Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 56
Filter
1.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(5): e13151, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20238584

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of the specific dynamics of influenza introduction and spread in university settings is limited. METHODS: Persons with acute respiratory illness symptoms received influenza testing by molecular assay during October 6-November 23, 2022. Viral sequencing and phylogenetic analysis were conducted on nasal swab samples from case-patients. Case-control analysis of a voluntary survey of persons tested was used to identify factors associated with influenza; logistic regression was conducted to calculate odds ratios and 95% CIs. A subset of case-patients tested during the first month of the outbreak was interviewed to identify sources of introduction and early spread. RESULTS: Among 3268 persons tested, 788 (24.1%) tested positive for influenza; 744 (22.8%) were included in the survey analysis. All 380 sequenced specimens were influenza A (H3N2) virus clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2, suggesting rapid transmission. Influenza (OR [95% CI]) was associated with indoor congregate dining (1.43 [1.002-2.03]), attending large gatherings indoors (1.83 [1.26-2.66]) or outdoors (2.33 [1.64-3.31]), and varied by residence type (apartment with ≥1 roommate: 2.93 [1.21-7.11], residence hall room alone: 4.18 [1.31-13.31], or with roommate: 6.09 [2.46-15.06], or fraternity/sorority house: 15.13 [4.30-53.21], all compared with single-dwelling apartment). Odds of influenza were lower among persons who left campus for ≥1 day during the week before their influenza test (0.49 [0.32-0.75]). Almost all early cases reported attending large events. CONCLUSIONS: Congregate living and activity settings on university campuses can lead to rapid spread of influenza following introduction. Isolating following a positive influenza test or administering antiviral medications to exposed persons may help mitigate outbreaks.


Subject(s)
Influenza A virus , Influenza, Human , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype , Phylogeny , Universities , Risk Factors
2.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2023 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20238063

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Understanding the changing epidemiology of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) informs research priorities and public health policies. METHODS: Among adults (≥18 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 between 11 March 2021, and 31 August 2022 at 21 hospitals in 18 states, those hospitalized during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron-predominant period (BA.1, BA.2, BA.4/BA.5) were compared to those from earlier Alpha- and Delta-predominant periods. Demographic characteristics, biomarkers within 24 hours of admission, and outcomes, including oxygen support and death, were assessed. RESULTS: Among 9825 patients, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 60 years (47-72), 47% were women, and 21% non-Hispanic Black. From the Alpha-predominant period (Mar-Jul 2021; N = 1312) to the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineage-predominant period (Jun-Aug 2022; N = 1307): the percentage of patients who had ≥4 categories of underlying medical conditions increased from 11% to 21%; those vaccinated with at least a primary COVID-19 vaccine series increased from 7% to 67%; those ≥75 years old increased from 11% to 33%; those who did not receive any supplemental oxygen increased from 18% to 42%. Median (IQR) highest C-reactive protein and D-dimer concentration decreased from 42.0 mg/L (9.9-122.0) to 11.5 mg/L (2.7-42.8) and 3.1 mcg/mL (0.8-640.0) to 1.0 mcg/mL (0.5-2.2), respectively. In-hospital death peaked at 12% in the Delta-predominant period and declined to 4% during the BA.4/BA.5-predominant period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to adults hospitalized during early COVID-19 variant periods, those hospitalized during Omicron-variant COVID-19 were older, had multiple co-morbidities, were more likely to be vaccinated, and less likely to experience severe respiratory disease, systemic inflammation, coagulopathy, and death.

3.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 42(6): 443-448, 2023 06 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20234768

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Childcare attendance is a common risk factor for acute respiratory illness (ARI) in young children. Our goal was to better understand the specific respiratory viruses that predominate in childcare, which may support the development of tailored illness prevention and intervention strategies in childcare settings. METHODS: Using data from a prospective household cohort of ARI surveillance, we assessed specimen from 1418 ARIs reported by 359 childcare-aged children over 6 study seasons (2012/2013 through 2017/2018). Respiratory swabs were tested by polymerase chain reaction for 9 respiratory viruses. A mixed-effect logistic regression model was used to compare odds of various viral detection outcomes. The Shannon's Diversity index was used to compare the richness (ie, number of species) and diversity (ie, relative species abundance) associated with respiratory viruses detected in both groups. RESULTS: At least 1 virus was detected in 75.5% of childcare-associated ARIs and in 80.1% of homecare ARIs. Compared with illnesses among homecare children, childcare illnesses were associated with significantly higher odds of detected adenovirus (odds ratio = 1.86, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-3.28) and human metapneumovirus (odds ratio = 1.76, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-3.0). The pool of viruses associated with childcare ARI was found to be significantly richer and more diverse than that of viruses associated with homecare ARI ( P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Children attending childcare experience a higher risk of adenovirus and human metapneumovirus infection and are regularly exposed to a rich and diverse pool of respiratory viruses in childcare environments. Our results underscore the necessity of thorough and multifaceted viral prevention strategies in childcare settings.


Subject(s)
Respiratory Tract Infections , Virus Diseases , Viruses , Child , Humans , Infant , Child, Preschool , Aged , Prospective Studies , Child Care , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Virus Diseases/epidemiology , Adenoviridae
4.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(5): e13143, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-20231202

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We estimated combined protection conferred by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination against COVID-19-associated acute respiratory illness (ARI). METHODS: During SARS-CoV-2 Delta (B.1.617.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant circulation between October 2021 and April 2022, prospectively enrolled adult patients with outpatient ARI had respiratory and filter paper blood specimens collected for SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing and serology. Dried blood spots were tested for immunoglobulin-G antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (NP) and spike protein receptor binding domain antigen using a validated multiplex bead assay. Evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection also included documented or self-reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. We used documented COVID-19 vaccination status to estimate vaccine effectiveness (VE) by multivariable logistic regression by prior infection status. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-five (29%) of 1577 participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection at enrollment; 209 (46%) case-patients and 637 (57%) test-negative patients were NP seropositive, had documented previous laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, or self-reported prior infection. Among previously uninfected patients, three-dose VE was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60%-99%) against Delta, but not statistically significant against Omicron. Among previously infected patients, three-dose VE was 57% (CI, 20%-76%) against Omicron; VE against Delta could not be estimated. CONCLUSIONS: Three mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses provided additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant-associated illness among previously infected participants.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Adult , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Outpatients , Vaccine Efficacy
5.
Vaccine ; 41(29): 4249-4256, 2023 06 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2319667

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of COVID-19 vaccination status is necessary to produce reliable COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates. Data comparing differences in COVID-19 VE by vaccination sources (i.e., immunization information systems [IIS], electronic medical records [EMR], and self-report) are limited. We compared the number of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by each of these sources to assess agreement as well as differences in VE estimates using vaccination data from each individual source and vaccination data adjudicated from all sources combined. METHODS: Adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized with COVID-like illness at 21 hospitals in 18 U.S. states participating in the IVY Network during February 1-August 31, 2022, were enrolled. Numbers of COVID-19 vaccine doses identified by IIS, EMR, and self-report were compared in kappa agreement analyses. Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was estimated using multivariable logistic regression models to compare the odds of COVID-19 vaccination between SARS-CoV-2-positive case-patients and SARS-CoV-2-negative control-patients. VE was estimated using each source of vaccination data separately and all sources combined. RESULTS: A total of 4499 patients were included. Patients with ≥1 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine dose were identified most frequently by self-report (n = 3570, 79 %), followed by IIS (n = 3272, 73 %) and EMR (n = 3057, 68 %). Agreement was highest between IIS and self-report for 4 doses with a kappa of 0.77 (95 % CI = 0.73-0.81). VE point estimates of 3 doses against COVID-19 hospitalization were substantially lower when using vaccination data from EMR only (VE = 31 %, 95 % CI = 16 %-43 %) than when using all sources combined (VE = 53 %, 95 % CI = 41 %-62%). CONCLUSION: Vaccination data from EMR only may substantially underestimate COVID-19 VE.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , Adolescent , Self Report , Electronic Health Records , Vaccine Efficacy , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Immunization , Vaccination , Hospitalization , RNA, Messenger
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 72(17): 463-468, 2023 Apr 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2294077

ABSTRACT

As of April 2023, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in 1.1 million deaths in the United States, with approximately 75% of deaths occurring among adults aged ≥65 years (1). Data on the durability of protection provided by monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination against critical outcomes of COVID-19 are limited beyond the Omicron BA.1 lineage period (December 26, 2021-March 26, 2022). In this case-control analysis, the effectiveness of 2-4 monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses was evaluated against COVID-19-associated invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and in-hospital death among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during February 1, 2022-January 31, 2023. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against IMV and in-hospital death was 62% among adults aged ≥18 years and 69% among those aged ≥65 years. When stratified by time since last dose, VE was 76% at 7-179 days, 54% at 180-364 days, and 56% at ≥365 days. Monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccination provided substantial, durable protection against IMV and in-hospital death among adults during the Omicron variant period. All adults should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccination to prevent critical COVID-19-associated outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Adult , Adolescent , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hospital Mortality , Pandemics , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , RNA, Messenger
7.
Clin Infect Dis ; 76(8): 1358-1363, 2023 04 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2302049

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the United States, influenza activity during the 2021-2022 season was modest and sufficient enough to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) for the first time since the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. We estimated influenza VE against laboratory-confirmed outpatient acute illness caused by predominant A(H3N2) viruses. METHODS: Between October 2021 and April 2022, research staff across 7 sites enrolled patients aged ≥6 months seeking outpatient care for acute respiratory illness with cough. Using a test-negative design, we assessed VE against influenza A(H3N2). Due to strong correlation between influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination, participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from VE estimations. Estimates were adjusted for site, age, month of illness, race/ethnicity, and general health status. RESULTS: Among 6260 participants, 468 (7%) tested positive for influenza only, including 440 (94%) for A(H3N2). All 206 sequenced A(H3N2) viruses were characterized as belonging to genetic group 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.2, which has antigenic differences from the 2021-2022 season A(H3N2) vaccine component that belongs to clade 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.1. After excluding 1948 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, 4312 patients were included in analyses of influenza VE; 2463 (57%) were vaccinated against influenza. Effectiveness against A(H3N2) for all ages was 36% (95% confidence interval, 20%-49%) overall. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza vaccination in 2021-2022 provided protection against influenza A(H3N2)-related outpatient visits among young persons.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , United States/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype , Seasons , Vaccine Efficacy , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccination , Influenza B virus
8.
Influenza and other respiratory viruses ; 17(3), 2023.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2259185

ABSTRACT

Background The annual reappearance of respiratory viruses has been recognized for decades. COVID‐19 mitigation measures taken during the pandemic were targeted at respiratory transmission and broadly impacted the burden of acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs). Methods We used the longitudinal Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation (HIVE) cohort in southeast Michigan to characterize the circulation of respiratory viruses from March 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, using RT‐PCR of respiratory specimens collected at illness onset. Participants were surveyed twice during the study period, and SARS‐CoV‐2 antibodies were measured in serum by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. Incidence rates of ARI reports and virus detections were compared between the study period and a preceding pre‐pandemic period of similar duration. Results Overall, 437 participants reported a total of 772 ARIs;42.6% had respiratory viruses detected. Rhinoviruses were the most frequent virus, but seasonal coronaviruses, excluding SARS‐CoV‐2, were also common. Illness reports and percent positivity were lowest from May to August 2020, when mitigation measures were most stringent. Seropositivity for SARS‐CoV‐2 was 5.3% in summer 2020 and increased to 11.3% in spring 2021. The incidence rate of total reported ARIs for the study period was 50% lower (95% CI: 0.5, 0.6;p < 0.001) than the incidence rate from a pre‐pandemic comparison period (March 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017). Conclusions The burden of ARI in the HIVE cohort during the COVID‐19 pandemic fluctuated, with declines occurring concurrently with the widespread use of public health measures. Rhinovirus and seasonal coronaviruses continued to circulate even when influenza and SARS‐CoV‐2 circulation was low.

9.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(3): e13120, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2268415

ABSTRACT

Background: Patients are admitted to the hospital for respiratory illness at different stages of their disease course. It is important to appropriately analyse this heterogeneity in surveillance data to accurately measure disease severity among those hospitalized. The purpose of this study was to determine if unique baseline clusters of influenza patients exist and to examine the association between cluster membership and in-hospital outcomes. Methods: Patients hospitalized with influenza at two hospitals in Southeast Michigan during the 2017/2018 (n = 242) and 2018/2019 (n = 115) influenza seasons were included. Physiologic and laboratory variables were collected for the first 24 h of the hospital stay. K-medoids clustering was used to determine groups of individuals based on these values. Multivariable linear regression or Firth's logistic regression were used to examine the association between cluster membership and clinical outcomes. Results: Three clusters were selected for 2017/2018, mainly differentiated by blood glucose level. After adjustment, those in C171 had 5.6 times the odds of mechanical ventilator use than those in C172 (95% CI: 1.49, 21.1) and a significantly longer mean hospital length of stay than those in both C172 (mean 1.5 days longer, 95% CI: 0.2, 2.7) and C173 (mean 1.4 days longer, 95% CI: 0.3, 2.5). Similar results were seen between the two clusters selected for 2018/2019. Conclusion: In this study of hospitalized influenza patients, we show that distinct clusters with higher disease acuity can be identified and could be targeted for evaluations of vaccine and influenza antiviral effectiveness against disease attenuation. The association of higher disease acuity with glucose level merits evaluation.


Subject(s)
Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Hospitalization , Length of Stay , Hospitals , Cluster Analysis
10.
J Infect Dis ; 2023 Mar 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2257228

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 genomic and subgenomic RNA levels are frequently used as a correlate of infectiousness. The impact of host factors and SARS-CoV-2 lineage on RNA viral load is unclear. METHODS: Total nucleocapsid (N) and subgenomic N (sgN) RNA levels were measured by RT-qPCR in specimens from 3,204 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19 at 21 hospitals. RT-qPCR cycle threshold (Ct) values were used to estimate RNA viral load. The impact of time of sampling, SARS-CoV-2 variant, age, comorbidities, vaccination, and immune status on N and sgN Ct values were evaluated using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Ct values at presentation for N (mean ±standard deviation) were 24.14±4.53 for non-variants of concern, 25.15±4.33 for Alpha, 25.31±4.50 for Delta, and 26.26±4.42 for Omicron. N and sgN RNA levels varied with time since symptom onset and infecting variant but not with age, comorbidity, immune status, or vaccination. When normalized to total N RNA, sgN levels were similar across all variants. CONCLUSIONS: RNA viral loads were similar among hospitalized adults, irrespective of infecting variant and known risk factors for severe COVID-19. Total N and subgenomic RNA N viral loads were highly correlated, suggesting that subgenomic RNA measurements adds little information for the purposes of estimating infectivity.

11.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2283784

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with historically low influenza circulation during the 2020-2021 season, followed by increase in influenza circulation during the 2021-2022 US season. The 2a.2 subgroup of the influenza A(H3N2) 3C.2a1b subclade that predominated was antigenically different from the vaccine strain. METHODS: To understand the effectiveness of the 2021-2022 vaccine against hospitalized influenza illness, a multi-state sentinel surveillance network enrolled adults aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) and tested for influenza by a molecular assay. Using the test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was measured by comparing the odds of current season influenza vaccination in influenza-positive case-patients and influenza-negative, SARS-CoV-2-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. A separate analysis was performed to illustrate bias introduced by including SARS-CoV-2 positive controls. RESULTS: A total of 2334 patients, including 295 influenza cases (47% vaccinated), 1175 influenza- and SARS-CoV-2 negative controls (53% vaccinated), and 864 influenza-negative and SARS-CoV-2 positive controls (49% vaccinated), were analyzed. Influenza VE was 26% (95%CI: -14 to 52%) among adults aged 18-64 years, -3% (95%CI: -54 to 31%) among adults aged ≥65 years, and 50% (95%CI: 15 to 71%) among adults 18-64 years without immunocompromising conditions. Estimated VE decreased with inclusion of SARS-CoV-2-positive controls. CONCLUSIONS: During a season where influenza A(H3N2) was antigenically different from the vaccine virus, vaccination was associated with a reduced risk of influenza hospitalization in younger immunocompetent adults. However, vaccination did not provide protection in adults ≥65 years of age. Improvements in vaccines, antivirals, and prevention strategies are warranted.

12.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 17(3): e13106, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2259186

ABSTRACT

Background: The annual reappearance of respiratory viruses has been recognized for decades. COVID-19 mitigation measures taken during the pandemic were targeted at respiratory transmission and broadly impacted the burden of acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs). Methods: We used the longitudinal Household Influenza Vaccine Evaluation (HIVE) cohort in southeast Michigan to characterize the circulation of respiratory viruses from March 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, using RT-PCR of respiratory specimens collected at illness onset. Participants were surveyed twice during the study period, and SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were measured in serum by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. Incidence rates of ARI reports and virus detections were compared between the study period and a preceding pre-pandemic period of similar duration. Results: Overall, 437 participants reported a total of 772 ARIs; 42.6% had respiratory viruses detected. Rhinoviruses were the most frequent virus, but seasonal coronaviruses, excluding SARS-CoV-2, were also common. Illness reports and percent positivity were lowest from May to August 2020, when mitigation measures were most stringent. Seropositivity for SARS-CoV-2 was 5.3% in summer 2020 and increased to 11.3% in spring 2021. The incidence rate of total reported ARIs for the study period was 50% lower (95% CI: 0.5, 0.6; p < 0.001) than the incidence rate from a pre-pandemic comparison period (March 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017). Conclusions: The burden of ARI in the HIVE cohort during the COVID-19 pandemic fluctuated, with declines occurring concurrently with the widespread use of public health measures. Rhinovirus and seasonal coronaviruses continued to circulate even when influenza and SARS-CoV-2 circulation was low.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Rhinovirus
13.
J Infect Dis ; 2022 Nov 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2243456

ABSTRACT

When first approved, many hoped that the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine would provide long-term protection after a primary series. Waning of immunity and continued appearance of new variants has made booster inoculations necessary. The process is becoming increasingly similar to that used for annual updating of the influenza vaccine. The similarity has become even more apparent with selection of BA.4/BA.5 as the Omicron strain of the updated bivalent (Original + Omicron) Covid-19 vaccines. It is hoped that, if Covid-19 develops winter seasonality, SARS-CoV-2 vaccines will require only annual review to determine if updates are necessary. Recommendations on whom should receive the booster would be based on conditions at that time.

14.
Clin Infect Dis ; 2022 May 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2236202

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization. METHODS: Case control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states March 11 - December 15, 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and RT-PCR-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with two doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (<180 vs ≥180 days since dose two) and continuous time modeled using restricted cubic splines. RESULTS: 10,078 patients were included, 4906 cases (23% vaccinated) and 5172 controls (62% vaccinated). Median age was 60 years (IQR 46-70), 56% were non-Hispanic White, and 81% had ≥1 medical condition. Among immunocompetent adults, VE <180 days was 90% (95%CI: 88-91) vs 82% (95%CI: 79-85) at ≥180 days (p < 0.001). VE declined for Pfizer-BioNTech (88% to 79%, p < 0.001) and Moderna (93% to 87%, p < 0.001) products, for younger adults (18-64 years) [91% to 87%, p = 0.005], and for adults ≥65 years of age (87% to 78%, p < 0.001). In models using restricted cubic splines, similar changes were observed. CONCLUSION: In a period largely pre-dating Omicron variant circulation, effectiveness of two mRNA doses against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was largely sustained through 9 months.

15.
Open Forum Infect Dis ; 10(1): ofac698, 2023 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2212869

ABSTRACT

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are increasingly reporting relative VE (rVE) comparing a primary series plus booster doses with a primary series only. Interpretation of rVE differs from traditional studies measuring absolute VE (aVE) of a vaccine regimen against an unvaccinated referent group. We estimated aVE and rVE against COVID-19 hospitalization in primary-series plus first-booster recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: Booster-eligible immunocompetent adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in the United States during December 25, 2021-April 4, 2022 were included. In a test-negative design, logistic regression with case status as the outcome and completion of primary vaccine series or primary series plus 1 booster dose as the predictors, adjusted for potential confounders, were used to estimate aVE and rVE. Results: A total of 2060 patients were analyzed, including 1104 COVID-19 cases and 956 controls. Relative VE against COVID-19 hospitalization in boosted mRNA vaccine recipients versus primary series only was 66% (95% confidence interval [CI], 55%-74%); aVE was 81% (95% CI, 75%-86%) for boosted versus 46% (95% CI, 30%-58%) for primary. For boosted Janssen vaccine recipients versus primary series, rVE was 49% (95% CI, -9% to 76%); aVE was 62% (95% CI, 33%-79%) for boosted versus 36% (95% CI, -4% to 60%) for primary. Conclusions: Vaccine booster doses increased protection against COVID-19 hospitalization compared with a primary series. Comparing rVE measures across studies can lead to flawed interpretations of the added value of a new vaccination regimen, whereas difference in aVE, when available, may be a more useful metric.

16.
Nat Commun ; 14(1): 272, 2023 01 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2185850

ABSTRACT

Transmission bottlenecks limit the spread of novel mutations and reduce the efficiency of selection along a transmission chain. While increased force of infection, receptor binding, or immune evasion may influence bottleneck size, the relationship between transmissibility and the transmission bottleneck is unclear. Here we compare the transmission bottleneck of non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 lineages to those of Alpha, Delta, and Omicron. We sequenced viruses from 168 individuals in 65 households. Most virus populations had 0-1 single nucleotide variants (iSNV). From 64 transmission pairs with detectable iSNV, we identify a per clade bottleneck of 1 (95% CI 1-1) for Alpha, Delta, and Omicron and 2 (95% CI 2-2) for non-VOC. These tight bottlenecks reflect the low diversity at the time of transmission, which may be more pronounced in rapidly transmissible variants. Tight bottlenecks will limit the development of highly mutated VOC in transmission chains, adding to the evidence that selection over prolonged infections may drive their evolution.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Immune Evasion/genetics
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(5152): 1625-1630, 2022 Dec 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2204208

ABSTRACT

Monovalent COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, designed against the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, successfully reduced COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and globally (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization has declined over time, likely related to a combination of factors, including waning immunity and, with the emergence of the Omicron variant and its sublineages, immune evasion (3). To address these factors, on September 1, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended a bivalent COVID-19 mRNA booster (bivalent booster) dose, developed against the spike protein from ancestral SARS-CoV-2 and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 sublineages, for persons who had completed at least a primary COVID-19 vaccination series (with or without monovalent booster doses) ≥2 months earlier (4). Data on the effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose against COVID-19 hospitalization in the United States are lacking, including among older adults, who are at highest risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness. During September 8-November 30, 2022, the Investigating Respiratory Viruses in the Acutely Ill (IVY) Network§ assessed effectiveness of a bivalent booster dose received after ≥2 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccine against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥65 years. When compared with unvaccinated persons, VE of a bivalent booster dose received ≥7 days before illness onset (median = 29 days) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was 84%. Compared with persons who received ≥2 monovalent-only mRNA vaccine doses, relative VE of a bivalent booster dose was 73%. These early findings show that a bivalent booster dose provided strong protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization in older adults and additional protection among persons with previous monovalent-only mRNA vaccination. All eligible persons, especially adults aged ≥65 years, should receive a bivalent booster dose to maximize protection against COVID-19 hospitalization this winter season. Additional strategies to prevent respiratory illness, such as masking in indoor public spaces, should also be considered, especially in areas where COVID-19 community levels are high (4,5).


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19 Vaccines , Vaccine Efficacy , Hospitalization , RNA, Messenger , Vaccines, Combined
18.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 29(2): 278-285, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2198459

ABSTRACT

Persons with COVID-19-like illnesses are advised to stay home to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. We assessed relationships between telework experience and COVID-19 illness with work attendance when ill. Adults experiencing fever, cough, or loss of taste or smell who sought healthcare or COVID-19 testing in the United States during March-November 2020 were enrolled. Adults with telework experience before illness were more likely to work at all (onsite or remotely) during illness (87.8%) than those with no telework experience (49.9%) (adjusted odds ratio 5.48, 95% CI 3.40-8.83). COVID-19 case-patients were less likely to work onsite (22.1%) than were persons with other acute respiratory illnesses (37.3%) (adjusted odds ratio 0.36, 95% CI 0.24-0.53). Among COVID-19 case-patients with telework experience, only 6.5% worked onsite during illness. Telework experience before illness gave mildly ill workers the option to work and improved compliance with public health recommendations to stay home during illness.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , SARS-CoV-2 , Pandemics , Presenteeism
19.
Vaccine ; 40(48): 6979-6986, 2022 Nov 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2082297

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Test-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls. METHODS: Adults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group. RESULTS: 5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls. CONCLUSIONS: Despite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , Adult , United States/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Testing , Vaccine Efficacy , Case-Control Studies , Hospitalization , Syndrome
20.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 71(42): 1327-1334, 2022 Oct 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2081112

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (B.1.1.529 or BA.1) became predominant in the United States by late December 2021 (1). BA.1 has since been replaced by emerging lineages BA.2 (including BA.2.12.1) in March 2022, followed by BA.4 and BA.5, which have accounted for a majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections since late June 2022 (1). Data on the effectiveness of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines against BA.4/BA.5-associated hospitalizations are limited, and their interpretation is complicated by waning of vaccine-induced immunity (2-5). Further, infections with earlier Omicron lineages, including BA.1 and BA.2, reduce vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates because certain persons in the referent unvaccinated group have protection from infection-induced immunity. The IVY Network† assessed effectiveness of 2, 3, and 4 doses of monovalent mRNA vaccines compared with no vaccination against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among immunocompetent adults aged ≥18 years during December 26, 2021-August 31, 2022. During the BA.1/BA.2 period, VE 14-150 days after a second dose was 63% and decreased to 34% after 150 days. Similarly, VE 7-120 days after a third dose was 79% and decreased to 41% after 120 days. VE 7-120 days after a fourth dose was 61%. During the BA.4/BA.5 period, similar trends were observed, although CIs for VE estimates between categories of time since the last dose overlapped. VE 14-150 days and >150 days after a second dose was 83% and 37%, respectively. VE 7-120 days and >120 days after a third dose was 60%and 29%, respectively. VE 7-120 days after the fourth dose was 61%. Protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization waned even after a third dose. The newly authorized bivalent COVID-19 vaccines include mRNA from the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 strain and from shared mRNA components between BA.4 and BA.5 lineages and are expected to be more immunogenic against BA.4/BA.5 than monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (6-8). All eligible adults aged ≥18 years§ should receive a booster dose, which currently consists of a bivalent mRNA vaccine, to maximize protection against BA.4/BA.5 and prevent COVID-19-associated hospitalization.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , United States/epidemiology , Humans , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Hospitalization , Vaccines, Combined , RNA, Messenger
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL