Post-recovery health domain scores among outpatients by SARS-CoV-2 testing status during the pre-Delta period

BACKGROUND

Symptoms of COVID-19 including fatigue and dyspnea, may persist for weeks to months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study compared self-reported disability among SARS-CoV-2-positive and negative persons with mild to moderate COVID-19-like illness who presented for outpatient care before widespread COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

Unvaccinated adults with COVID-19-like illness enrolled within 10 days of illness onset at three US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network sites were tested for SARS-CoV-2 by molecular assay. Enrollees completed an enrollment questionnaire and two follow-up surveys (7-24 days and 2-7 months after illness onset) online or by phone to assess illness characteristics and health status. The second follow-up survey included questions measuring global health, physical function, fatigue, and dyspnea. Scores in the four domains were compared by participants' SARS-CoV-2 test results in univariate analysis and multivariable Gamma regression.

RESULTS

During September 22, 2020 - February 13, 2021, 2712 eligible adults were enrolled, 1541 completed the first follow-up survey, and 650 completed the second follow-up survey. SARS-CoV-2-positive participants were more likely to report fever at acute illness but were otherwise comparable to SARS-CoV-2-negative participants. At first follow-up, SARS-CoV-2-positive participants were less likely to have reported fully or mostly recovered from their illness compared to SARS-CoV-2-negative participants. At second follow-up, no differences by SARS-CoV-2 test results were detected in the four domains in the multivariable model.

CONCLUSION

Self-reported disability was similar among outpatient SARS-CoV-2-positive and -negative adults 2-7 months after illness onset.

Risk of COVID-19 Hospitalization and Protection Associated With mRNA Vaccination Among US Adults With Psychiatric Disorders

BACKGROUND

Although psychiatric disorders have been associated with reduced immune responses to other vaccines, it remains unknown whether they influence COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE). This study evaluated risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and estimated mRNA VE stratified by psychiatric disorder status.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort analysis of the VISION Network in four US states, the rate of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalization between December 2021 and August 2022 was compared across psychiatric diagnoses and by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination status using Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Among 2,436,999 adults, 22.1% had ≥1 psychiatric disorder. The incidence of COVID-19-associated hospitalization was higher among patients with any versus no psychiatric disorder (394 vs. 156 per 100,000 person-years, p < 0.001). Any psychiatric disorder (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18-1.37) and mood (aHR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.15-1.36), anxiety (aHR, 1.33, 95% CI, 1.22-1.45), and psychotic (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.14-1.74) disorders were each significant independent predictors of hospitalization. Among patients with any psychiatric disorder, aHRs for the association between vaccination and hospitalization were 0.35 (95% CI, 0.25-0.49) after a recent second dose, 0.08 (95% CI, 0.06-0.11) after a recent third dose, and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.17-0.66) after a recent fourth dose, compared to unvaccinated patients. Corresponding VE estimates were 65%, 92%, and 67%, respectively, and were similar among patients with no psychiatric disorder (68%, 92%, and 79%).

CONCLUSION

Psychiatric disorders were associated with increased risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization. However, mRNA vaccination provided similar protection regardless of psychiatric disorder status, highlighting its benefit for individuals with psychiatric disorders.

Clinical Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Critical Outcomes Among Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19-VISION Network, 10 States, June 2021-March 2023

BACKGROUND

The epidemiology of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to develop with emerging variants, expanding population-level immunity, and advances in clinical care. We describe changes in the clinical epidemiology of COVID-19 hospitalizations and risk factors for critical outcomes over time.

METHODS

We included adults aged ≥18 years from 10 states hospitalized with COVID-19 June 2021-March 2023. We evaluated changes in demographics, clinical characteristics, and critical outcomes (intensive care unit admission and/or death) and evaluated critical outcomes risk factors (risk ratios [RRs]), stratified by COVID-19 vaccination status.

RESULTS

A total of 60 488 COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were included in the analysis. Among those hospitalized, median age increased from 60 to 75 years, proportion vaccinated increased from 18.2% to 70.1%, and critical outcomes declined from 24.8% to 19.4% (all P < .001) between the Delta (June-December, 2021) and post-BA.4/BA.5 (September 2022-March 2023) periods. Hospitalization events with critical outcomes had a higher proportion of ≥4 categories of medical condition categories assessed (32.8%) compared to all hospitalizations (23.0%). Critical outcome risk factors were similar for unvaccinated and vaccinated populations; presence of ≥4 medical condition categories was most strongly associated with risk of critical outcomes regardless of vaccine status (unvaccinated: adjusted RR, 2.27 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.14-2.41]; vaccinated: adjusted RR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.56-1.92]) across periods.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of adults hospitalized with COVID-19 who experienced critical outcomes decreased with time, and median patient age increased with time. Multimorbidity was most strongly associated with critical outcomes.

Effect of programmed intermittent epidural bolus protocol on physician-administered rescue boluses of labor analgesia

Background

Prior studies have shown that programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) techniques, with or without patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) boluses, provide better pain relief, reduced motor block, and better patient satisfaction compared to continuous epidural infusion (CEI) techniques. We hypothesized that patients who had labor epidural analgesia (LEA) maintained with PIEB and PCEA would be less likely to receive a physician-administered rescue analgesia bolus compared to patients who had CEI and PCEA.

Methods

We searched our electronic medical record for patients who had CEI and PCEA from August 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 and for patients who had PIEB and PCEA from August 2, 2022 to December 31, 2022.

Results

A total of 792 and 665 patients had maintenance of LEA with CEI/PCEA and PIEB/PCEA, respectively. A multivariate logistic regression was performed and, after adjusting for variables of interest, patients who had PIEB and PCEA were less likely to receive one or more physician-administered rescue analgesia boluses (odds ratio 0.504; 95% confidence interval 0.392, 0.649; P < 0.001) compared to patients who had CEI and PCEA.

Conclusion

PIEB/PCEA was associated with fewer physician-administered boluses of rescue analgesia compared to CEI/PCEA when used for LEA.

Number needed to vaccinate with a COVID-19 booster to prevent a COVID-19-associated hospitalization during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 variant predominance, December 2021-February 2022, VISION Network: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Understanding the usefulness of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses-particularly given varying disease incidence-is needed to support public health policy. We characterize the benefits of COVID-19 booster doses using number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department encounter.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of immunocompetent adults at five health systems in four U.S. states during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 predominance (December 2021-February 2022). Included patients completed a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccine series and were either eligible to or received a booster dose. NNV were estimated using hazard ratios for each outcome (hospitalization and emergency department encounters), with results stratified by three 25-day periods and site.

Findings

1,285,032 patients contributed 938 hospitalizations and 2076 emergency department encounters. 555,729 (43.2%) patients were aged 18-49 years, 363,299 (28.3%) 50-64 years, and 366,004 (28.5%) ≥65 years. Most patients were female (n = 765,728, 59.6%), White (n = 990,224, 77.1%), and non-Hispanic (n = 1,063,964, 82.8%). 37.2% of patients received a booster and 62.8% received only two doses. Median estimated NNV to prevent one hospitalization was 205 (range 44-615) and NNV was lower across study periods for adults aged ≥65 years (110, 46, and 88, respectively) and those with underlying medical conditions (163, 69, and 131, respectively). Median estimated NNV to prevent one emergency department encounter was 156 (range 75-592).

Interpretation

The number of patients needed to receive a booster dose was highly dependent on local disease incidence, outcome severity, and patient risk factors for moderate-to-severe disease.

Funding

Funding was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention though contract 75D30120C07986 to Westat, Inc. and contract 75D30120C07765 to Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.

Relationships Between Social Vulnerability and Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Coverage and Vaccine Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination coverage remains lower in communities with higher social vulnerability. Factors such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) exposure risk and access to healthcare are often correlated with social vulnerability and may therefore contribute to a relationship between vulnerability and observed vaccine effectiveness (VE). Understanding whether these factors impact VE could contribute to our understanding of real-world VE.

METHODS

We used electronic health record data from 7 health systems to assess vaccination coverage among patients with medically attended COVID-19-like illness. We then used a test-negative design to assess VE for 2- and 3-dose messenger RNA (mRNA) adult (≥18 years) vaccine recipients across Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) quartiles. SVI rankings were determined by geocoding patient addresses to census tracts; rankings were grouped into quartiles for analysis.

RESULTS

In July 2021, primary series vaccination coverage was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (56% vs 36%, respectively). In February 2022, booster dose coverage among persons who had completed a primary series was higher in the least vulnerable quartile than in the most vulnerable quartile (43% vs 30%). VE among 2-dose and 3-dose recipients during the Delta and Omicron BA.1 periods of predominance was similar across SVI quartiles.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 vaccination coverage varied substantially by SVI. Differences in VE estimates by SVI were minimal across groups after adjusting for baseline patient factors. However, lower vaccination coverage among more socially vulnerable groups means that the burden of illness is still disproportionately borne by the most socially vulnerable populations.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccination in Children and Adolescents

OBJECTIVES

We assessed BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild to moderate and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children and adolescents through the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 period.

METHODS

Using VISION Network records from April 2021 to September 2022, we conducted a test-negative, case-control study assessing VE against COVID-19-associated emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) encounters and hospitalizations using logistic regression, conditioned on month and site, adjusted for covariates.

RESULTS

We compared 9800 ED/UC cases with 70 232 controls, and 305 hospitalized cases with 2612 controls. During Delta, 2-dose VE against ED/UC encounters at 12 to 15 years was initially 93% (95% confidence interval 89 to 95), waning to 77% (69% to 84%) after ≥150 days. At ages 16 to 17, VE was initially 93% (86% to 97%), waning to 72% (63% to 79%) after ≥150 days. During Omicron, VE at ages 12 to 15 was initially 64% (44% to 77%), waning to 13% (3% to 23%) after 60 days; at ages 16 to 17 VE was 31% (10% to 47%) during days 60 to 149, waning to 7% (-8 to 20%) after 150 days. A monovalent booster increased VE to 54% (40% to 65%) at ages 12 to 15 and 46% (30% to 58%) at ages 16 to 17. At ages 5 to 11, 2-dose VE was 49% (33% to 61%) initially and 41% (29% to 51%) after 150 days. During Delta, VE against hospitalizations at ages 12 to 17 was high (>97%), and at ages 16 to 17 remained 98% (73% to 100%) beyond 150 days; during Omicron, hospitalizations were too infrequent to precisely estimate VE.

CONCLUSIONS

BNT162b2 protected children and adolescents against mild to moderate and severe COVID-19. VE was lower during Omicron predominance including BA.4/BA.5, waned after dose 2 but increased after a monovalent booster. Children and adolescents should receive all recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

Estimation of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Effectiveness and COVID-19 Illness and Severity by Vaccination Status During Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 Sublineage Periods

IMPORTANCE

Recent SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant sublineages, including BA.4 and BA.5, may be associated with greater immune evasion and less protection against COVID-19 after vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 2, 3, or 4 doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among immunocompetent adults during a period of BA.4 or BA.5 predominant circulation; and to evaluate the relative severity of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients across Omicron BA.1, BA.2 or BA.2.12.1, and BA.4 or BA.5 sublineage periods.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This test-negative case-control study was conducted in 10 states with data from emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) encounters and hospitalizations from December 16, 2021, to August 20, 2022. Participants included adults with COVID-19-like illness and molecular testing for SARS-CoV-2. Data were analyzed from August 2 to September 21, 2022.

EXPOSURES

mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The outcomes of interest were COVID-19 ED or UC encounters, hospitalizations, and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or in-hospital death. VE associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19 was estimated, stratified by care setting and vaccine doses (2, 3, or 4 doses vs 0 doses as the reference group). Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, demographic and clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared across sublineage periods.

RESULTS

During the BA.4 and BA.5 predominant period, there were 82 229 eligible ED and UC encounters among patients with COVID-19-like illness (median [IQR] age, 51 [33-70] years; 49 682 [60.4%] female patients), and 19 114 patients (23.2%) had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2; among 21 007 hospitalized patients (median [IQR] age, 71 [58-81] years; 11 209 [53.4%] female patients), 3583 (17.1 %) had test results positive for SARS-CoV-2. Estimated VE against hospitalization was 25% (95% CI, 17%-32%) for receipt of 2 vaccine doses at 150 days or more after receipt, 68% (95% CI, 50%-80%) for a third dose 7 to 119 days after receipt, and 36% (95% CI, 29%-42%) for a third dose 120 days or more (median [IQR], 235 [204-262] days) after receipt. Among patients aged 65 years or older who had received a fourth vaccine dose, VE was 66% (95% CI, 53%-75%) at 7 to 59 days after vaccination and 57% (95% CI, 44%-66%) at 60 days or more (median [IQR], 88 [75-105] days) after vaccination. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, ICU admission or in-hospital death occurred in 21.4% of patients during the BA.1 period vs 14.7% during the BA.4 and BA.5 period (standardized mean difference: 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this case-control study of COVID-19 vaccines and illness, VE associated with protection against medically attended COVID-19 illness was lower with increasing time since last dose; estimated VE was higher after receipt of 1 or 2 booster doses compared with a primary series alone.

Protection of 2 and 3 mRNA Vaccine Doses Against Severe Outcomes Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19 – VISION Network, August 2021 – March 2022

Background

We assessed COVID-19 vaccination impact on illness severity among adults hospitalized with COVID-19 August 2021–March 2022.

Methods

We evaluated differences in intensive care unit (ICU) admission, in-hospital death, and length of stay among vaccinated (2 or 3 mRNA vaccine doses) versus unvaccinated patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized for ≥24 hours with COVID-19-like illness (CLI) and positive SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing. We calculated odds ratios for ICU admission and death and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) for time to hospital discharge adjusted for age, geographic region, calendar time, and local virus circulation.

Results

We included 27,149 SARS-CoV-2 positive hospitalizations. During both Delta and Omicron-predominant periods, protection against ICU admission was strongest among 3-dose vaccinees compared with unvaccinated patients (Delta OR [CI]: 0.52 [0.28–0.96]); Omicron OR [CI]: 0.69 [0.54–0.87]). During both periods, risk of in-hospital of death was lower among vaccinated compared with unvaccinated but ORs were overlapping; during Omicron, lowest among 3-dose vaccinees (OR [CI] 0.39 [0.28–0.54]). We observed SHR &gt;1 across all vaccination strata in both periods indicating faster discharge for vaccinated patients.

Conclusions

COVID-19 vaccination was associated with lower rates of ICU admission and in-hospital death in both Delta and Omicron periods compared with being unvaccinated.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults During SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Predominance - VISION Network, 10 States, December 2021-August 2022

Persons with moderate-to-severe immunocompromising conditions might have reduced protection after COVID-19 vaccination, compared with persons without immunocompromising conditions (1-3). On August 13, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that adults with immunocompromising conditions receive an expanded primary series of 3 doses of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. ACIP followed with recommendations on September 23, 2021, for a fourth (booster) dose and on September 1, 2022, for a new bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine booster dose, containing components of the BA.4 and BA.5 sublineages of the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant (4). Data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) of monovalent COVID-19 vaccines among persons with immunocompromising conditions since the emergence of the Omicron variant in December 2021 are limited. In the multistate VISION Network,^§ monovalent 2-, 3-, and 4-dose mRNA VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization were estimated among adults with immunocompromising conditions^¶ hospitalized with COVID-19-like illness,** using a test-negative design comparing odds of previous vaccination among persons with a positive or negative molecular test result (case-patients and control-patients) for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). During December 16, 2021-August 20, 2022, among SARS-CoV-2 test-positive case-patients, 1,815 (36.3%), 1,387 (27.7%), 1,552 (31.0%), and 251 (5.0%) received 0, 2, 3, and 4 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses, respectively. Among test-negative control-patients during this period, 6,928 (23.7%), 7,411 (25.4%), 12,734 (43.6%), and 2,142 (7.3%) received these respective doses. Overall, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalization among adults with immunocompromising conditions hospitalized for COVID-like illness during Omicron predominance was 36% ≥14 days after dose 2, 69% 7-89 days after dose 3, and 44% ≥90 days after dose 3. Restricting the analysis to later periods when Omicron sublineages BA.2/BA.2.12.1 and BA.4/BA.5 were predominant and 3-dose recipients were eligible to receive a fourth dose, VE was 32% ≥90 days after dose 3 and 43% ≥7 days after dose 4. Protection offered by vaccination among persons with immunocompromising conditions during Omicron predominance was moderate even after a 3-dose monovalent primary series or booster dose. Given the incomplete protection against hospitalization afforded by monovalent COVID-19 vaccines, persons with immunocompromising conditions might benefit from updated bivalent vaccine booster doses that target recently circulating Omicron sublineages, in line with ACIP recommendations. Further, additional protective recommendations for persons with immunocompromising conditions, including the use of prophylactic antibody therapy, early access to and use of antivirals, and enhanced nonpharmaceutical interventions such as well-fitting masks or respirators, should also be considered.

Waning of vaccine effectiveness against moderate and severe covid-19 among adults in the US from the VISION network: test negative, case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 in adults by time since second, third, or fourth doses, and by age and immunocompromised status.

DESIGN

Test negative case-control study.

SETTING

Hospitals, emergency departments, and urgent care clinics in 10 US states, 17 January 2021 to 12 July 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

893 461 adults (≥18 years) admitted to one of 261 hospitals or to one of 272 emergency department or 119 urgent care centers for covid-like illness tested for SARS-CoV-2.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome was waning of vaccine effectiveness with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine during the omicron and delta periods, and the period before delta was dominant using logistic regression conditioned on calendar week and geographic area while adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, local virus circulation, immunocompromised status, and likelihood of being vaccinated.

RESULTS

45 903 people admitted to hospital with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 213 103 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 (controls), and 103 287 people admitted to emergency department or urgent care with covid-19 (cases) were compared with 531 168 people with covid-like illness who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. In the omicron period, vaccine effectiveness against covid-19 requiring admission to hospital was 89% (95% confidence interval 88% to 90%) within two months after dose 3 but waned to 66% (63% to 68%) by four to five months. Vaccine effectiveness of three doses against emergency department or urgent care visits was 83% (82% to 84%) initially but waned to 46% (44% to 49%) by four to five months. Waning was evident in all subgroups, including young adults and individuals who were not immunocompromised; although waning was morein people who were immunocompromised. Vaccine effectiveness increased among most groups after a fourth dose in whom this booster was recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against moderate and severe covid-19 waned with time after vaccination. The findings support recommendations for a booster dose after a primary series and consideration of additional booster doses.

Vaccine-associated attenuation of subjective severity among outpatients with influenza

Influenza vaccines can mitigate illness severity, including reduced risk of ICU admission and death, in people with breakthrough infection. Less is known about vaccine attenuation of mild/moderate influenza illness. We compared subjective severity scores in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons with medically attended illness and laboratory-confirmed influenza. Participants were prospectively recruited when presenting for care at five US sites over nine seasons. Participants aged ≥ 16 years completed the EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale (VAS) at enrollment. After controlling for potential confounders in a multivariable model, including age and general health status, VAS scores were significantly higher among 2,830 vaccinated participants compared with 3,459 unvaccinated participants, indicating vaccinated participants felt better at the time of presentation for care. No differences in VAS scores were observed by the type of vaccine received among persons aged ≥ 65 years. Our findings suggest vaccine-associated attenuation of milder influenza illness is possible.

Analyzing immunotherapy adverse events in elderly cancer patients

e24009

Background: Immunotherapy (IT) has cemented itself as a mainstay in cancer treatment, especially in those with late stage malignancies. Generally, these agents are well tolerated, but there is a known association with immune-related adverse events (iRAE). Due to an underrepresentation of elderly patients in clinical trial data, it is valuable to understand the tolerance of these agents. The primary objective of our study was to evaluate for an association between older age, defined as age 75 and above, and increased risk for iRAE in a real-world population. Methods: We performed a retrospective study utilizing data from elderly patients (pts) who had first received IT (specifically Pembrolizumab, Nivolumab, Atezolizumab, Avelumab, and Durvalumab) from 01/01/2015 through 12/31/2019. This subset of pts were followed until 12/31/2021. Descriptive analyses were performed to identify iRAE patterns. A chi-square test or a Fisher’s exact test was used to test for associations in bivariate comparisons while a two-sample t-test was used to test for differences in continuous variables between age groups > 75 to 79 years (Group 1) and > 80 years (Group 2). Statistical significance was determined by p < 0.05 unless otherwise noted. Results: 103 pts qualified for assessment over the study period. Group 1 had a total of 48 pts with a median age of 77. Group 2 had a total of 55 pts with a median age of 84. The study had 57 males and 46 females. 96 pts were Stage IV and 7 pts were Stage III. The most prevalent malignancies in the study were lung, skin, and renal cancer. Treatment intent was palliative for 96 pts, adjuvant for 6 pts, and neo-adjuvant for 1 pt. Overall, there were 72 pts with reported iRAE and 31 pts without reported iRAE. Of the pts with iRAE: 7 pts required outpatient observation without intervention, 38 pts required outpatient intervention(s), 19 pts were hospitalized, and 8 pts required ICU level of care. There was one death due to complications from encephalitis associated with hypophysitis and hyperthyroidism. Regarding discontinuation of IT for pts: 42 pts transitioned to hospice, 35 pts had progression of disease, 8 pts finished their treatment regimen, 5 pts developed an alternative diagnosis, and 9 pts discontinued due to iRAE. Nine pts in the study required corticosteroids for their iRAE. There was no statistically significant difference in incidence of any iRAE (regardless of type) between the two age groups 75-79 and over 80 years (p-value = 0.3703). Similarly, there was no difference for sub-categories including stage of cancer, type of cancer, treatment intent, and severity of iRAE. Conclusions: Elderly pts over age 75 that received the aforementioned IT were shown to have relatively tolerable safety profiles regardless of their age group and the majority continued with IT despite iRAE. This study reinforces the notion that IT could be used in geriatric pts without fear of exposing this vulnerable age group to substantial rates of negative outcomes.

