Search

Introduction: Repeated COVID-19 booster vaccination was recommended in healthcare workers (HCWs) to maintain protection. We measured the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the second booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine compared to the first booster, against laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in HCWs., Methods: In a prospective cohort study among HCWs from 12 European hospitals, we collected nasopharyngeal or saliva samples at enrolment and during weekly/fortnightly follow-up between October 2022 and May 2023. We estimated rVE of the second versus first COVID-19 vaccine booster dose against SARS-CoV-2 infection, overall, by time since second booster and restricted to the bivalent vaccines only. Using Cox regression, we calculated the rVE as (1-hazard ratio)*100, adjusting for hospital, age, sex, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and at least one underlying condition., Results: Among the 979 included HCWs eligible for a second booster vaccination, 392 (40 %) received it and 192 (20 %) presented an infection during the study period. The rVE of the second versus first booster dose was -5 % (95 %CI: -46; 25) overall, 3 % (-46; 36) in the 7-89 days after receiving the second booster dose. The rVE was 11 % (-43; 45) when restricted to the use of bivalent vaccines only., Conclusion: The bivalent COVID-19 could have reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs by 11 %. However, we note the limitation of imprecise rVE estimates due to the proportion of monovalent vaccine used in the study, the small sample size and the study being conducted during the predominant circulation of XBB.1.5 sub-lineage. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness studies in HCWs can provide important evidence to inform the optimal timing and the use of updated COVID-19 vaccines., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: APU reported payment under EMA DARWIN EU project outside of the submitted work. MLM, AM, LCC reported additional support received from ISIDORe (EATRIS) Network for carrying out the local SARS-CoV-2 sequencing. CPP reported speaker fees from Pfizer and MSD. SAF reported speaker fees from and participation in Advisory board of Pfizer, MSD and Gilead. CMA reported speaker fees from MSD, Pfizer and Sanofi. JS reported support for attending ESID conference 2022 from Takeda Pharmaceutical. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

In autumn 2023, European vaccination campaigns predominantly administered XBB.1.5 vaccine. In a European multicentre study, we estimated 2023 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed symptomatic infection at primary care level between September 2023 and January 2024. Using a test-negative case-control design, we estimated VE in the target group for COVID-19 vaccination overall and by time since vaccination. We included 1057 cases and 4397 controls. Vaccine effectiveness was 40 % (95 % CI: 26-53 %) overall, 48 % (95 % CI: 31-61 %) among those vaccinated < 6 weeks of onset and 29 % (95 % CI: 3-49 %) at 6-14 weeks. Our results suggest that COVID-19 vaccines administered to target groups during the autumn 2023 campaigns showed clinically significant effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed, medically attended symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the 3 months following vaccination. A longer study period will allow for further variant-specific COVID-19 VE estimates, better understanding decline in VE and informing booster administration policies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Within influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies at primary care level with a laboratory-confirmed outcome, clinical case definitions for recruitment of patients can vary. We used the 2022-23 VEBIS primary care European multicentre study end-of-season data to evaluate whether the clinical case definition affected IVE estimates., Methods: We estimated VE using a multicentre test-negative case-control design. We measured VE against any influenza and influenza (sub)types, by age group (0-14, 15-64, ≥65 years) and by influenza vaccine target group, using logistic regression. We estimated IVE among patients meeting the European Union (EU) acute respiratory infection (ARI) case definition and among those meeting the EU influenza-like illness (ILI) case definition, including only sites providing information on specific symptoms and recruiting patients using an ARI case definition (as the EU ILI case definition is a subset of the EU ARI one)., Results: We included 24 319 patients meeting the EU ARI case definition, of whom 21 804 patients (90 %) meet the EU ILI case definition, for the overall pooled VE analysis against any influenza. The overall and influenza (sub)type-specific VE varied by ≤2 % between EU ILI and EU ARI populations., Discussion: Among all analyses, we found similar VE estimates between the EU ILI and EU ARI populations, with few (10%) additional non-ILI ARI patients recruited. These results indicate that VE in the 2022-23 influenza season was not affected by use of a different clinical case definition for recruitment, although we recommend investigating whether this holds true for next seasons., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Monitoring effectiveness of pertussis vaccines is necessary to adapt vaccination strategies. PERTINENT, Pertussis in Infants European Network, is an active sentinel surveillance system implemented in 35 hospitals across six EU/EEA countries. We aim to measure pertussis vaccines effectiveness (VE) by dose against hospitalisation in infants aged <1 year., Methods: From December 2015 to December 2019, participating hospitals recruited all infants with pertussis-like symptoms. Cases were vaccine-eligible infants testing positive for Bordetella pertussis by PCR or culture; controls were those testing negative to all Bordetella spp. For each vaccine dose, we defined an infant as vaccinated if she/he received the corresponding dose >14 days before symptoms. Unvaccinated were those who did not receive any dose. We calculated (one-stage model) pooled VE as 100*(1-odds ratio of vaccination) adjusted for country, onset date (in 3-month categories) and age-group (when sample allowed it)., Results: Of 1,393 infants eligible for vaccination, we included 259 cases and 746 controls. Median age was 16 weeks for cases and 19 weeks for controls (p < 0.001). Median birth weight and gestational age were 3,235 g and week 39 for cases, 3,113 g and week 39 for controls. Among cases, 119 (46 %) were vaccinated: 74 with one dose, 37 two doses, 8 three doses. Among controls, 469 (63 %) were vaccinated: 233 with one dose, 206 two doses, 30 three doses. Adjusted VE after at least one dose was 59 % (95 %CI: 36-73). Adjusted VE was 48 % (95 %CI: 5-71) for dose one (416 eligible infants) and 76 % (95 %CI: 43-90) for dose two (258 eligible infants). Only 42 infants were eligible for the third dose., Conclusions: Our results suggest moderate one-dose and two-dose VE in infants. Larger sample size would allow more precise estimates for dose one, two and three., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest No conflict of interest to declare except for Elmira Flem who has been employed since April 2019 by Merck & Co., Inc., North Wales, PA, USA. The work for the current study was conducted by Dr. Flem under the previous affiliation at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: PERTINENT is an active hospital-based surveillance system for pertussis in infants. In 2019, four of the six participating European countries recommended pertussis vaccination in pregnancy. Among infants aged <2 months, we measured the vaccine effectiveness (VE) in pregnancy; among infants aged 2-11 months, VE of vaccination in pregnancy and of primary vaccination (PV)., Methods: From December 2015 to 2019, we included all infants aged <1 year presenting with pertussis-like symptoms. Using a test-negative-design, cases were infants testing positive for Bordetella pertussis by PCR or culture. Controls were those testing negative for all Bordetella species. Vaccinated mothers were those who received vaccine in pregnancy. Vaccinated infants were those who received ≥1 dose of PV > 14 days before symptom onset. We excluded infants with unknown maternal or PV status or with mothers vaccinated ≤14 days before delivery. We calculated pooled VE as 100 * (1-odds ratio of vaccination) adjusted for study site, onset date in quarters and infants' age group., Results: Of 829 infants presenting with pertussis-like symptoms, 336 (41%) were too young for PV. For the VE in pregnancy analysis, we included 75 cases and 201 controls. Vaccination in pregnancy was recorded for 9 cases (12%) and 92 controls (46%), adjusted VE was between 75% [95%CI: 35-91%] and 88% [95%CI: 57-96%]. Of 493 infants eligible for PV, we included 123 cases and 253 controls. Thirty-one cases and 98 controls recorded both PV with ≥ 1 dose and vaccination in pregnancy, adjusted VE was between 74% [95%CI: 33-90] and 95% [95%CI: 69-99]; 27 cases and 53 controls recorded PV only, adjusted VE was between 68% [95%CI: 27-86] and 94% [95%CI: 59-99]., Conclusion: Our findings suggest that vaccination in pregnancy reduces pertussis incidence in infants too young for PV. In infants aged 2-11 months, PV only and both PV and vaccination in pregnancy provide significant protection against severe pertussis., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The elimination of rubella and prevention of congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) by 2015 are established goals for Europe. Our aim was to review the epidemiology of rubella in relation to this goal., Material and Methods: National surveillance institutions from 32 European countries provided information on rubella and CRS surveillance systems and data for 2000-08. We reported the number of notified rubella cases by year for countries with a national mandatory notification system for rubella covering total country population consistently throughout 2000-08 and analysed rubella surveillance data for 2008., Results: Throughout 2000-08, 24 countries conducted passive routine surveillance based on mandatory reporting rubella covering total country population. Altogether these countries reported 526,751 rubella cases. The median incidence per million inhabitants declined from 7.2 in 2000 to 0.3 in 2008. By 2008, the number of countries with mandatory notification systems for rubella increased to 28. These countries reported 21,475 rubella cases of which 1.5% (n=317) were laboratory-confirmed. Most cases (n=21,075; 98%) were reported from Poland, Italy and Romania. Ten countries reported zero rubella cases and five others reported an incidence of <1 per million inhabitants. In 2008, 20 CRS cases were reported from five countries., Conclusion: The overall decline in rubella incidence and increase in the number of countries conducting rubella surveillance through a mandatory notification system are notable achievements toward the goal of rubella elimination in Europe. However, in a few countries with high rubella incidence the risk for CRS still exists. Achievement and maintenance of the required high vaccination coverage and high-quality surveillance of rubella and CRS including laboratory testing of all suspected cases are fundamental to eliminate rubella and prevent CRS in Europe., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)