Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 23
Filter
1.
Vaccine ; 2023 Jun 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234674

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 mortality, and to explore whether an increased risk of non-COVID-19 mortality exists in the weeks following a COVID-19 vaccine dose. METHODS: National registries of causes of death, COVID-19 vaccination, specialized health care and long-term care reimbursements were linked by a unique person identifier using data from 1 January 2021 to 31 January 2022. We used Cox regression with calendar time as underlying time scale to, firstly, estimate VE against COVID-19 mortality after primary and first booster vaccination, per month since vaccination and, secondly, estimate risk of non-COVID-19 mortality in the 5 or 8 weeks following a first, second or first booster dose, adjusting for birth year, sex, medical risk group and country of origin. RESULTS: VE against COVID-19 mortality was > 90 % for all age groups two months after completion of the primary series. VE gradually decreased thereafter, to around 80 % at 7-8 months post-primary series for most groups, and around 60 % for elderly receiving a high level of long-term care and for people aged 90+ years. Following a first booster dose, the VE increased to > 85 % in all groups. The risk of non-COVID-19 mortality was lower or similar in the 5 or 8 weeks following a first dose compared to no vaccination, as well as following a second dose compared to one dose and a booster compared to two doses, for all age and long-term care groups. CONCLUSION: At the population level, COVID-19 vaccination greatly reduced the risk of COVID-19 mortality and no increased risk of death from other causes was observed.

2.
J Infect Dis ; 2023 Apr 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2327889

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to estimate vaccine effectiveness against infection (VE-infection) and against further transmission (VE-infectiousness) in a household setting during Delta and Omicron. Knowing these effects can aid policy makers in deciding which groups to prioritize for vaccination. METHODS: Participants with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test were asked about COVID-19 vaccination status and SARS-CoV-2 testing of their household members one month later. VE-infection and VE-infectiousness was estimated using GEE logistic regression adjusting for age, vaccination status, calendar week and household size. RESULTS: 3,399 questionnaires concerning 4,105 household members were included. During the Delta-period, VE-infection of primary series was 47% (95% CI: -27%; 78%) and VE-infectiousness of primary series was 70% (95% CI: 28%; 87%). During the Omicron-period, VE-infection was -36% (95% CI: -88%; 1%) for primary series and -28% (95% CI: -77%; 7%) for booster vaccination. The VE-infectiousness was 45% (95% CI: -14%; 74%) for primary series and 64% (95% CI: 31%; 82%) for booster vaccination. DISCUSSION: Our study shows that COVID-19 vaccination is effective against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Delta and against infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron. Estimation of VE against infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was limited by several factors. Our results support booster vaccination for those in close contact with vulnerable people to prevent transmission.

3.
Vaccine ; 41(26): 3847-3854, 2023 06 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2320091

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against COVID-19 have proven effective in preventing COVID-19 hospitalisation. In this study, we aimed to quantify part of the public health impact of COVID-19 vaccination by estimating the number of averted hospitalisations. We present results from the beginning of the vaccination campaign ('entire period', January 6, 2021) and a subperiod starting at August 2, 2021 ('subperiod') when all adults had the opportunity to complete their primary series, both until August 30, 2022. METHODS: Using calendar-time specific vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates and vaccine coverage (VC) by round (primary series, first booster and second booster) and the observed number of COVID-19 associated hospitalisations, we estimated the number of averted hospitalisations per age group for the two study periods. From January 25, 2022, when registration of the indication of hospitalisation started, hospitalisations not causally related to COVID-19 were excluded. RESULTS: In the entire period, an estimated 98,170 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 96,123-99,928) hospitalisations were averted, of which 90,753 (95 % CI 88,790-92,531) were in the subperiod, representing 57.0 % and 67.9 % of all estimated hospital admissions. Estimated averted hospitalisations were lowest for 12-49-year-olds and highest for 70-79-year-olds. More admissions were averted in the Delta period (72.3 %) than in the Omicron period (63.4 %). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 vaccination prevented a large number of hospitalisations. Although the counterfactual of having had no vaccinations while maintaining the same public health measures is unrealistic, these findings underline the public health importance of the vaccination campaign to policy makers and the public.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Netherlands , Vaccination , Hospitalization
4.
Int J Infect Dis ; 133: 36-42, 2023 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2296740

