Cardiac manifestations and outcomes of COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis in the young in the USA: longitudinal results from the Myocarditis After COVID Vaccination (MACiV) multicenter study.

Background: We aimed to study the clinical characteristics, myocardial injury, and longitudinal outcomes of COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis (C-VAM). Methods: In this longitudinal retrospective observational cohort multicenter study across 38 hospitals in the United States, 333 patients with C-VAM were compared with 100 patients with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C). We included patients ≤30 years of age with a clinical diagnosis of acute myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination based on clinical presentation, abnormal biomarkers and/or cardiovascular imaging findings. Demographics, past medical history, hospital course, biochemistry results, cardiovascular imaging, and follow-up information from April 2021 to November 2022 were collected. The primary outcome was presence of myocardial injury as evidenced by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Findings: Patients with C-VAM were predominantly white (67%) adolescent males (91%, 15.7 ± 2.8 years). Their initial clinical course was more likely to be mild (80% vs. 23%, p < 0.001) and cardiac dysfunction was less common (17% vs. 68%, p < 0.0001), compared to MIS-C. In contrast, LGE on CMR was more prevalent in C-VAM (82% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). The probability of LGE was higher in males (OR 3.28 [95% CI: 0.99, 10.6, p = 0.052]), in older patients (>15 years, OR 2.74 [95% CI: 1.28, 5.83, p = 0.009]) and when C-VAM occurred after the first or second dose as compared to the third dose of mRNA vaccine. Mid-term clinical outcomes of C-VAM at a median follow-up of 178 days (IQR 114-285 days) were reassuring. No cardiac deaths or heart transplantations were reported until the time of submission of this report. LGE persisted in 60% of the patients at follow up. Interpretation: Myocardial injury at initial presentation and its persistence at follow up, despite a mild initial course and favorable mid-term clinical outcome, warrants continued clinical surveillance and long-term studies in affected patients with C-VAM. Funding: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Development of Interoperable Computable Phenotype Algorithms for Adverse Events of Special Interest to Be Used for Biologics Safety Surveillance: Validation Study.

BACKGROUND: Adverse events associated with vaccination have been evaluated by epidemiological studies and more recently have gained additional attention with the emergency use authorization of several COVID-19 vaccines. As part of its responsibility to conduct postmarket surveillance, the US Food and Drug Administration continues to monitor several adverse events of special interest (AESIs) to ensure vaccine safety, including for COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: This study is part of the Biologics Effectiveness and Safety Initiative, which aims to improve the Food and Drug Administration's postmarket surveillance capabilities while minimizing public burden. This study aimed to enhance active surveillance efforts through a rules-based, computable phenotype algorithm to identify 5 AESIs being monitored by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention for COVID-19 or other vaccines: anaphylaxis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, myocarditis/pericarditis, thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome, and febrile seizure. This study examined whether these phenotypes have sufficiently high positive predictive value (PPV) to ensure that the cases selected for surveillance are reasonably likely to be a postbiologic adverse event. This allows patient privacy, and security concerns for the data sharing of patients who had nonadverse events can be properly accounted for when evaluating the cost-benefit aspect of our approach. METHODS: AESI phenotype algorithms were developed to apply to electronic health record data at health provider organizations across the country by querying for standard and interoperable codes. The codes queried in the rules represent symptoms, diagnoses, or treatments of the AESI sourced from published case definitions and input from clinicians. To validate the performance of the algorithms, we applied them to electronic health record data from a US academic health system and provided a sample of cases for clinicians to evaluate. Performance was assessed using PPV. RESULTS: With a PPV of 93.3%, our anaphylaxis algorithm performed the best. The PPVs for our febrile seizure, myocarditis/pericarditis, thrombocytopenia syndrome, and Guillain-Barré syndrome algorithms were 89%, 83.5%, 70.2%, and 47.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Given our algorithm design and performance, our results support continued research into using interoperable algorithms for widespread AESI postmarket detection.

Data quality and timeliness analysis for post-vaccination adverse event cases reported through healthcare data exchange to FDA BEST pilot platform.

Introduction: This study is part of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) initiative, which aims to improve the FDA's postmarket surveillance capabilities by using real-world data (RWD). In the United States, using RWD for postmarket surveillance has been hindered by the inability to exchange clinical data between healthcare providers and public health organizations in an interoperable format. However, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) has recently enacted regulation requiring all healthcare providers to support seamless access, exchange, and use of electronic health information through the interoperable HL7 Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard. To leverage the recent ONC changes, BEST designed a pilot platform to query and receive the clinical information necessary to analyze suspected AEs. This study assessed the feasibility of using the RWD received through the data exchange of FHIR resources to study post-vaccination AE cases by evaluating the data volume, query response time, and data quality. Materials and methods: The study used RWD from 283 post-vaccination AE cases, which were received through the platform. We used descriptive statistics to report results and apply 322 data quality tests based on a data quality framework for EHR. Results: The volume analysis indicated the average clinical resources for a post-vaccination AE case was 983.9 for the median partner. The query response time analysis indicated that cases could be received by the platform at a median of 3 min and 30 s. The quality analysis indicated that most of the data elements and conformance requirements useful for postmarket surveillance were met. Discussion: This study describes the platform's data volume, data query response time, and data quality results from the queried postvaccination adverse event cases and identified updates to current standards to close data quality gaps.

Stroke After Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults in the US, 2016 to 2019.

This case series investigates whether an increase in stroke risk occurred after influenza vaccination among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries during the influenza seasons from 2016 to 2019.

Modeling US blood donor deferrals under a policy of individual risk assessment for HIV risk sexual behavior.

BACKGROUND: In May 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released final guidance for blood donor eligibility that recommended the elimination of 3-month deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM) and the related deferral for women who have sex with MSM. In its place, FDA introduced an individual risk assessment policy of asking all presenting blood donors, regardless of sex or gender, if they have had a new partner or more than one sexual partner in the last 3 months and deferring those who also report anal sex (penile-anal intercourse) during this period. We modeled the possible impact of this policy on the US blood donor base. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We developed a computational model to estimate the percentage of blood donors who would be deferred under a policy of individual HIV risk assessment. The model incorporated demographic information about donors and national survey data on HIV risk behaviors and included age and sex distributions and dependencies. RESULTS: Our model estimates that approximately 1.2% of US blood donors would be deferred under the individual HIV risk assessment paradigm. DISCUSSION: The model predicts a relatively minor effect of replacing the time-based deferral for MSM with individual risk-based deferral for sexual behavior. As US blood centers implement this new policy, the effect may be mitigated by donor gains, which warrant further study. The new policy is unlikely to adversely affect the availability of blood and blood components.

Assessment of potential adverse events following the 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccines among U.S. adults aged 65 years and older.

BACKGROUND: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. METHODS: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status. RESULTS: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 primary series vaccination in children aged 5-17 years in the United States: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines are authorized for use in children in the United States; real-world assessment of vaccine effectiveness in children is needed. This study's objective was to estimate the effectiveness of receiving a complete primary series of monovalent BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccine in US children. METHODS: This cohort study identified children aged 5-17 years vaccinated with BNT162b2 matched with unvaccinated children. Participants and BNT162b2 vaccinations were identified in Optum and CVS Health insurance administrative claims databases linked with Immunization Information System (IIS) COVID-19 vaccination records from 16 US jurisdictions between December 11, 2020, and May 31, 2022 (end date varied by database and IIS). Vaccinated children were followed from their first BNT162b2 dose and matched to unvaccinated children on calendar date, US county of residence, and demographic and clinical factors. Censoring occurred if vaccinated children failed to receive a timely dose 2 or if unvaccinated children received any dose. Two COVID-19 outcome definitions were evaluated: COVID-19 diagnosis in any medical setting and COVID-19 diagnosis in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus HR. VE was estimated overall, within age subgroups, and within variant-specific eras. Sensitivity, negative control, and quantitative bias analyses evaluated various potential biases. RESULTS: There were 453,655 eligible vaccinated children one-to-one matched to unvaccinated comparators (mean age 12 years; 50% female). COVID-19 hospitalizations/ED visits were rare in children, regardless of vaccination status (Optum, 41.2 per 10,000 person-years; CVS Health, 44.1 per 10,000 person-years). Overall, vaccination was associated with reduced incidence of any medically diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 38% [95% CI, 36-40%]) and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 (meta-analyzed VE = 61% [95% CI, 56-65%]). VE estimates were lowest among children 5-11 years and during the Omicron-variant era. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of a complete BNT162b2 vaccine primary series was associated with overall reduced medically diagnosed COVID-19 and hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19 in children; observed VE estimates differed by age group and variant era. REGISTRATION: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website ( https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf ).

Safety of Ancestral Monovalent BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 Vaccines in US Children Aged 6 Months to 17 Years.

Importance: Active monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination provides early detection of rare outcomes that may not be identified in prelicensure trials. Objective: To conduct near-real-time monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study evaluated 21 prespecified health outcomes after exposure before early 2023 to BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 ancestral monovalent COVID-19 vaccines in children aged 6 months to 17 years by applying a near-real-time monitoring framework using health care data from 3 commercial claims databases in the US (Optum [through April 2023], Carelon Research [through March 2023], and CVS Health [through February 2023]). Increased rates of each outcome after vaccination were compared with annual historical rates from January 1 to December 31, 2019, and January 1 to December 31, 2020, as well as between April 1 and December 31, 2020. Exposure: Receipt of an ancestral monovalent BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, or NVX-CoV2373 COVID-19 vaccine dose identified through administrative claims data linked with Immunization Information Systems data. Main Outcomes and Measures: Twenty-one prespecified health outcomes, of which 15 underwent sequential testing and 6 were only monitored descriptively due to lack of historical rates. Results: Among 4 102 016 vaccinated enrollees aged 6 months to 17 years, 2 058 142 (50.2%) were male and 3 901 370 (95.1%) lived in an urban area. Thirteen of 15 sequentially tested outcomes did not meet the threshold for a statistical signal. Statistical signals were detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 vaccination in children aged 12 to 17 years and seizure after vaccination with BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 in children aged 2 to 4 or 5 years. However, in post hoc sensitivity analyses, a statistical signal for seizure was observed only after mRNA-1273 when 2019 background rates were selected; no statistical signal was observed when 2022 rates were selected. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of pediatric enrollees across 3 commercial health insurance databases, statistical signals detected for myocarditis or pericarditis after BNT162b2 (ages 12-17 years) were consistent with previous reports, and seizures after BNT162b2 (ages 2-4 years) and mRNA-1273 vaccinations (ages 2-5 years) should be further investigated in a robust epidemiologic study with confounding adjustment. The US Food and Drug Administration concludes that the known and potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the known and potential risks of COVID-19 infection.

Stroke Risk After COVID-19 Bivalent Vaccination Among US Older Adults.

Importance: In January 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Food and Drug Administration noted a safety concern for ischemic stroke among adults aged 65 years or older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine. Objective: To evaluate stroke risk after administration of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, (2) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine on the same day (concomitant administration), and (3) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine. Design, Setting, and Participants: Self-controlled case series including 11 001 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (among 5 397 278 vaccinated individuals). The study period was August 31, 2022, through February 4, 2023. Exposures: Receipt of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (primary) or (2) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine (secondary). Main Outcomes and Measures: Stroke risk (nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, combined outcome of nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke) during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window after vaccination vs the 43- to 90-day control window. Results: There were 5 397 278 Medicare beneficiaries who received either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (median age, 74 years [IQR, 70-80 years]; 56% were women). Among the 11 001 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there were no statistically significant associations between either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine and the outcomes of nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window vs the 43- to 90-day control window (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 0.72-1.12). Among the 4596 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after concomitant administration of either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window for the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.13 [95% CI, 0.05-6.22]) and a statistically significant association between vaccination and transient ischemic attack during the 1- to 21-day risk window for the Moderna mRNA-1273.222 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.06-1.74]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.33 [95% CI, 0.46-6.20]). Among the 21 345 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after administration of a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window (IRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.43-2.87]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there was no evidence of a significantly elevated risk for stroke during the days immediately after vaccination.

Incidence rates of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) among adults in United States commercial and Medicare claims databases, 2017-2020.

BACKGROUND: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare). RESULTS: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults. CONCLUSION: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS.

Effectiveness of monovalent COVID-19 booster/additional vaccine doses in the United States.

Background: Monovalent booster/additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized in August 2021 in the United States. We evaluated the real-world effectiveness of receipt of a monovalent booster/additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared with receiving a primary vaccine series without a booster/additional dose. Methods: Cohorts of individuals receiving a COVID-19 booster/additional dose after receipt of a complete primary vaccine series were identified in 2 administrative insurance claims databases (Optum, CVS Health) supplemented with state immunization information system data between August 2021 and March 2022. Individuals with a complete primary series but without a booster/additional dose were one-to-one matched to boosted individuals on calendar date, geography, and clinical factors. COVID-19 diagnoses were identified in any medical setting, or specifically in hospitals/emergency departments (EDs). Propensity score-weighted hazards ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with Cox proportional hazards models; vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated as 1 minus the HR by vaccine brand overall and within subgroups of variant-specific eras, immunocompromised status, and homologous/heterologous booster status. Results: Across both data sources, we identified 752,165 matched pairs for BNT162b2, 410,501 for mRNA-1273, and 11,398 for JNJ-7836735. For any medically diagnosed COVID-19, meta-analyzed VE estimates for BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and JNJ-7836735, respectively, were: BNT162b2, 54% (95% CI, 53%-56%); mRNA-1273, 58% (95% CI, 56%-59%); JNJ-7836735, 34% (95% CI, 23%-44%). For hospital/ED-diagnosed COVID-19, VE estimates ranged from 70% to 76%. VE was generally lower during the Omicron era than the Delta era and for immunocompromised individuals. There was little difference observed by homologous or heterologous booster status. Conclusion: The original, monovalent booster/additional doses were reasonably effective in real-world use among the populations for which they were indicated during the study period. Additional studies may be informative in the future as new variants emerge and new vaccines become available.Registration: The study protocol was publicly posted on the BEST Initiative website (https://bestinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/C19-VX-Effectiveness-Protocol_2022_508.pdf).

HIV risk behavior profiles among men who have sex with men interested in donating blood: Findings from the Assessing Donor Variability and New Concepts in Eligibility study.

BACKGROUND: Individual risk assessment allows donors to be evaluated based on their own behaviors. Study objectives were to assess human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) risk behaviors in men who have sex with men (MSM) and estimate the proportion of the study population who would not be deferred for higher risk HIV sexual behaviors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional survey and biomarker assessment were conducted in eight U.S. cities. Participants were sexually active MSM interested in blood donation aged 18-39 years, assigned male sex at birth. Participants completed surveys during two study visits to define eligibility, and self-reported sexual and HIV prevention behaviors. Blood was drawn at study visit 1 and tested for HIV and the presence of tenofovir, one of the drugs in oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Associations were assessed between HIV infection status or HIV PrEP use and behaviors, including sex partners, new partners, and anal sex. RESULTS: A total of 1566 MSM completed the visit 1 questionnaire and blood draw and 1197 completed the visit 2 questionnaire. Among 1562 persons without HIV, 789 (50.4%) were not taking PrEP. Of those not taking PrEP, 66.2% reported one sexual partner or no anal sex and 69% reported no new sexual partners or no anal sex with a new partner in the past 3 months. CONCLUSION: The study found that questions were able to identify sexually active, HIV-negative MSM who report lower risk sexual behaviors. About a quarter of enrolled study participants would be potentially eligible blood donors using individual risk assessment questions.

Benefit-risk assessment of Covid-19 vaccine, MRNA (MRNA-1273) for males age 18-64 years.

Since the authorization of the Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, real-world evidence has indicated its effectiveness in preventing COVID-19 cases. However, increased cases of mRNA vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis have been reported, predominantly in young adults and adolescents. The Food and Drug Administration conducted a benefit-risk assessment to inform the review of the Biologics License Application for use of the Moderna vaccine among individuals ages 18 and older. We modeled the benefit-risk per million individuals who receive two complete doses of the vaccine. Benefit endpoints were vaccine-preventable COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and deaths. The risk endpoints were vaccine-related myocarditis/pericarditis cases, hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths. The analysis was conducted on the age-stratified male population due to data signals and previous work showing males to be the main risk group. We constructed six scenarios to evaluate the impact of uncertainty associated with pandemic dynamics, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against novel variants, and rates of vaccine-associated myocarditis/pericarditis cases on the model results. For our most likely scenario, we assumed the US COVID-19 incidence was for the week of December 25, 2021, with a VE of 30% against cases and 72% against hospitalization with the Omicron-dominant strain. Our source for estimating vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rates was FDA's CBER Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) System databases. Overall, our results supported the conclusion that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh its risks. Remarkably, we predicted vaccinating one million 18-25 year-old males would prevent 82,484 cases, 4,766 hospitalizations, 1,144 ICU admissions, and 51 deaths due to COVID-19, comparing to 128 vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis cases, 110 hospitalizations, zero ICU admissions, and zero deaths. Uncertainties in the pandemic trajectory, effectiveness of vaccine against novel variants, and vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis rate are important limitations of our analysis. Also, the model does not evaluate potential long-term adverse effects due to either COVID-19 or vaccine-attributable myocarditis/pericarditis.

Development and Validation of an Algorithm for Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome (TTS) at Unusual Sites.

Introduction: Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) has been reported following receipt of adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines. However, no validation studies evaluating the accuracy of International Classification of Diseases-10-Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM)-based algorithm for unusual site TTS are available in the published literature. Methods: The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of clinical coding to 1) leverage literature review and clinical input to develop an ICD-10-CM-based algorithm to identify unusual site TTS as a composite outcome and 2) validate the algorithm against the Brighton Collaboration's interim case definition using laboratory, pathology, and imaging reports in an academic health network electronic health record (EHR) within the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative. Validation of up to 50 cases per thrombosis site was conducted, with positive predictive values (PPV) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) calculated using pathology or imaging results as the gold standard. Results: The algorithm identified 278 unusual site TTS cases, of which 117 (42.1%) were selected for validation. In both the algorithm-identified and validation cohorts, over 60% of patients were 56 years or older. The positive predictive value (PPV) for unusual site TTS was 76.1% (95% CI 67.2-83.2%) and at least 80% for all but one individual thrombosis diagnosis code. PPV for thrombocytopenia was 98.3% (95% CI 92.1-99.5%). Discussion: This study represents the first report of a validated ICD-10-CM-based algorithm for unusual site TTS. A validation effort found that the algorithm performed at an intermediate-to-high PPV, suggesting that the algorithm can be used in observational studies including active surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines and other medical products.

Evaluation of potential adverse events following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination among adults aged 65 years and older: Two self-controlled studies in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Our near-real-time safety monitoring of 16 adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination identified potential elevation in risk for six AEs following primary series and monovalent booster dose administration. The crude association with AEs does not imply causality. Accordingly, we conducted robust evaluation of potential associations. METHODS: We conducted two self-controlled case series studies of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) in U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years. Adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated following primary series doses for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), pulmonary embolism (PE), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC); and following monovalent booster doses for AMI, PE, ITP, Bell's Palsy (BP) and Myocarditis/Pericarditis (Myo/Peri). RESULTS: The primary series study included 3,360,981 individuals who received 6,388,542 primary series doses; the booster study included 6,156,100 individuals with one monovalent booster dose. The AMI IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.91 to 1.18) and 1.06 (95 % CI: 1.003 to 1.12), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.01 (95 % CI: 0.82 to 1.26) and 1.05 (95 % CI: 0.998 to 1.11), respectively. The hospital inpatient PE IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.19 (95 % CI: 1.03 to 1.38) and 0.86 (95 % CI: 0.78 to 0.95), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.15 (95 % CI: 0.94 to 1.41) and 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.79 to 0.96), respectively. The studies' results do not support that exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines elevate the risk of ITP, DIC, Myo/Peri, and BP. CONCLUSION: We did not find an increased risk for AMI, ITP, DIC, BP, and Myo/Peri and there was not consistent evidence for PE after exposure to COVID-19 mRNA primary series or monovalent booster vaccines. These results support the favorable safety profile of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines administered in the U.S. elderly population.

Use of Immunization Information Systems in Ascertainment of COVID-19 Vaccinations for Claims-Based Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness Studies.

Importance: Safety and effectiveness studies of COVID-19 vaccines are being conducted using clinical data, including administrative claims. However, claims data only partially capture administered COVID-19 vaccine doses for numerous reasons, such as vaccination at sites that do not generate claims for reimbursement. Objective: To evaluate the extent to which Immunization Information Systems (IIS) data linked to claims data enhances claims-based COVID-19 vaccine capture for a commercially insured population and to estimate the magnitude of misclassification of vaccinated individuals as having unvaccinated status in the linked IIS and claims data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used claims data from a commercial health insurance database and obtained vaccination data from IIS repositories in 11 US states. Participants were individuals younger than 65 years who resided in 1 of 11 states of interest and who were insured in health plans from December 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated proportion of individuals with at least 1 dose of any COVID-19 vaccine and proportion of individuals with a completed vaccine series based on general population guidelines. Vaccination status estimates were calculated and compared using claims data alone and linked IIS and claims data. Remaining misclassification of vaccination status was assessed by comparing linked IIS and claims data estimates with estimates from external surveillance data sources (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] and state Department of Health [DOH]) and capture-recapture analysis. Results: This cohort study included 5 112 722 individuals (mean [SD] age, 33.5 [17.6] years; 2 618 098 females [51.2%]) from 11 states. Characteristics of those who received at least 1 vaccine dose and those who completed a vaccine series were similar to the overall study population. The proportion with at least 1 vaccine dose increased from 32.8% using claims data alone to 48.1% when the data were supplemented with IIS vaccination records. Vaccination estimates using linked IIS and claims data varied widely by state. The percentage of individuals who completed a vaccine series increased from 24.4% to 41.9% after the addition of IIS vaccine records and varied across states. The percentages of underrecording using linked IIS and claims data were 12.1% to 47.1% lower than those using CDC data, 9.1% to 46.9% lower than the state DOH, and 9.2% to 50.9% lower than capture-recapture analysis. Conclusion and Relevance: Results of this study suggested that supplementing COVID-19 claims records with IIS vaccination records substantially increased the number of individuals who were identified as vaccinated, yet potential underrecording remained. Improvements in reporting vaccination data to IIS infrastructures could allow frequent updates of vaccination status for all individuals and all vaccines.

Safety of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine in Children Aged 5 to 17 Years.

Importance: Active monitoring of health outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination offers early detection of rare outcomes that may not be identified in prelicensure trials. Objective: To conduct near-real-time monitoring of health outcomes following BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population aged 5 to 17 years. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based study was conducted under a public health surveillance mandate from the US Food and Drug Administration. Participants aged 5 to 17 years were included if they received BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination through mid 2022 and had continuous enrollment in a medical health insurance plan from the start of an outcome-specific clean window until the COVID-19 vaccination. Surveillance of 20 prespecified health outcomes was conducted in near real time within a cohort of vaccinated individuals from the earliest Emergency Use Authorization date for the BNT162b2 vaccination (December 11, 2020) and was expanded as more pediatric age groups received authorization through May and June 2022. All 20 health outcomes were monitored descriptively, 13 of which additionally underwent sequential testing. For these 13 health outcomes, the increased risk of each outcome after vaccination was compared with a historical baseline with adjustments for repeated looks at the data as well as a claims processing delay. A sequential testing approach was used, which declared a safety signal when the log likelihood ratio comparing the observed rate ratio against the null hypothesis exceeded a critical value. Exposure: Exposure was defined as receipt of a BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine dose. The primary analysis assessed primary series doses together (dose 1 + dose 2), and dose-specific secondary analyses were conducted. Follow-up time was censored for death, disenrollment, end of the outcome-specific risk window, end of the study period, or a receipt of a subsequent vaccine dose. Main Outcomes: Twenty prespecified health outcomes: 13 were assessed using sequential testing and 7 were monitored descriptively because of a lack of historical comparator data. Results: This study included 3 017 352 enrollees aged 5 to 17 years. Of the enrollees across all 3 databases, 1 510 817 (50.1%) were males, 1 506 499 (49.9%) were females, and 2 867 436 (95.0%) lived in an urban area. In the primary sequential analyses, a safety signal was observed only for myocarditis or pericarditis after primary series vaccination with BNT162b2 in the age group 12 to 17 years across all 3 databases. No safety signals were observed for the 12 other outcomes assessed using sequential testing. Conclusions and Relevance: Among 20 health outcomes that were monitored in near real time, a safety signal was identified for only myocarditis or pericarditis. Consistent with other published reports, these results provide additional evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are safe in children.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of COVID-19 vaccines safety during pregnancy is urgently needed. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components and technological platforms used in other vaccines during pregnancy and animal studies to complement direct evidence. We searched literature databases from its inception to September 2021 without language restriction, COVID-19 vaccine websites, and reference lists of other systematic reviews and the included studies. Pairs of reviewers independently selected, data extracted, and assessed the risk of bias of the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. (PROSPERO CRD42021234185). RESULTS: We retrieved 8,837 records from the literature search; 71 studies were included, involving 17,719,495 pregnant persons and 389 pregnant animals. Most studies (94%) were conducted in high-income countries, were cohort studies (51%), and 15% were classified as high risk of bias. We identified nine COVID-19 vaccine studies, seven involving 309,164 pregnant persons, mostly exposed to mRNA vaccines. Among non-COVID-19 vaccines, the most frequent exposures were AS03 and aluminum-based adjuvants. A meta-analysis of studies that adjusted for potential confounders showed no association with adverse outcomes, regardless of the vaccine or the trimester of vaccination. Neither the reported rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes nor reactogenicity exceeded expected background rates, which was the case for ASO3- or aluminum-adjuvanted non-COVID-19 vaccines in the proportion meta-analyses of uncontrolled studies/arms. The only exception was postpartum hemorrhage after COVID-19 vaccination (10.40%; 95% CI: 6.49-15.10%), reported by two studies; however, the comparison with non-exposed pregnant persons, available for one study, found non-statistically significant differences (adjusted OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.56-2.12). Animal studies showed consistent results with studies in pregnant persons. CONCLUSION: We found no safety concerns for currently administered COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Additional experimental and real-world evidence could enhance vaccination coverage. Robust safety data for non-mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are still needed.

Comparison of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes using archival medical records before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo: a facility-based, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Little research has been conducted on the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on either birth outcomes or the ability of archival medical records to accurately capture these outcomes. Our study objective is thus to compare the prevalence of preterm birth, stillbirth, low birth weight (LBW), small for gestational age (SGA), congenital microcephaly, and neonatal bloodstream infection (NBSI) before and during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). METHODS: We conducted a facility-based retrospective cohort study in which identified cases of birth outcomes were tabulated at initial screening and subcategorized according to level of diagnostic certainty using Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GAIA) definitions. Documentation of any birth complications, delivery type, and maternal vaccination history were also evaluated. The prevalence of each birth outcome was compared in the pre-COVID-19 (i.e., July 2019 to February 2020) and intra-COVID-19 (i.e., March to August 2020) periods via two-sample z-test for equality of proportions. RESULTS: In total, 14,300 birth records were abstracted. Adverse birth outcomes were identified among 22.0% and 14.3% of pregnancies in the pre-COVID-19 and intra-COVID-19 periods, respectively. For stillbirth, LBW, SGA, microcephaly, and NBSI, prevalence estimates were similar across study periods. However, the prevalence of preterm birth in the intra-COVID-19 period was significantly lower than that reported during the pre-COVID-19 period (8.6% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the level of diagnostic certainty declined slightly across all outcomes investigated from the pre-COVID-19 to the intra-COVID-19 period. Nonetheless, diagnostic certainty was especially low for certain outcomes (i.e., stillbirth and NBSI) regardless of period; still, other outcomes, such as preterm birth and LBW, had moderate to high levels of diagnostic certainty. Results were mostly consistent when the analysis was focused on the facilities designated for COVID-19 care. CONCLUSION: This study succeeded in providing prevalence estimates for key adverse birth outcomes using GAIA criteria during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kinshasa, DRC. Furthermore, our study adds crucial real-world data to the literature surrounding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on maternal and neonatal services and outcomes in Africa.

Modeling the Risk of HIV Transfusion Transmission.

BACKGROUND: Blood donations are routinely screened for HIV to prevent an infectious unit from being released to the blood supply. Despite improvements to blood screening assays, donations from infected donors remain undetectable during the window period (WP), when the virus has not yet replicated above the lower limit of detection (LOD) of a screening assay. To aid in the quantitative risk assessments of WP donations, a dose-response model describing the probability of transfusion-transmission of HIV over a range of viral RNA copies was developed. METHODS: An exponential model was chosen based on data fit and parsimony. A data set from a HIV challenge study using a nonhuman primate model and another data set from reported human blood transfusions associated with HIV infected donors were separately fit to the model to generate parameter estimates. A Bayesian framework using No-U-Turn Sampling (NUTS) and Monte Carlo simulations was performed to generate posterior distributions quantifying uncertainty in parameter estimation and model predictions. RESULTS: The parameters of the exponential model for both nonhuman primate and human data were estimated with a mean (95% credible intervals) of 2.70 × 10 -2 (7.74 × 10 -3 , 6.06 × 10 -2 ) and 7.56 × 10 -4 (3.68 × 10 -4 , 1.31 × 10 -3 ), respectively. The predicted ID 50 for the animal and human models was 26 (12, 90) and 918 (529, 1886) RNA copies transfused, respectively. CONCLUSION: This dose-response model can be used in a quantitative framework to estimate the probability of transfusion-transmission of HIV through WP donations. These models can be especially informative when assessing risk from blood components with low viral load.