on individual, socioeconomic, and environmental inequalities associated with IMD risk, prevention and control in all ages. Studies on IMD risk (n = 15) and prevention (n = 14) inequalities were identified. IMD incidence proportions were higher in Medicaid versus commercially insured populations, and IMD mortality was higher in poorer neighborhoods. White adolescents, adolescents from lower income families, and with lower maternal education were more likely to receive MenB vaccination; while Black and Hispanic adolescents, and adolescents with higher family incomes, were more likely to receive MenACWY vaccination. Meningococcal vaccination was associated with being up-to-date with other vaccinations, having multiple healthcare/well child visits, having a pediatrician as healthcare provider (HCP), and attending private facilities; while being uninsured was associated with lower vaccination. States with a MenACWY vaccination mandate and higher pediatrician-to-children ratios had higher vaccination rates. Important inequalities were due to individual differences, socioeconomic, and environmental factors. IMD prevention is suboptimal, especially among adolescents/young adults. To improve health equity, health policy makers could ameliorate meningococcal vaccination coverage across the US, with simplified and stronger meningococcal vaccine recommendations from public health authorities, and initiatives to enhance parental/patient and HCP knowledge of IMD and vaccine recommendations.

4CMenB journey to the 10-year anniversary and beyond

The 4-component meningococcal serogroup B (MenB) vaccine, 4CMenB, the first broadly protective, protein-based MenB vaccine to be licensed, is now registered in more than 50 countries worldwide. Real-world evidence (RWE) from the last decade confirms its effectiveness and impact, with infant immunization programs showing vaccine effectiveness of 71-95% against invasive MenB disease and cross-protection against non-B serogroups, including a 69% decrease in serogroup W cases in 4CMenB-eligible cohorts in England. RWE from different countries also demonstrates the potential for additional moderate protection against gonorrhea in adolescents. The real-world safety profile of 4CMenB is consistent with prelicensure reports. Use of the endogenous complement human serum bactericidal antibody (enc-hSBA) assay against 110 MenB strains may enable assessment of the immunological effectiveness of multicomponent MenB vaccines in clinical trial settings. Equitable access to 4CMenB vaccination is required to better protect all age groups, including older adults, and vulnerable groups through comprehensive immunization policies.

Meningococcal Disease in Persons With HIV Reported Through Active Surveillance in the United States, 2009-2019

Persons with HIV (PWH) are at increased risk for bacterial infections, and previous publications document an increased risk for invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) in particular. This analysis provides evidence that PWH face a 6-fold increase in risk for IMD based on Active Bacterial Core surveillance data collected during 2009-2019.

[Invasive meningococcal disease: increased risk and vaccination prevention for immunocompromised patients]

BACKGROUND

The development of evidence-based guidelines for the prevention of infectious diseases through vaccination requires an understanding of populations that most likely may obtain an infection, severe illness or disease. Targeted vaccination recommendations are made possible by identifying risk groups, as is the case with meningococcal infections. Despite falling case numbers, meningococcal sepsis and meningococcal meningitis remain a major health problem.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was carried out on the research platform Ovid.

RESULTS

Vulnerable groups of people whose immune system is limited by primary and secondary immunodeficiency, such as asplenia, renal failure, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, diabetes, complement deficiency, organ and stem cell transplants, or immunomodulatory therapy (e.g., in rheumatic, hematological or oncological diseases), are exposed to an increased risk of infection and more severe courses of disease. Despite adequate medical care, the mortality rate is high and patients that survived the infection are often suffering from severe long-term sequelae. In such cases, the vaccination recommendations of the Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) for indication vaccinations and the application instructions for vaccination in the case of immune deficiency should be consistently implemented in Germany.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased responsibility for comprehensive protection must be assumed for persons with underlying diseases. Reducing invasive meningococcal infections can be achieved through widespread education of patients and contacts, as well as practicing physicians on available vaccinations.

Barriers and facilitators to HPV and meningococcal vaccination among men who have sex with men: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Men who have sex with men (MSM) have suboptimal uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) and meningococcal vaccines. This study examines barriers and facilitators to HPV and meningococcal vaccination among MSM in a large, racially/ethnically diverse, and medically underserved U.S. region.

METHODS

In 2020, we conducted five focus groups with MSM living in the Inland Empire, California. Participants discussed (1) their knowledge about and attitudes toward HPV, meningococcal disease, and related vaccines; and (2) factors that would encourage or discourage vaccine uptake. Data were systematically analyzed to identify salient barriers and facilitators to vaccination.

RESULTS

Participants (N = 25) had a median age of 29. Most were Hispanic (68%), self-identified as gay (84%), and had college degrees (64%). Key barriers to vaccination included: (1) limited awareness and knowledge about HPV and meningococcal disease, (2) reliance on mainstream healthcare providers for vaccine information, (3) stigma and reluctance to disclose sexual orientation, (4) uncertainty about health insurance coverage and vaccine costs, and (5) distance and time required to access vaccines. Key facilitators to vaccination were: (1) vaccine confidence, (2) perceived severity of HPV and meningococcal disease, (3) bundling vaccination into routine healthcare, and (4) pharmacies as vaccination sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings highlight opportunities for HPV and meningococcal vaccine promotion, including targeted education and awareness campaigns for MSM, LGBT inclusivity training for healthcare providers, and structural interventions to improve vaccine accessibility.

Living with HIV and Getting Vaccinated: A Narrative Review

After 40 years of its appearance, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection remains a leading public health challenge worldwide. Since the introduction of antiretroviral treatment (ART), HIV infection has become a chronic condition, and people living with HIV could have life expectancies close to those of the general population. People with HIV often have an increased risk of infection or experience more severe morbidity following exposure to vaccine-preventable diseases. Nowadays, several vaccines are available against bacteria and viruses. However, national and international vaccination guidelines for people with HIV are heterogeneous, and not every vaccine is included. For these reasons, we aimed to perform a narrative review about the vaccinations available for adults living with HIV, reporting the most updated studies performed for each vaccine among this population. We performed a comprehensive literature search through electronic databases (Pubmed-MEDLINE and Embase) and search engines (Google Scholar). We included English peer-reviewed publications (articles and reviews) on HIV and vaccination. Despite widespread use and guideline recommendations, few vaccine trials have been conducted in people with HIV. In addition, not all vaccines are recommended for people with HIV, especially for those with low CD4 cells count. Clinicians should carefully collect the history of vaccinations and patients' acceptance and preferences and regularly check the presence of antibodies for vaccine-preventable pathogens.

Expert Perspectives on the Vaccination of Individuals Who Are at Increased Risk of Meningococcal Disease Due to Medical Conditions: A Podcast

Patients with functional or anatomic asplenia, including sickle cell anemia; complement component deficiency; or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection have a significantly increased risk of developing meningococcal disease. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends vaccination with a quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate vaccine against serogroups A, C, W, and Y (MenACWY) for individuals 2 months of age or older who are diagnosed with functional or anatomic asplenia, complement component deficiency, or HIV infection. Vaccination with a meningococcal vaccine against serogroup B (MenB) is also recommended for individuals 10 years of age or older who are diagnosed with functional or anatomic asplenia or complement component deficiency. Despite these recommendations, recent studies have shown that vaccination coverage in these populations is low. In this podcast, the authors discuss the challenges for implementing vaccine recommendations for individuals with medical conditions at increased risk of developing meningococcal disease and discuss strategies to increase coverage. Suboptimal vaccination rates could be addressed by better educating healthcare providers about recommendations for MenACWY and MenB vaccines in individuals at increased risk, increasing awareness of low vaccination coverage, and tailoring the education to the needs of particular healthcare providers and their respective patient populations. Barriers to vaccination could also be removed by administering vaccines at alternative sites of care, bundling preventative services, and implementing vaccination reminder systems that are tied to immunization information systems.

National and regional differences in meningococcal vaccine recommendations for individuals at an increased risk of meningococcal disease

INTRODUCTION

Invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) is a severe, life-threatening condition caused by infection with Neisseria meningitidis. Currently available vaccines offer protection against the five most common meningococcal disease-causing serogroups and include monovalent and quadrivalent conjugate vaccines (MenA, MenC, MenACWY vaccines) and outer membrane vesicle- and/or recombinant protein-based vaccines (MenB vaccines).

AREAS COVERED

Country and regional immunization programs target populations susceptible to IMD and typically emphasize the highest-risk age groups (i.e., infants, adolescents/young adults, and the elderly); however, additional groups are also considered at an elevated risk and are the focus of the current review. Specific increased-risk groups include individuals with underlying immunocompromising medical conditions, university/college students, Indigenous people, laboratory workers, military personnel, men who have sex with men, and travelers to areas with hyperendemic IMD. This review compares established meningococcal vaccination recommendations for these vulnerable groups in Europe, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, Brazil, and Turkey.

EXPERT OPINION

Recommendations should be standardized to cover all groups at increased risk of IMD.

Human Papillomavirus Vaccine Administration Trends Among Commercially Insured US Adults Aged 27-45 Years Before and After Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices Recommendation Change, 2007-2020

Importance

In 2019, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended patient-clinician shared decision-making for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in adults aged 27 to 45 years. Less is known about the HPV vaccine administration trends in this age group before and after this recommendation update.

Objective

To examine the association between the ACIP recommendation update and the HPV vaccine administration among US adults aged 27 to 45 years.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This large commercial claim-based retrospective cohort study used the Optum Clinformatics database for validated claims from January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2020. A total of 22 600 520 US adults aged 27 to 45 years without previous HPV vaccination claims during the study and enrollment period were included.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The first-appearing HPV vaccination claim per individual was defined as a new HPV vaccine administration. Interrupted time-series analyses were conducted to assess the association between the ACIP update and the quarterly vaccine administration rate change. The annual rate trends across race and ethnicity groups and the proportions of vaccination cases by sub-age groups and valent types were also estimated. Vaccine administration trends were assessed by race and ethnicity in this age group because HPV vaccination trends were found to differ by race and ethnicity in the initially eligible population.

Results

Among 22 600 520 final study participants, the majority were men (50.9%) and non-Hispanic White (53.4%), and the mean (SD) age when first observed was 34.6 (5.8) years. In women, the ACIP update was associated with an immediate increase in vaccine administration rate (coefficient β2, 40.18 per 100 000 persons; P = .01) and an increased slope (coefficient β3, 9.62 per 100 000 persons per quarter; P = .03) over time postupdate. The ACIP update was only associated with an immediate increase in vaccine administration in men (coefficient β2, 27.54; P < .001). The annual rate trends were similar across race and ethnicity groups. Age at vaccine administration shifted over time (eg, women aged 40-45 years comprised only 4.9% of vaccinations in 2017, then 19.0% in 2019, and 22.7% in 2020). The most administered HPV vaccines in 2020 were 9 valent (women, 97.0%; men, 97.7%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this population-based cohort study, there were statistically significant increases in HPV vaccine administration in adults aged 27 to 45 years after the ACIP recommendation update. Patient-clinician shared decision-making may have been the main associated factor for this increase. Further research is warranted to explore the decision-making process in receiving HPV vaccination and to develop effective decision aids to maximize the cancer prevention benefit in this age group.