Effectiveness of Homologous and Heterologous COVID-19 Booster Doses Following 1 Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) Vaccine Dose Against COVID-19-Associated Emergency Department and Urgent Care Encounters and Hospitalizations Among Adults - VISION Network, 10 States, December 2021-March 2022

CDC recommends that all persons aged ≥18 years receive a single COVID-19 vaccine booster dose ≥2 months after receipt of an Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) adenovirus vector-based primary series vaccine; a heterologous COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is preferred over a homologous (matching) Janssen vaccine for booster vaccination. This recommendation was made in light of the risks for rare but serious adverse events following receipt of a Janssen vaccine, including thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Guillain-Barré syndrome† (1), and clinical trial data indicating similar or higher neutralizing antibody response following heterologous boosting compared with homologous boosting (2). Data on real-world vaccine effectiveness (VE) of different booster strategies following a primary Janssen vaccine dose are limited, particularly during the period of Omicron variant predominance. The VISION Network§ determined real-world VE of 1 Janssen vaccine dose and 2 alternative booster dose strategies: 1) a homologous booster (i.e., 2 Janssen doses) and 2) a heterologous mRNA booster (i.e., 1 Janssen dose/1 mRNA dose). In addition, VE of these booster strategies was compared with VE of a homologous booster following mRNA primary series vaccination (i.e., 3 mRNA doses). The study examined 80,287 emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits¶ and 25,244 hospitalizations across 10 states during December 16, 2021-March 7, 2022, when Omicron was the predominant circulating variant.** VE against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated ED/UC encounters was 24% after 1 Janssen dose, 54% after 2 Janssen doses, 79% after 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose, and 83% after 3 mRNA doses. VE for the same vaccination strategies against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19-associated hospitalizations were 31%, 67%, 78%, and 90%, respectively. All booster strategies provided higher protection than a single Janssen dose against ED/UC visits and hospitalizations during Omicron variant predominance. Vaccination with 1 Janssen/1 mRNA dose provided higher protection than did 2 Janssen doses against COVID-19-associated ED/UC visits and was comparable to protection provided by 3 mRNA doses during the first 120 days after a booster dose. However, 3 mRNA doses provided higher protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations than did other booster strategies during the same time interval since booster dose. All adults who have received mRNA vaccines for their COVID-19 primary series vaccination should receive an mRNA booster dose when eligible. Adults who received a primary Janssen vaccine dose should preferentially receive a heterologous mRNA vaccine booster dose ≥2 months later, or a homologous Janssen vaccine booster dose if mRNA vaccine is contraindicated or unavailable. Further investigation of the durability of protection afforded by different booster strategies is warranted.

Laboratory-Confirmed COVID-19 Among Adults Hospitalized with COVID-19-Like Illness with Infection-Induced or mRNA Vaccine-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Immunity - Nine States, January-September 2021

Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) or COVID-19 vaccination can provide immunity and protection from subsequent SARS-CoV-2 infection and illness. CDC used data from the VISION Network* to examine hospitalizations in adults with COVID-19-like illness and compared the odds of receiving a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result, and thus having laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, between unvaccinated patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection occurring 90-179 days before COVID-19-like illness hospitalization, and patients who were fully vaccinated with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine 90-179 days before hospitalization with no previous documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Hospitalized adults aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness were included if they had received testing at least twice: once associated with a COVID-19-like illness hospitalization during January-September 2021 and at least once earlier (since February 1, 2020, and ≥14 days before that hospitalization). Among COVID-19-like illness hospitalizations in persons whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, the odds of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (adjusted for sociodemographic and health characteristics) among unvaccinated, previously infected adults were higher than the odds among fully vaccinated recipients of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine with no previous documented infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 5.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.75-10.99). These findings suggest that among hospitalized adults with COVID-19-like illness whose previous infection or vaccination occurred 90-179 days earlier, vaccine-induced immunity was more protective than infection-induced immunity against laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. All eligible persons should be vaccinated against COVID-19 as soon as possible, including unvaccinated persons previously infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Effectiveness of 2-Dose Vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Against COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among Immunocompromised Adults - Nine States, January-September 2021

Immunocompromised persons, defined as those with suppressed humoral or cellular immunity resulting from health conditions or medications, account for approximately 3% of the U.S. adult population (1). Immunocompromised adults are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes (2) and might not acquire the same level of protection from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines as do immunocompetent adults (3,4). To evaluate vaccine effectiveness (VE) among immunocompromised adults, data from the VISION Network* on hospitalizations among persons aged ≥18 years with COVID-19-like illness from 187 hospitals in nine states during January 17-September 5, 2021 were analyzed. Using selected discharge diagnoses,† VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization conferred by completing a 2-dose series of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine ≥14 days before the index hospitalization date§ (i.e., being fully vaccinated) was evaluated using a test-negative design comparing 20,101 immunocompromised adults (10,564 [53%] of whom were fully vaccinated) and 69,116 immunocompetent adults (29,456 [43%] of whom were fully vaccinated). VE of 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was lower among immunocompromised patients (77%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 74%-80%) than among immunocompetent patients (90%; 95% CI = 89%-91%). This difference persisted irrespective of mRNA vaccine product, age group, and timing of hospitalization relative to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant predominance in the state of hospitalization. VE varied across immunocompromising condition subgroups, ranging from 59% (organ or stem cell transplant recipients) to 81% (persons with a rheumatologic or inflammatory disorder). Immunocompromised persons benefit from mRNA COVID-19 vaccination but are less protected from severe COVID-19 outcomes than are immunocompetent persons, and VE varies among immunocompromised subgroups. Immunocompromised persons receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines should receive 3 doses and a booster, consistent with CDC recommendations (5), practice nonpharmaceutical interventions, and, if infected, be monitored closely and considered early for proven therapies that can prevent severe outcomes.

Reviewing the Outcomes of Different Treatment Approaches in Elderly Pancreatic Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVES

The incidence of pancreatic cancer is age dependent. Ninety percent of new diagnoses occur in patients older than 55 years. Despite the association with age and cancer, elderly patients are historically underrepresented in clinical trials. Thus, optimal management of elderly patients has a lack of data. The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the outcomes of palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients with pancreatic cancer compared with supportive care alone.

METHODS

Unicentric data were reviewed on all elderly patients (defined as age >65 years) with a diagnosis of pancreatic cancer from 2008 through 2019 to compare outcomes in those who received chemotherapy versus supportive care alone.

RESULTS

The study reviewed 665 patients with a median age of 75 years (mean, 75.7 years) and average Charlson Comorbidity Score of 5.74. Of them, 291 received chemotherapy and 363 received supportive care only. Chemotherapy was associated with a median overall survival of 250 versus 93 days with supportive care (P < 0.0001). Analysis showed improved survival for all age ranges, cancer stages, and Charlson Comorbidity Scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly pancreatic cancer patients can benefit from palliative chemotherapy, and it should be considered, especially in patients with fewer medical comorbidities and better functional status.

Vaccine effectiveness against acute respiratory illness hospitalizations for influenza-associated pneumonia during the 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 seasons, US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN)

BACKGROUND

Evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza-associated pneumonia has varied by season, location, and strain. We estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified influenza-associated pneumonia during 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 seasons in the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN).

METHODS

Among adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 10 US hospitals for acute respiratory illness (ARI), clinician-investigators used keywords from reports of chest imaging performed during 3 days around hospital admission to assign a diagnosis of 'definite/probable pneumonia'. We used a test-negative design to estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia, comparing RT-PCR confirmed influenza cases with test-negative subjects. Influenza vaccination status was documented in immunization records or self-reported, including date and location. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for age, site, season, calendar-time, and other factors.

RESULTS

Of 4,843 adults hospitalized with ARI included in the primary analysis, 266 (5.5%) had 'definite/probable pneumonia' and confirmed influenza. Adjusted VE against hospitalization for any radiographically confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI]): 17%-53%); by type/subtype, it was 74% (95% CI: 52%-87%), influenza A (H1N1)pdm09; 25% (-15% to 50%), A (H3N2); and 23% (95% CI: -32% to 54%), influenza B. Adjusted VE against intensive care for any influenza was 57% (95% CI, 19%-77%).

CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccination was modestly effective among adults in preventing hospitalizations and the need for intensive care associated with influenza pneumonia. VE was significantly higher against A (H1N1)pdm09 and was low against A (H3N2) and B.

Effectiveness of Trivalent and Quadrivalent Inactivated Vaccines Against Influenza B in the United States, 2011-2012 to 2016-2017

Background

Since 2013, quadrivalent influenza vaccines containing 2 B viruses gradually replaced trivalent vaccines in the United States. We compared the vaccine effectiveness of quadrivalent to trivalent inactivated vaccines (IIV4 to IIV3, respectively) against illness due to influenza B during the transition, when IIV4 use increased rapidly.

Methods

The US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (Flu VE) Network analyzed 25 019 of 42 600 outpatients aged ≥6 months who enrolled within 7 days of illness onset during 6 seasons from 2011–2012. Upper respiratory specimens were tested for the influenza virus type and B lineage. Using logistic regression, we estimated IIV4 or IIV3 effectiveness by comparing the odds of an influenza B infection overall and the odds of B lineage among vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants. Over 4 seasons from 2013–2014, we compared the relative odds of an influenza B infection among IIV4 versus IIV3 recipients.

Results

Trivalent vaccines included the predominantly circulating B lineage in 4 of 6 seasons. During 4 influenza seasons when both IIV4 and IIV3 were widely used, the overall effectiveness against any influenza B was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45–59) for IIV4 versus 45% (95% CI, 34–54) for IIV3. IIV4 was more effective than IIV3 against the B lineage not included in IIV3, but comparative effectiveness against illnesses related to any influenza B favored neither vaccine valency.

Conclusions

The uptake of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines was not associated with increased protection against any influenza B illness, despite the higher effectiveness of quadrivalent vaccines against the added B virus lineage. Public health impact and cost-benefit analyses are needed globally.

Parental perceptions of the impact of neonatal unit visitation policies during COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain parental perceptions of the impact of restricted visiting policies to neonatal intensive care units during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey of parents impacted by visitation policies.

SETTING

Six tertiary level neonatal units, four from the UK and two from the USA, participated in the study.

PARTICIPANTS

Parents and families of infants hospitalised in the participating centres between 1 May 2020 and 21 August 2020.

METHODS

Online-based and/or paper-based survey, querying the visitation policies and their impact on parents' ability to visit, care for and bond with their infants.

RESULTS

A total of 231 responses were received. Visitation limited to a single visitor with no restrictions on duration was the most frequently reported policy; 140/217 (63%). Visitation policies were perceived as being restrictive by 62% (138/219) of the respondents with 37% (80/216) reporting being able to visit less often than desired, 41% (78/191) reporting being unable to bond enough and 27% (51/191) reporting not being able to participate in their baby's daily care. Mild to severe impact on breast feeding was reported by 36% (75/209) of respondents. Stricter policies had a higher impact on families and were significantly associated with a lack of bonding time, inability to participate in care and an adverse impact on breast feeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Visitation policies during the COVID-19 pandemic varied between centres and over time with stricter restrictions implemented earlier on in the pandemic. Parents reported significant impacts on their ability to visit, care for and bond with their infants with perceived severity of impact worse with stricter restrictions.

Interim Estimates of 2018-19 Seasonal Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness - United States, February 2019

In the United States, annual vaccination against seasonal influenza is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/whoshouldvax.htm). Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine varies by season. During each influenza season since 2004-05, CDC has estimated the effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine to prevent laboratory-confirmed influenza associated with medically attended acute respiratory illness (ARI). This interim report uses data from 3,254 children and adults enrolled in the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (U.S. Flu VE Network) during November 23, 2018-February 2, 2019. During this period, overall adjusted vaccine effectiveness against all influenza virus infection associated with medically attended ARI was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 34%-57%). For children aged 6 months-17 years, overall vaccine effectiveness was 61% (44%-73%). Seventy-four percent of influenza A infections for which subtype information was available were caused by A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated to be 46% (30%-58%) against illness caused by influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses. CDC recommends that health care providers continue to administer influenza vaccine because influenza activity is ongoing and the vaccine can still prevent illness, hospitalization, and death associated with currently circulating influenza viruses, or other influenza viruses that might circulate later in the season. During the 2017-18 influenza season, in which influenza A(H3N2) predominated, vaccination was estimated to prevent 7.1 million illnesses, 3.7 million medical visits, 109,000 hospitalizations, and 8,000 deaths (1). Vaccination can also reduce the severity of influenza-associated illness (2). Persons aged ≥6 months who have not yet been vaccinated this season should be vaccinated.