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of primary and booster vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 infection overall and in four risk groups defined by age and medical risk condition during the Delta and Omicron BA.1/BA.2 periods. METHODS: VAccine Study COvid-19 is an ongoing prospective cohort study among Dutch adults. The primary end point was a self-reported positive SARS-CoV-2 test from July 12, 2021 to June 06, 2022. The analyses included only participants without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection based on a positive test or serology. We used Cox proportional hazard models with vaccination status as the time-varying exposure and adjustment for age, sex, educational level, and medical risk condition. RESULTS: A total of 37,170 participants (mean age 57 years) were included. In the Delta period, VE <6 weeks after the primary vaccination was 80% (95% confidence interval 69-87) and decreased to 71% (65-77) after 6 months. VE increased to 96% (86-99) shortly after the first booster vaccination. In the Omicron period, these estimates were 46% (22-63), 25% (8-39), and 57% (52-62), respectively. For the Omicron period, an interaction term between vaccination status and risk group significantly improved the model (P <0.001), with generally lower VEs for those with a medical risk condition. CONCLUSION: Our results show the benefit of booster vaccinations against infection, also in risk groups; although, the additional protection wanes quite rapidly.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Middle Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Netherlands/epidemiology , Vaccine Efficacy , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , Prospective Studies , Vaccination
5.
Euro Surveill ; 28(7)2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2263556

ABSTRACT

We used data of 32,542 prospective cohort study participants who previously received primary and one or two monovalent booster COVID-19 vaccinations. Between 26 September and 19 December 2022, relative effectiveness of bivalent original/Omicron BA.1 vaccination against self-reported Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was 31% in 18-59-year-olds and 14% in 60-85-year-olds. Protection of Omicron infection was higher than of bivalent vaccination without prior infection. Although bivalent booster vaccination increases protection against COVID-19 hospitalisations, we found limited added benefit in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , RNA, Messenger , Vaccination
6.
Euro Surveill ; 28(7)2023 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2249566

ABSTRACT

BackgroundIn summer 2022, SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.5 became dominant in Europe. In vitro studies have shown a large reduction of antibody neutralisation for this variant.AimWe aimed to investigate differences in protection from previous infection and/or vaccination against infection with Omicron BA.4/5 vs BA.2.MethodsWe employed a case-only approach including positive PCR tests from community testing between 2 May and 24 July 2022 that were tested for S gene target failure (SGTF), which distinguishes BA.4/5 from BA.2 infection. Previous infections were categorised by variant using whole genome sequencing or SGTF. We estimated by logistic regression the association of SGTF with vaccination and/or previous infection, and of SGTF of the current infection with the variant of the previous infection, adjusting for testing week, age group and sex.ResultsThe percentage of registered previous SARS-CoV-2 infections was higher among 19,836 persons infected with Omicron BA.4/5 than among 7,052 persons infected with BA.2 (31.3% vs 20.0%). Adjusting for testing week, age group and sex, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) was 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5). The distribution of vaccination status did not differ for BA.4/5 vs BA.2 infections (aOR = 1.1 for primary and booster vaccination). Among persons with a previous infection, those currently infected with BA4/5 had a shorter interval between infections, and the previous infection was more often caused by BA.1, compared with those currently infected with BA.2 (aOR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.5-2.6).ConclusionOur results suggest immunity induced by BA.1 is less effective against BA.4/5 infection than against BA.2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Europe , Immunization, Secondary
7.
Sci Transl Med ; : eabn4338, 2022 Jul 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2249567

ABSTRACT

The extent to which severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern (VOC) break through infection- or vaccine-induced immunity is not well understood. We analyzed 28,578 sequenced SARS-CoV-2 samples from individuals with known immune status obtained through national community testing in the Netherlands from March to August 2021. We found evidence of an increased risk of infection by the Beta (B.1.351), Gamma (P.1), or Delta (B.1.617.2) variants compared to the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant after vaccination. No clear differences were found between vaccines. However, the effect was larger in the first 14-59 days after complete vaccination compared to ≥60 days. In contrast to vaccine-induced immunity, there was no increased risk for re-infection with Beta, Gamma or Delta variants relative to Alpha variant in individuals with infection-induced immunity.

9.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(12): 2173-2180, 2022 07 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2188401

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In response to the recent serogroup W invasive meningococcal disease (IMD-W) epidemic in the Netherlands, meningococcal serogroup C (MenC) conjugate vaccination for children aged 14 months was replaced with a MenACWY conjugate vaccination, and a mass campaign targeting individuals aged 14-18 years was executed. We investigated the impact of MenACWY vaccination implementation in 2018-2020 on incidence rates and estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE). METHODS: We extracted IMD cases diagnosed between July 2014 and December 2020 from the national surveillance system. We calculated age group-specific incidence rate ratios by comparing incidence rates before (July 2017-March 2018) and after (July 2019-March 2020) MenACWY vaccination implementation. We estimated VE in vaccine-eligible cases using the screening method. RESULTS: Overall, the IMD-W incidence rate declined by 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 40 to 74). It declined by 82% (95% CI, 18 to 96) in the vaccine-eligible age group (individuals aged 15-36 months and 14-18 years) and by 57% (95% CI, 34 to 72) in vaccine-noneligible age groups. VE was 92% (95% CI, -20 to 99.5) in vaccine-eligible toddlers (aged 15-36 months). No IMD-W cases were reported in vaccine-eligible teenagers after the campaign. CONCLUSIONS: The MenACWY vaccination program was effective in preventing IMD-W in the target population. The IMD-W incidence reduction in vaccine-noneligible age groups may be caused by indirect effects of the vaccination program. However, disentangling natural fluctuation from vaccine effect was not possible. Our findings encourage the use of toddler and teenager MenACWY vaccination in national immunization programs.


Subject(s)
Meningococcal Infections , Meningococcal Vaccines , Neisseria meningitidis, Serogroup C , Adolescent , Humans , Meningococcal Infections/epidemiology , Meningococcal Infections/prevention & control , Netherlands/epidemiology , Serogroup , Vaccination/methods , Vaccines, Conjugate
10.
Euro Surveill ; 27(45)2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2117963

ABSTRACT

BackgroundDifferential SARS-CoV-2 exposure between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals may confound vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates.AimWe conducted a test-negative case-control study to determine VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection and the presence of confounding by SARS-CoV-2 exposure.MethodsWe included adults tested for SARS-CoV-2 at community facilities between 4 July and 8 December 2021 (circulation period of the Delta variant). The VE against SARS-CoV-2 infection after primary vaccination with an mRNA (Comirnaty or Spikevax) or vector-based vaccine (Vaxzevria or Janssen) was calculated using logistic regression adjusting for age, sex and calendar week (Model 1). We additionally adjusted for comorbidity and education level (Model 2) and SARS-CoV-2 exposure (number of close contacts, visiting busy locations, household size, face mask wearing, contact with SARS-CoV-2 case; Model 3). We stratified by age, vaccine type and time since vaccination.ResultsVE against infection (Model 3) was 64% (95% CI: 50-73), only slightly lower than in Models 1 (68%; 95% CI: 58-76) and 2 (67%; 95% CI: 56-75). Estimates stratified by age group, vaccine and time since vaccination remained similar: mRNA VE (Model 3) among people ≥ 50 years decreased significantly (p = 0.01) from 81% (95% CI: 66-91) at < 120 days to 61% (95% CI: 22-80) at ≥ 120 days after vaccination. It decreased from 83% to 59% in Model 1 and from 81% to 56% in Model 2.ConclusionSARS-CoV-2 exposure did not majorly confound the estimated COVID-19 VE against infection, suggesting that VE can be estimated accurately using routinely collected data without exposure information.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Case-Control Studies , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2 , RNA, Messenger
11.
Vaccine ; 40(46): 6664-6669, 2022 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106124

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Elderly people in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination. METHODS: We calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE - at on average 6 months after vaccination - as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality < 30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2). RESULTS: The overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI -28%; 46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI -44%; 96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N = 55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week. CONCLUSION: VE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was very low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2 , Immunization Programs , Disease Outbreaks/prevention & control
12.
Vaccine ; 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2046935

ABSTRACT

Background Elderly in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at higher risk for (severe) COVID-19, yet evidence of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in this population is scarce. In November 2021 (Delta period), a COVID-19 outbreak occurred at a LTCF in the Netherlands, continuing despite measures and booster vaccination campaign. We investigated the outbreak to assess VE of primary COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and to describe the impact of the booster vaccination. Methods We calculated attack rate (AR) and case fatality (CF) per vaccination status (unvaccinated, primarily vaccinated and boostered). We calculated VE – at on average 6 months after vaccination – as 1- risk ratio (RR) using the crude risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between vaccination status (primary vaccination versus unvaccinated) and outcomes (SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality <30 days after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2). Results The overall AR was 67% (70/105). CF was 33% (2/6) among unvaccinated cases, 12% among primarily vaccinated (7/58) and 0% (0/5) among boostered. The VE of primary vaccination was 17% (95% CI -28%;46%) against SARS-CoV-2 infection and 70% (95% CI -44%;96%) against mortality. Among boostered residents (N=55), there were 25 cases in the first week after receiving the booster dose, declining to 5 in the second and none in the third week . Conclusion VE of primary vaccination in residents of LTCF was low against SARS-CoV-2 infection and moderate against mortality. There were few cases at 2 weeks after the booster dose and no deaths, despite the presence of susceptible residents. These data are consistent with the positive impact of the booster vaccination in curbing transmission. Timely booster vaccination in residents of LTCF is therefore important.

13.
Nat Commun ; 13(1): 4738, 2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1991583

ABSTRACT

Given the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 variants and the roll-out of booster COVID-19 vaccination, evidence is needed on protection conferred by primary vaccination, booster vaccination and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection by variant. We employed a test-negative design on S-gene target failure data from community PCR testing in the Netherlands from 22 November 2021 to 31 March 2022 (n = 671,763). Previous infection, primary vaccination or both protected well against Delta infection. Protection against Omicron BA.1 infection was much lower compared to Delta. Protection was similar against Omicron BA.1 compared to BA.2 infection after previous infection, primary and booster vaccination. Higher protection was observed against all variants in individuals with both vaccination and previous infection compared with either one. Protection against all variants decreased over time since last vaccination or infection. We found that primary vaccination with current COVID-19 vaccines and previous SARS-CoV-2 infections offered low protection against Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 infection. Booster vaccination considerably increased protection against Omicron infection, but decreased rapidly after vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Viral Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
14.
Epidemiol Infect ; 150: e116, 2022 06 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1895541

ABSTRACT

Surveillance data shows a geographical overlap between the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the past Q fever epidemic (2007-2010) in the Netherlands. We investigated the relationship between past Q fever and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in 2020/2021, using a retrospective matched cohort study.In January 2021, former Q fever patients received a questionnaire on demographics, SARS-CoV-2 test results and related hospital/intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. SARS-CoV-2 incidence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in former Q fever patients and standardised incidence ratios (SIR) to compare to the age-standardised SARS-CoV-2 incidence in the general regional population were calculated.Among 890 former Q fever patients (response rate: 68%), 66 had a PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Of these, nine (14%) were hospitalised and two (3%) were admitted to ICU. From February to June 2020 the SARS-CoV-2 incidence was 1573/100 000 (95% CI 749-2397) in former Q fever patients and 695/100 000 in the general population (SIR 2.26; 95% CI 1.24-3.80). The incidence was not significantly higher from September 2020 to February 2021.We found no sufficient evidence for a difference in SARS-CoV-2 incidence or an increased severity in former Q fever patients vs. the general population during the period with widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing availability (September 2020-February 2021). This indicates that former Q fever patients do not have a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Q Fever , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , Cohort Studies , Humans , Incidence , Q Fever/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Euro Surveill ; 27(21)2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1875327

ABSTRACT

IntroductionIn July and August 2021, the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant dominated in Europe.AimUsing a multicentre test-negative study, we measured COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic infection.MethodsIndividuals with COVID-19 or acute respiratory symptoms at primary care/community level in 10 European countries were tested for SARS-CoV-2. We measured complete primary course overall VE by vaccine brand and by time since vaccination.ResultsOverall VE was 74% (95% CI: 69-79), 76% (95% CI: 71-80), 63% (95% CI: 48-75) and 63% (95% CI: 16-83) among those aged 30-44, 45-59, 60-74 and ≥ 75 years, respectively. VE among those aged 30-59 years was 78% (95% CI: 75-81), 66% (95% CI: 58-73), 91% (95% CI: 87-94) and 52% (95% CI: 40-61), for Comirnaty, Vaxzevria, Spikevax and COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, respectively. VE among people 60 years and older was 67% (95% CI: 52-77), 65% (95% CI: 48-76) and 83% (95% CI: 64-92) for Comirnaty, Vaxzevria and Spikevax, respectively. Comirnaty VE among those aged 30-59 years was 87% (95% CI: 83-89) at 14-29 days and 65% (95% CI: 56-71%) at ≥ 90 days between vaccination and onset of symptoms.ConclusionsVE against symptomatic infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant varied among brands, ranging from 52% to 91%. While some waning of the vaccine effect may be present (sample size limited this analysis to only Comirnaty), protection was 65% at 90 days or more between vaccination and onset.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Primary Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination
16.
Microorganisms ; 10(5)2022 May 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1820340

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 control measures have resulted in a decline in invasive bacterial disease caused by Neisseria meningitidis (IMD), Streptococcus pneumoniae (IPD), and Haemophilus influenzae (Hi-D). These species comprise different serogroups and serotypes that impact transmissibility and virulence. We evaluated type- and pathogen-specific changes in invasive bacterial disease epidemiology in the Netherlands during the first year of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Cases were based on nationwide surveillance for five bacterial species with either respiratory (IMD, IPD, Hi-D) or non-respiratory (controls) transmission routes and were compared from the pre-COVID period (April 2015-March 2020) to the first COVID-19 year (April 2020-March 2021). IMD, IPD, and Hi-D cases decreased by 78%, 67%, and 35%, respectively, in the first COVID-19 year compared to the pre-COVID period, although effects differed per age group. Serogroup B-IMD declined by 61%, while serogroup W and Y-IMD decreased >90%. IPD caused by serotypes 7F, 15A, 12F, 33F, and 8 showed the most pronounced decline (≥76%). In contrast to an overall decrease in Hi-D cases, vaccine-preventable serotype b (Hib) increased by 51%. COVID-19 control measures had pathogen- and type-specific effects related to invasive infections. Continued surveillance is critical to monitor potential rebound effects once restriction measures are lifted and transmission is resumed.

17.
Infection ; 50(3): 709-717, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1682171

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Since the first reports of COVID-19 cases, sex-discrepancies have been reported in COVID-19 mortality. We provide a detailed description of these sex differences in relation to age and comorbidities among notified cases as well as in relation to age and sex-specific mortality in the general Dutch population. METHODS: Data on COVID-19 cases and mortality until May 31st 2020 was extracted from the national surveillance database with exclusion of healthcare workers. Association between sex and case fatality was analyzed with multivariable logistic regression. Subsequently, male-female ratio in standardized mortality ratios and population mortality rates relative to all-cause and infectious disease-specific mortality were computed stratified by age. RESULTS: Male-female odds ratio for case fatality was 1.33 [95% CI 1.26-1.41] and among hospitalized cases 1.27 [95% CI 1.16-1.40]. This remained significant after adjustment for age and comorbidities. The male-female ratio of the standardized mortality ratio was 1.70 [95%CI 1.62-1.78]. The population mortality rate for COVID-19 was 35.1 per 100.000, with a male-female rate ratio of 1.25 (95% CI 1.18-1.31) which was higher than in all-cause population mortality and infectious disease mortality. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms male sex is a predisposing factor for severe outcomes of COVID-19, independent of age and comorbidities. In addition to general male-female-differences, COVID-19 specific mechanisms likely contribute to this mortality discrepancy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Female , Hospitalization , Humans , Male , Netherlands/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Sex Characteristics
19.
Vaccine ; 40(1): 59-66, 2022 01 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1565666

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Meningococcal serogroup C (MenC) vaccination was introduced for 14-month-olds in the Netherlands in 2002, alongside a mass campaign for 1-18 year-olds. Due to an outbreak of serogroup W disease, MenC vaccination was replaced for MenACWY vaccination in 2018, next to introduction of a booster at 14 years of age and a catch-up campaign for 14-18 year-olds. We assessed meningococcal ACWY antibodies across the Dutch population in 2016/17 and 2020. METHODS: In a nationwide cross-sectional serosurvey in 2016/17, sera from participants aged 0-89 years (n = 6886) were tested for MenACWY-polysaccharide-specific (PS) serum IgG concentrations, and functional MenACWY antibody titers were determined in subsets. Moreover, longitudinal samples collected in 2020 (n = 1782) were measured for MenACWY-PS serum IgG concentrations. RESULTS: MenC antibody levels were low, except in recently vaccinated 14-23 month-olds and individuals who were vaccinated as teenagers in 2002, with seroprevalence of 59% and 20-46%, respectively. Meningococcal AWY antibody levels were overall low both in 2016/17 and in 2020. Naturally-acquired MenW immunity was limited in 2020 despite the recent serogroup W outbreak. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates waning of MenC immunity 15 years after a mass campaign in the Netherlands. Furthermore, it highlights the lack of meningococcal AWY immunity across the population and underlines the importance of the recently introduced MenACWY (booster) vaccination.


Subject(s)
Meningococcal Infections , Meningococcal Vaccines , Neisseria meningitidis, Serogroup C , Adolescent , Antibodies, Bacterial , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Immunization, Secondary , Meningococcal Infections/epidemiology , Meningococcal Infections/prevention & control , Netherlands/epidemiology , Seroepidemiologic Studies , Vaccines, Conjugate
20.
Euro Surveill ; 26(44)2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1503826

ABSTRACT

We estimated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness against onward transmission by comparing secondary attack rates among household members for vaccinated and unvaccinated index cases, based on source and contact tracing data collected when the Delta variant was dominant. Effectiveness of full vaccination of the index case against transmission to unvaccinated and fully vaccinated household contacts, respectively, was 63% (95% confidence interval (CI): 46-75) and 40% (95% CI: 20-54), in addition to the direct protection of vaccination of contacts against infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Family Characteristics , Humans , Netherlands/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL