Real-world Effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Among US Nursing Home Residents Aged ≥65 Years in the Pre-Delta and High Delta Periods.

Background: Long-term care residents were among the most vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Medicare nursing home residents aged ≥65 years during pre-Delta and high Delta periods. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 13 December 2020 to 20 November 2021 using Medicare claims data. Exposures included 2 and 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. We used inverse probability weighting and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate absolute and relative vaccine effectiveness. Results: Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death was 69.8% (95% CI, 65.9%‒73.3%) during the pre-Delta period and 55.7% (49.5%‒61.1%) during the high Delta period, without adjusting for time since vaccination. We observed substantial waning of effectiveness from 65.1% (54.2%‒73.5%) within 6 months from second-dose vaccination to 45.2% (30.6%‒56.7%) ≥6 months after second-dose vaccination in the high Delta period. Three doses provided 88.7% (73.5%‒95.2%) vaccine effectiveness against death, and the incremental benefit of 3 vs 2 doses was 74.6% (40.4%‒89.2%) during high Delta. Among beneficiaries with a prior COVID-19 infection, 3-dose vaccine effectiveness for preventing death was 78.6% (50.0%‒90.8%), and the additional protection of 3 vs 2 doses was 70.0% (30.1%‒87.1%) during high Delta. Vaccine effectiveness estimates against less severe outcomes (eg, infection) were lower. Conclusions: This nationwide real-world study demonstrated that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provided substantial protection against COVID-19-related death. Two-dose protection waned after 6 months. Third doses during the high Delta period provided significant additional protection for individuals with or without a prior COVID-19 infection.

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.

ICD-10 anaphylaxis algorithm and the estimate of vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis incidence in Medicare.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is a rare, serious allergic reaction. Its identification in large healthcare databases can help better characterize this risk. OBJECTIVE: To create an ICD-10 anaphylaxis algorithm, estimate its positive predictive values (PPVs) in a post-vaccination risk window, and estimate vaccination-attributable anaphylaxis rates in the Medicare Fee For Service (FFS) population. METHODS: An anaphylaxis algorithm with core and extended portions was constructed analyzing ICD-10 anaphylaxis claims data in Medicare FFS from 2015 to 2017. Cases of post-vaccination anaphylaxis among Medicare FFS beneficiaries were then identified from October 1, 2015 to February 28, 2019 utilizing vaccine relevant anaphylaxis ICD-10 codes. Information from medical records was used to determine true anaphylaxis cases based on the Brighton Collaboration's anaphylaxis case definition. PPVs were estimated for incident anaphylaxis and the subset of vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis within a 2-day post-vaccination risk window. Vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis rates in Medicare FFS were also estimated. RESULTS: The study recorded 66,572,128 vaccinations among 21,685,119 unique Medicare FFS beneficiaries. The algorithm identified a total of 190 suspected anaphylaxis cases within the 2-day post-vaccination window; of these 117 (62%) satisfied the core algorithm, and 73 (38%) additional cases satisfied the extended algorithm. The core algorithm's PPV was 66% (95% CI [56%, 76%]) for identifying incident anaphylaxis and 44% (95% CI [34%, 56%]) for vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis. The vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis incidence rate after any vaccination was 0.88 per million doses (95% CI [0.67, 1.16]). CONCLUSION: The ICD-10 claims algorithm for anaphylaxis allows the assessment of anaphylaxis risk in real-world data. The algorithm revealed vaccine-attributable anaphylaxis is rare among vaccinated Medicare FFS beneficiaries.

Comparative Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccines Among US Medicare Beneficiaries Ages 65 Years and Older During the 2019-2020 Season.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50 000 influenza-associated deaths occur annually in the United States, overwhelmingly among individuals aged ≥65 years. Although vaccination is the primary prevention tool, investigations have shown low vaccine effectiveness (VE) in recent years, particularly among the elderly. We analyzed the relative VE (RVE) of all influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years to prevent influenza hospital encounters during the 2019-2020 season. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using Poisson regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Exposures included egg-based high-dose trivalent (HD-IIV3), egg-based adjuvanted trivalent (aIIV3), egg-based standard dose (SD) quadrivalent (IIV4), cell-based SD quadrivalent (cIIV4), and recombinant quadrivalent (RIV4) influenza vaccines. RESULTS: We studied 12.7 million vaccinated beneficiaries. Following IPTW, cohorts were well balanced for all covariates and health-seeking behavior indicators. In the adjusted analysis, RIV4 (RVE, 13.3%; 95% CI, 7.4-18.9%), aIIV3 (RVE, 8.2%; 95% CI, 4.2-12.0%), and HD-IIV3 (RVE, 6.8%; 95% CI, 3.3-10.1%) were significantly more effective in preventing hospital encounters than the reference egg-based SD IIV4, while cIIV4 was not significantly more effective than IIV4 (RVE, 2.8%; 95% CI, -2.8%, 8.2%). Our results were consistent across all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In this influenza B-Victoria and A(H1N1)-dominated season, RIV4 was moderately more effective than other vaccines, while HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 were more effective than the IIV4 vaccines, highlighting the contributions of antigen amount and adjuvant use to VE. Egg adaptation likely did not substantially affect our RVE evaluation. Our findings, specific to the 2019-2020 season, should be evaluated in other studies using virological case confirmation.

Effect of Age on Relative Effectiveness of High-Dose Versus Standard-Dose Influenza Vaccines Among US Medicare Beneficiaries Aged ≥65 Years.

BACKGROUND: Studies have found that the high-dose influenza vaccine has a higher relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) versus standard-dose vaccines in some seasons. We evaluated the effect of age on the RVE of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines among Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS: A 6-season retrospective cohort study from 2012 to 2018 among Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years was performed. Poisson regression was used to evaluate the effect of age on the RVE of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations. RESULTS: The study included >19 million vaccinated beneficiaries in a community pharmacy setting. The Poisson models indicated a slightly increasing trend in RVE with age in all seasons. The high-dose vaccine was more effective than standard-dose vaccines in preventing influenza-related hospital encounters (ie, influenza-related inpatient stays and emergency department visits) in the 2012-2013 (RVE, 23.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 17.6%-28.3%), 2013-2014 (RVE, 15.3%; 95% CI, 7.8%-22.3%), 2014-2015 (RVE, 8.9%; 95% CI, 5.6%-12.1%), and 2016-2017 (RVE, 12.6%; 95% CI, 6.3%-18.4%) seasons and was at least as effective in all other seasons. We also found that the high-dose vaccine was consistently more effective than standard-dose vaccines across all seasons for people aged ≥85 years. Similar trends were observed for influenza-related inpatient stays. CONCLUSIONS: The RVE of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines increases with age.

Zostavax vaccine effectiveness among US elderly using real-world evidence: Addressing unmeasured confounders by using multiple imputation after linking beneficiary surveys with Medicare claims.

PURPOSE: Medicare claims can provide real-world evidence (RWE) to support the Food and Drug Administration's ability to conduct postapproval studies to validate products' safety and effectiveness. However, Medicare claims do not contain comprehensive information on some important sources of bias. Thus, we piloted an approach using the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), a nationally representative survey of the Medicare population, to (a) assess cohort balance with respect to unmeasured confounders in a herpes zoster vaccine (HZV) effectiveness claims-based study and (b) augment Medicare claims with MCBS data to include unmeasured covariates. METHODS: We reanalyzed data from our published HZV effectiveness Medicare analysis, using linkages to MCBS to obtain information on impaired mobility, education, and health-seeking behavior. We assessed survey variable balance between the matched cohorts and selected imbalanced variables for model adjustment, applying multiple imputation by chained equations (MICE) to impute these potential unmeasured confounders. RESULTS: The original HZV effectiveness study cohorts appeared well balanced with respect to variables we selected from the MCBS. Our imputed results showed slight shifts in HZV effectiveness point estimates with wider confidence intervals, but indicated no statistically significant differences from the original study estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Our innovative use of linked survey data to assess cohort balance and our imputation approach to augment Medicare claims with MCBS data to include unmeasured covariates provide potential solutions for addressing bias related to unmeasured confounding in large database studies, thus adding new tools for RWE studies.