Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 29
Filter
1.
Viruses ; 14(4):797, 2022.
Article in English | MDPI | ID: covidwho-1786082

ABSTRACT

Influenza-like illness (ILI) can be caused by a range of respiratory viruses. The present study investigates the contribution of influenza and other respiratory viruses, the occurrence of viral co-infections, and the persistence of the viruses after ILI onset in older adults. During the influenza season 2014–2015, 2366 generally healthy community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) were enrolled in the study. Viruses were identified by multiplex ligation–dependent probe-amplification assay in naso- and oropharyngeal swabs taken during acute ILI phase, and 2 and 8 weeks later. The ILI incidence was 10.7%, which did not differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated older adults;influenza virus was the most frequently detected virus (39.4%). Other viruses with significant contribution were: rhinovirus (17.3%), seasonal coronavirus (9.8%), respiratory syncytial virus (6.7%), and human metapneumovirus (6.3%). Co-infections of influenza virus with other viruses were rare. The frequency of ILI cases in older adults in this 2014–2015 season with low vaccine effectiveness was comparable to that of the 2012–2013 season with moderate vaccine efficacy. The low rate of viral co-infections observed, especially for influenza virus, suggests that influenza virus infection reduces the risk of simultaneous infection with other viruses. Viral persistence or viral co-infections did not affect the clinical outcome of ILI.

2.
Vaccine ; 40(15): 2251-2257, 2022 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1730146

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With COVID-19 vaccine roll-out ongoing in many countries globally, monitoring of breakthrough infections is of great importance. Antibodies persist in the blood after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Since COVID-19 vaccines induce immune response to the Spike protein of the virus, which is the main serosurveillance target to date, alternative targets should be explored to distinguish infection from vaccination. METHODS: Multiplex immunoassay data from 1,513 SARS-CoV-2 RT-qPCR-tested individuals (352 positive and 1,161 negative) without COVID-19 vaccination history were used to determine the accuracy of Nucleoprotein-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) in detecting past SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also described Spike S1 and Nucleoprotein-specific IgG responses in 230 COVID-19 vaccinated individuals (Pfizer/BioNTech). RESULTS: The sensitivity of Nucleoprotein seropositivity was 85% (95% confidence interval: 80-90%) for mild COVID-19 in the first two months following symptom onset. Sensitivity was lower in asymptomatic individuals (67%, 50-81%). Participants who had experienced a SARS-CoV-2 infection up to 11 months preceding vaccination, as assessed by Spike S1 seropositivity or RT-qPCR, produced 2.7-fold higher median levels of IgG to Spike S1 ≥ 14 days after the first dose as compared to those unexposed to SARS-CoV-2 at ≥ 7 days after the second dose (p = 0.011). Nucleoprotein-specific IgG concentrations were not affected by vaccination in infection-naïve participants. CONCLUSIONS: Serological responses to Nucleoprotein may prove helpful in identifying SARS-CoV-2 infections after vaccination. Furthermore, it can help interpret IgG to Spike S1 after COVID-19 vaccination as particularly high responses shortly after vaccination could be explained by prior exposure history.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Antibodies, Viral , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , Nucleoproteins , SARS-CoV-2 , Spike Glycoprotein, Coronavirus , Vaccination
3.
Frontiers in immunology ; 13, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1695876

ABSTRACT

Background Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to considerable morbidity/mortality worldwide, but most infections, especially among children, have a mild course. However, it remains largely unknown whether infected children develop cellular immune memory. Methods To determine whether a memory T cell response is being developed, we performed a longitudinal assessment of the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response by IFN-γ ELISPOT and activation marker analyses of peripheral blood samples from unvaccinated children and adults with mild-to-moderate COVID-19. Results Upon stimulation of PBMCs with heat-inactivated SARS-CoV-2 or overlapping peptides of spike (S-SARS-CoV-2) and nucleocapsid proteins, we found S-SARS-CoV-2-specific IFN-γ T cell responses in infected children (83%) and adults (100%) that were absent in unexposed controls. Frequencies of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were higher in infected adults, especially in those with moderate symptoms, compared to infected children. The S-SARS-CoV-2 IFN-γ T cell response correlated with S1-SARS-CoV-2-specific serum antibody concentrations. Predominantly, effector memory CD4+ T cells of a Th1 phenotype were activated upon exposure to SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Frequencies of SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were significantly reduced at 10 months after symptom onset, while S1-SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG concentrations were still detectable in 90% of all children and adults. Conclusions Our data indicate that an antigen-specific T cell and antibody response is developed after mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults. It remains to be elucidated to what extent this SARS-CoV-2-specific response can contribute to an effective recall response after reinfection.

5.
Euro Surveill ; 26(45)2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1630353

ABSTRACT

We report a rapid increase in enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) infections, with 139 cases reported from eight European countries between 31 July and 14 October 2021. This upsurge is in line with the seasonality of EV-D68 and was presumably stimulated by the widespread reopening after COVID-19 lockdown. Most cases were identified in September, but more are to be expected in the coming months. Reinforcement of clinical awareness, diagnostic capacities and surveillance of EV-D68 is urgently needed in Europe.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Enterovirus D, Human , Enterovirus Infections , Enterovirus , Myelitis , Respiratory Tract Infections , Communicable Disease Control , Disease Outbreaks , Enterovirus D, Human/genetics , Enterovirus Infections/diagnosis , Enterovirus Infections/epidemiology , Europe/epidemiology , Humans , Myelitis/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 74(1): 52-58, 2022 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1621578

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Indoor environments are considered one of the main settings for transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Households in particular represent a close-contact environment with high probability of transmission between persons of different ages and roles in society. METHODS: Households with a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 positive case in the Netherlands (March-May 2020) were included. At least 3 home visits were performed during 4-6 weeks of follow-up, collecting naso- and oropharyngeal swabs, oral fluid, feces and blood samples from all household members for molecular and serological analyses. Symptoms were recorded from 2 weeks before the first visit through to the final visit. Infection secondary attack rates (SAR) were estimated with logistic regression. A transmission model was used to assess household transmission routes. RESULTS: A total of 55 households with 187 household contacts were included. In 17 households no transmission took place; in 11 households all persons were infected. Estimated infection SARs were high, ranging from 35% (95% confidence interval [CI], 24%-46%) in children to 51% (95% CI, 39%-63%) in adults. Estimated transmission rates in the household were high, with reduced susceptibility of children compared with adolescents and adults (0.67; 95% CI, .40-1.1). CONCLUSION: Estimated infection SARs were higher than reported in earlier household studies, presumably owing to our dense sampling protocol. Children were shown to be less susceptible than adults, but the estimated infection SAR in children was still high. Our results reinforce the role of households as one of the main multipliers of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Disease Susceptibility , Family Characteristics , Humans , Incidence
7.
Front Immunol ; 12: 750229, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1506957

ABSTRACT

Improving COVID-19 intervention strategies partly relies on animal models to study SARS-CoV-2 disease and immunity. In our pursuit to establish a model for severe COVID-19, we inoculated young and adult male ferrets intranasally or intratracheally with SARS-CoV-2. Intranasal inoculation established an infection in all ferrets, with viral dissemination into the brain and gut. Upon intratracheal inoculation only adult ferrets became infected. However, neither inoculation route induced observable COVID-19 symptoms. Despite this, a persistent inflammation in the nasal turbinates was prominent in especially young ferrets and follicular hyperplasia in the bronchi developed 21 days post infection. These effects -if sustained- might resemble long-COVID. Respiratory and systemic cellular responses and antibody responses were induced only in animals with an established infection. We conclude that intranasally-infected ferrets resemble asymptomatic COVID-19 and possibly aspects of long-COVID. Combined with the increasing portfolio to measure adaptive immunity, ferrets are a relevant model for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine research.


Subject(s)
Bronchi/pathology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/immunology , Ferrets/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Administration, Intranasal , Age Factors , Animals , Asymptomatic Diseases , Disease Models, Animal , Ferrets/virology , Humans , Hyperplasia , Immunity, Cellular , Immunity, Humoral , Injection, Intratympanic , Male , Virus Internalization
8.
EuropePMC; 2021.
Preprint in English | EuropePMC | ID: ppcovidwho-291169

ABSTRACT

Background: Claims of influenza vaccination increasing COVID-19 risk are circulating. Within the I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care multicentre study, we measured the association between 2019–20 influenza vaccination and COVID-19. Methods We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study at primary care level, in study sites in five European countries, from March–August 2020. Patients presenting with acute respiratory infection were swabbed, with demographic, 2019–20 influenza vaccination and clinical information documented. Using logistic regression we measured the adjusted odds ratio (aOR), adjusting for study site and age, sex, calendar time, presence of chronic conditions. The main analysis included patients swabbed ≤7 days after onset from the three countries with <15% of missing influenza vaccination. In secondary analyses, we included five countries, using multiple imputation with chained equations to account for missing data. Results We included 257 COVID-19 cases and 1631 controls in the main analysis (three countries). The overall aOR between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.66–1.32). The aOR was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.58–1.46) and 0.92 (95%CI: 0.51–1.67) among those aged 20–59 and ≥60 years, respectively. In secondary analyses, we included 6457 cases and 69272 controls. The imputed aOR was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79–0.95) among all ages and any delay between swab and symptom onset. Conclusions There was no evidence that COVID-19 cases were more likely to be vaccinated against influenza than controls. Influenza vaccination should be encouraged among target groups for vaccination. I-MOVE-COVID-19 will continue documenting influenza vaccination status in 2020-21, in order to learn about effects of recent influenza vaccination.

9.
J Clin Virol Plus ; 1(4): 100042, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1433482

ABSTRACT

Background: SARS-CoV-2 is taking a huge toll on society while influenza and RSV detection are also becoming more important. These viruses pose a high burden on health care. Rapid and accurate diagnostics for these pathogens are important for swift triage in the hospital. Fast molecular point of care test (mPOCT) assays for these pathogens can prove an alternative. Here a multi-center evaluation of the Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV assay is reported. Study design: The Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV assay was compared to three reference assays at three Dutch medical microbiology laboratories. An external quality assessment panel consisting of 16 specimens containing SARS-CoV-2, influenza viruses, RSV or human seasonal coronaviruses, or a combination thereof were used. Clinical specimens containing SARS-CoV-2 (n = 57), influenza viruses (n = 21) or RSV (n = 12), at a wide range of relevant concentrations were used. One laboratory also tested zoonotic avian and swine influenza viruses, and eight relevant SARS-CoV-2 variants. Results: The Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV assay showed equal performance compared to the reference assays. All SARS-CoV-2 variants of interest and variants of concern were accurately detected. Human seasonal coronaviruses were not detected. All four circulating seasonal influenza virus subtypes/lineages and both RSV types were accurately detected as well as a set of recent zoonotic avian and swine influenza viruses. The clinical specimens showed 98.2% concordance using this assay. Conclusion: The Xpert® Xpress SARS-CoV-2/Flu/RSV assay is a good alternative for accurate detection for SARS-CoV-2, influenza type A virus, influenza type B virus and RSV types A and B detection in a short timeframe.

11.
Euro Surveill ; 26(29)2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1350236

ABSTRACT

Since the introduction of non-pharmacological interventions to control COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) activity in Europe has been limited. Surveillance data for 17 countries showed delayed RSV epidemics in France (≥ 12 w) and Iceland (≥ 4 w) during the 2020/21 season. RSV cases (predominantly small children) in France and Iceland were older compared with previous seasons. We hypothesise that future RSV epidemic(s) could start outside the usual autumn/winter season and be larger than expected. Year-round surveillance of RSV is of critical importance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , Child , Europe/epidemiology , France/epidemiology , Humans , Iceland/epidemiology , Infant , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Seasons
12.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 28(5): 695-700, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1340599

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of nasal mid-turbinate self-testing using rapid antigen detection tests (RDT) for persons with suspected coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the community. Self-testing for COVID-19 infection with lateral flow assay severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RDT, provides rapid results and could enable frequent and extensive testing in the community, thereby improving the control of SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: Participants visiting a municipal SARS-CoV-2 testing centre, received self-testing kits containing either the BD Veritor System (BD-RDT) or Roche SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection test (Roche-RDT). Oro-nasopharyngeal swabs were collected from the participants for quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) testing. As a proxy for contagiousness, viral culture was performed on a selection of qRT-PCR positive samples to determine the Ct-value at which the chance of a positive culture dropped below 0.5 (Ct-value cut-off). Sensitivity and specificity of self-testing were compared to qRT-PCR with a Ct-value below the Ct value cut-off. Determinants independently associated with a false-negative self-test result were determined. RESULTS: A total of 3201 participants were included (BD-RDT n = 1595; Roche-RDT n = 1606). Sensitivity and specificity of self-testing compared with the qRT-PCR results with a Ct-value below the Ct-value cut-off were 78.4% (95% CI 73.2%-83.5%) and 99.4% (95% CI 99.1%-99.7%), respectively. A higher age was independently associated with a false-negative self-testing result with an odds ratio of 1.024 (95% CI 1.003-1.044). CONCLUSIONS: Self-testing using currently available RDT has a high specificity and relatively high sensitivity to identify individuals with a high probability of contagiousness.

13.
Euro Surveill ; 26(29)2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323061

ABSTRACT

We measured COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection at primary care/outpatient level among adults ≥ 65 years old using a multicentre test-negative design in eight European countries. We included 592 SARS-CoV-2 cases and 4,372 test-negative controls in the main analysis. The VE was 62% (95% CI: 45-74) for one dose only and 89% (95% CI: 79-94) for complete vaccination. COVID-19 vaccines provide good protection against COVID-19 presentation at primary care/outpatient level, particularly among fully vaccinated individuals.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , COVID-19 Vaccines , Europe , Humans , Primary Health Care
14.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(5): 1537-1540, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1269964

ABSTRACT

Temporal variation of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) epidemics was recently reported to be determined by the dominant RSV subtype. However, when we repeated the analysis for 4 countries in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, the dominant subtype did not seem to affect temporal variation of RSV epidemics.


Subject(s)
Epidemics , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections , Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human , DNA Viruses , Humans , Infant , Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections/epidemiology
15.
Environ Health Perspect ; 129(4): 47002, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1264202

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence for indoor airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is accumulating. OBJECTIVES: We assessed of the risk of illness due to airborne SARS-CoV-2 particles from breathing, speaking, singing, coughing, and sneezing in indoor environments. METHODS: A risk assessment model, AirCoV2, for exposure to SARS-CoV-2 particles in aerosol droplets was developed. Previously published data on droplets expelled by breathing, speaking, singing, coughing, and sneezing by an infected person were used as inputs. Scenarios encompassed virus concentration, exposure time, and ventilation. Newly collected data of virus RNA copies in mucus from patients are presented. RESULTS: The expelled volume of aerosols was highest for a sneeze, followed by a cough, singing, speaking, and breathing. After 20 min of exposure, at 107 RNA copies/mL in mucus, all mean illness risks were largely estimated to be below 0.001, except for the "high" sneeze scenario. At virus concentrations above 108 RNA copies/mL, and after 2 h of exposure, in the high and "low" sneeze scenarios, the high cough scenario and the singing scenario, risks exceeded 0.01 and may become very high, whereas the low coughing scenario, the high and low speaking scenarios and the breathing scenario remained below 0.1. After 2 h of exposure, singing became the second highest risk scenario. One air exchange per hour reduced risk of illness by about a factor of 2. Six air exchanges per hour reduced risks of illness by a factor of 8-13 for the sneeze and cough scenarios and by a factor of 4-9 for the other scenarios. DISCUSSION: The large variation in the volume of expelled aerosols is discussed. The model calculations indicated that SARS-CoV-2 transmission via aerosols outside of the 1.5-m social distancing norm can occur. Virus concentrations in aerosols and/or the amount of expelled aerosol droplets need to be high for substantial transmission via this route. AirCoV2 is made available as interactive computational tool. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7886.


Subject(s)
Aerosols , COVID-19/transmission , Pandemics/prevention & control , Risk Assessment/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Air Microbiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cough , Disease Transmission, Infectious , Humans , Singing , Sneezing
16.
Euro Surveill ; 26(10)2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1136422

ABSTRACT

BackgroundSensitive molecular diagnostics and correct test interpretation are crucial for accurate COVID-19 diagnosis and thereby essential for good clinical practice. Furthermore, they are a key factor in outbreak control where active case finding in combination with isolation and contact tracing are crucial.AimWith the objective to inform the public health and laboratory responses to the pandemic, we reviewed current published knowledge on the kinetics of SARS-CoV-2 infection as assessed by RNA molecular detection in a wide range of clinical samples.MethodsWe performed an extensive search on studies published between 1 December 2019 and 15 May 2020, reporting on molecular detection and/or isolation of SARS-CoV-2 in any human laboratory specimen.ResultsWe compiled a dataset of 264 studies including 32,515 COVID-19 cases, and additionally aggregated data points (n = 2,777) from sampling of 217 adults with known infection timeline. We summarised data on SARS-CoV-2 detection in the respiratory and gastrointestinal tract, blood, oral fluid, tears, cerebrospinal fluid, peritoneal fluid, semen, vaginal fluid; where provided, we also summarised specific observations on SARS-CoV-2 detection in pregnancy, infancy, children, adolescents and immunocompromised individuals.ConclusionOptimal SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing relies on choosing the most appropriate sample type, collected with adequate sampling technique, and with the infection timeline in mind. We outlined knowledge gaps and directions for future well-documented systematic studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques , Humans , Sensitivity and Specificity
17.
J Clin Microbiol ; 59(3)2021 02 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1125060

ABSTRACT

During the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, robust detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a key element for clinical management and to interrupt transmission chains. We organized an external quality assessment (EQA) of molecular detection of SARS-CoV-2 for European expert laboratories. An EQA panel composed of 12 samples, containing either SARS-CoV-2 at different concentrations to evaluate sensitivity or other respiratory viruses to evaluate specificity of SARS-CoV-2 testing, was distributed to 68 laboratories in 35 countries. Specificity samples included seasonal human coronaviruses hCoV-229E, hCoV-NL63, and hCoV-OC43, as well as Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), SARS-CoV, and human influenza viruses A and B. Sensitivity results differed among laboratories, particularly for low-concentration SARS-CoV-2 samples. Results indicated that performance was mostly independent of the selection of specific extraction or PCR methods.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/standards , COVID-19/diagnosis , Coronavirus 229E, Human , Coronavirus NL63, Human , Coronavirus OC43, Human , Humans , Influenzavirus A , Influenzavirus B , Laboratories , Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus , SARS Virus , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity
18.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 27(2): 411-420, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1076425

ABSTRACT

Since the 2009 influenza pandemic, the Netherlands has used a weekly death monitoring system to estimate deaths in excess of expectations. We present estimates of excess deaths during the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic and 10 previous influenza epidemics. Excess deaths per influenza epidemic averaged 4,000. The estimated 9,554 excess deaths (41% in excess) during the COVID-19 epidemic weeks 12-19 of 2020 appeared comparable to the 9,373 excess deaths (18%) during the severe influenza epidemic of 2017-18. However, these deaths occurred in a shorter time, had a higher peak, and were mitigated by nonpharmaceutical control measures. Excess deaths were 1.8-fold higher than reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 deaths (5,449). Based on excess deaths and preliminary results from seroepidemiologic studies, we estimated the infection-fatality rate to be 1%. Monitoring of excess deaths is crucial for timely estimates of disease burden for influenza and COVID-19. Our data complement laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 death reports and enable comparisons between epidemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/mortality , Epidemics/statistics & numerical data , Influenza, Human/mortality , Humans , Mortality/trends , Netherlands/epidemiology , Orthomyxoviridae , SARS-CoV-2 , Seasons
19.
Influenza Other Respir Viruses ; 15(4): 429-438, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1042709

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Claims of influenza vaccination increasing COVID-19 risk are circulating. Within the I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care multicentre study, we measured the association between 2019-20 influenza vaccination and COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre test-negative case-control study at primary care level, in study sites in five European countries, from March to August 2020. Patients presenting with acute respiratory infection were swabbed, with demographic, 2019-20 influenza vaccination and clinical information documented. Using logistic regression, we measured the adjusted odds ratio (aOR), adjusting for study site and age, sex, calendar time, presence of chronic conditions. The main analysis included patients swabbed ≤7 days after onset from the three countries with <15% of missing influenza vaccination. In secondary analyses, we included five countries, using multiple imputation with chained equations to account for missing data. RESULTS: We included 257 COVID-19 cases and 1631 controls in the main analysis (three countries). The overall aOR between influenza vaccination and COVID-19 was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.66-1.32). The aOR was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.58-1.46) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.51-1.67) among those aged 20-59 and ≥60 years, respectively. In secondary analyses, we included 6457 cases and 69 272 controls. The imputed aOR was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.79-0.95) among all ages and any delay between swab and symptom onset. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that COVID-19 cases were more likely to be vaccinated against influenza than controls. Influenza vaccination should be encouraged among target groups for vaccination. I-MOVE-COVID-19 will continue documenting influenza vaccination status in 2020-21, in order to learn about effects of recent influenza vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Influenza Vaccines/administration & dosage , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Orthomyxoviridae/immunology , Vaccination/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/diagnosis , Case-Control Studies , Europe/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Logistic Models , Male , Odds Ratio , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Respiratory Tract Infections/epidemiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL