Search

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) provide protection against infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and are highly effective against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among eligible persons who receive 2 doses (1,2). However, vaccine effectiveness (VE) among persons with immunocompromising conditions* is lower than that among immunocompetent persons (2), and VE declines after several months among all persons (3). On August 12, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a third mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series ≥28 days after dose 2 for persons aged ≥12 years with immunocompromising conditions, and, on November 19, 2021, as a booster dose for all adults aged ≥18 years at least 6 months after dose 2, changed to ≥5 months after dose 2 on January 3, 2022 (4,5,6). Among 2,952 adults (including 1,385 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,567 COVID-19-negative controls) hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals during August 19-December 15, 2021, effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was compared between adults eligible for but who had not received a third vaccine dose (1,251) and vaccine-eligible adults who received a third dose ≥7 days before illness onset (312). Among 1,875 adults without immunocompromising conditions (including 1,065 [57%] unvaccinated, 679 [36%] 2-dose recipients, and 131 [7%] 3-dose [booster] recipients), VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was higher among those who received a booster dose (97%; 95% CI = 95%-99%) compared with that among 2-dose recipients (82%; 95% CI = 77%-86%) (p <0.001). Among 1,077 adults with immunocompromising conditions (including 324 [30%] unvaccinated, 572 [53%] 2-dose recipients, and 181 [17%] 3-dose recipients), VE was higher among those who received a third dose to complete a primary series (88%; 95% CI = 81%-93%) compared with 2-dose recipients (69%; 95% CI = 57%-78%) (p <0.001). Administration of a third COVID-19 mRNA vaccine dose as part of a primary series among immunocompromised adults, or as a booster dose among immunocompetent adults, provides improved protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton, institutional fees from Faron Pharmaceuticals and Sedana, grants from Janssen, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Department of Defense (DoD), book royalties from Oxford University and Brigham Young University, outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang was a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals in 2018 and consulted for PureTech Health in 2020. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH during the conduct of the study. Abhijit Duggal reports grants from NIH and participation on a steering committee for ALung Technologies, Inc., outside the submitted work. Matthew C. Exline reports support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and is a data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) member from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from CDC-Vanderbilt University Medical Center for the submitted work, CDC-Abt Associates, CDC-Westat, Janssen and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, AHRQ, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager reports salary support from Incyte Corporation and EMPACT Precision Medicine via Vanderbilt University Medical Center and grants from NHLBI, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and grants from Quidel outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, Ely Lilly, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche, outside the submitted work. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, and the Marcus Foundation; contract fees from bioMerieux, Endpoint LLC, and Entegrion Inc, outside the submitted work; in addition, Dr. Lindsell has a patent for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued. Emily T. Martin reports personal fees from Pfizer and grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH, Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Cytovale, Inc., and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. Wesley H. Self reports consulting fees from Aeprio Pharmaceuticals and Merck, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Importance: A comprehensive understanding of the benefits of COVID-19 vaccination requires consideration of disease attenuation, determined as whether people who develop COVID-19 despite vaccination have lower disease severity than unvaccinated people., Objective: To evaluate the association between vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines-mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)-and COVID-19 hospitalization, and, among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the association with progression to critical disease., Design, Setting, and Participants: A US 21-site case-control analysis of 4513 adults hospitalized between March 11 and August 15, 2021, with 28-day outcome data on death and mechanical ventilation available for patients enrolled through July 14, 2021. Date of final follow-up was August 8, 2021., Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination., Main Outcomes and Measures: Associations were evaluated between prior vaccination and (1) hospitalization for COVID-19, in which case patients were those hospitalized for COVID-19 and control patients were those hospitalized for an alternative diagnosis; and (2) disease progression among patients hospitalized for COVID-19, in which cases and controls were COVID-19 patients with and without progression to death or mechanical ventilation, respectively. Associations were measured with multivariable logistic regression., Results: Among 4513 patients (median age, 59 years [IQR, 45-69]; 2202 [48.8%] women; 23.0% non-Hispanic Black individuals, 15.9% Hispanic individuals, and 20.1% with an immunocompromising condition), 1983 were case patients with COVID-19 and 2530 were controls without COVID-19. Unvaccinated patients accounted for 84.2% (1669/1983) of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Hospitalization for COVID-19 was significantly associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (cases, 15.8%; controls, 54.8%; adjusted OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.13-0.18), including for sequenced SARS-CoV-2 Alpha (8.7% vs 51.7%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.16) and Delta variants (21.9% vs 61.8%; aOR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.10-0.21). This association was stronger for immunocompetent patients (11.2% vs 53.5%; aOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.09-0.13) than immunocompromised patients (40.1% vs 58.8%; aOR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.69) (P < .001) and weaker at more than 120 days since vaccination with BNT162b2 (5.8% vs 11.5%; aOR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.27-0.49) than with mRNA-1273 (1.9% vs 8.3%; aOR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.23) (P < .001). Among 1197 patients hospitalized with COVID-19, death or invasive mechanical ventilation by day 28 was associated with decreased likelihood of vaccination (12.0% vs 24.7%; aOR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.58)., Conclusions and Relevance: Vaccination with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was significantly less likely among patients with COVID-19 hospitalization and disease progression to death or mechanical ventilation. These findings are consistent with risk reduction among vaccine breakthrough infections compared with absence of vaccination.

Three COVID-19 vaccines are authorized or approved for use among adults in the United States (1,2). Two 2-dose mRNA vaccines, mRNA-1273 from Moderna and BNT162b2 from Pfizer-BioNTech, received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2020 for persons aged ≥18 years and aged ≥16 years, respectively. A 1-dose viral vector vaccine (Ad26.COV2 from Janssen [Johnson & Johnson]) received EUA in February 2021 for persons aged ≥18 years (3). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine received FDA approval for persons aged ≥16 years on August 23, 2021 (4). Current guidelines from FDA and CDC recommend vaccination of eligible persons with one of these three products, without preference for any specific vaccine (4,5). To assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) of these three products in preventing COVID-19 hospitalization, CDC and collaborators conducted a case-control analysis among 3,689 adults aged ≥18 years who were hospitalized at 21 U.S. hospitals across 18 states during March 11-August 15, 2021. An additional analysis compared serum antibody levels (anti-spike immunoglobulin G [IgG] and anti-receptor binding domain [RBD] IgG) to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, among 100 healthy volunteers enrolled at three hospitals 2-6 weeks after full vaccination with the Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, or Janssen COVID-19 vaccine. Patients with immunocompromising conditions were excluded. VE against COVID-19 hospitalizations was higher for the Moderna vaccine (93%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 91%-95%) than for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (88%; 95% CI = 85%-91%) (p = 0.011); VE for both mRNA vaccines was higher than that for the Janssen vaccine (71%; 95% CI = 56%-81%) (all p<0.001). Protection for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine declined 4 months after vaccination. Postvaccination anti-spike IgG and anti-RBD IgG levels were significantly lower in persons vaccinated with the Janssen vaccine than the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines. Although these real-world data suggest some variation in levels of protection by vaccine, all FDA-approved or authorized COVID-19 vaccines provide substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Wesley H. Self reports grants and consultant fees from Merck and consultant fees from Aerpio Pharmaceuticals. Adit A. Ginde reports grant support from AbbVie and Faron Pharmaceuticals. Jonathan D. Casey reports a grant (N23HL153584) from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). D. Clark Files reports consultant fees from Cytovale and membership on a Medpace Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). David N. Hager reports salary support from Incyte Corporation, EMPACT Precision Medicine, and the Marcus Foundation. Michelle N. Gong reports grant support from NIH and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and fees for participating on a DSMB for Regeneron and for participating on a scientific advisory panel for Philips Healthcare. Daniel J. Henning reports consulting fees from Cytovale and Opticyte. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, institutional fees from Asahi Kasei Pharma and from Regeneron. Samuel M. Brown reports fees from Hamilton for chairing a DSMB, and institutional fees from Faron, Sedana, and Janssen; grants from Sedana, Janssen, NIH, and the Department of Defense (DoD); book royalties from Oxford University and Brigham Young University; and personal fees from New York University for service on a DSMB. Emily T. Martin reports personal fees from Pfizer for unrelated work and a grant from Merck for unrelated work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, 4D Medical, Lung LLC, and Reata Pharmaceuticals. Arnold S. Monto reports consulting fees from Sanofi-Pasteur and Seqirus. Steven Y. Chang was a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals and a Consultant for PureTech Health. Jennie H. Kwon reports grant support from NIH. Matthew C. Exline reports talks on nutrition in COVID pneumonia at APEN conference sponsored by Abbott Labs. Natasha Halasa reports grants from Sanofi and Quidel. James D. Chappell reports a grant from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH. Adam S. Lauring reports consultant fees from Sanofi and fees from Roche for membership on a trial steering committee. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultant fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur and grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, AHRQ, and Sanofi. Todd W. Rice reports personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc., as the Director of Medical Affairs, consultant fees from Avisa Pharma, LLC; and DSMB membership fees from Sanofi. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, and the Marcus Foundation; organizational contract fees from bioMerieux, Endpoint LLC, and Entegrion, Inc.; and a patent issued to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality and stresses hospital resources during periods of increased circulation. We evaluated the effectiveness of the 2019-2020 influenza vaccine against influenza-associated hospitalization in the United States., Methods: We included adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness at 14 hospitals and tested for influenza viruses by reserve-transcription polymerase chain reaction. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated by comparing the odds of current-season influenza vaccination in test-positive influenza cases vs test-negative controls, adjusting for confounders. VE was stratified by age and major circulating influenza types along with A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic subgroups., Results: A total of 3116 participants were included, including 18% (n = 553) influenza-positive cases. Median age was 63 years. Sixty-seven percent (n = 2079) received vaccination. Overall adjusted VE against influenza viruses was 41% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27%-52%). VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses was 40% (95% CI, 24%-53%) and 33% against B viruses (95% CI, 0-56%). Of the 2 major A(H1N1)pdm09 subgroups (representing 90% of sequenced H1N1 viruses), VE against one group (5A + 187A,189E) was 59% (95% CI, 34%-75%) whereas no VE was observed against the other group (5A + 156K) (-1% [95% CI, -61% to 37%])., Conclusions: In a primarily older population, influenza vaccination was associated with a 41% reduction in risk of hospitalized influenza illness., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Real-world evaluations have demonstrated high effectiveness of vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations (1-4) measured shortly after vaccination; longer follow-up is needed to assess durability of protection. In an evaluation at 21 hospitals in 18 states, the duration of mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was assessed among adults aged ≥18 years. Among 3,089 hospitalized adults (including 1,194 COVID-19 case-patients and 1,895 non-COVID-19 control-patients), the median age was 59 years, 48.7% were female, and 21.1% had an immunocompromising condition. Overall, 141 (11.8%) case-patients and 988 (52.1%) controls were fully vaccinated (defined as receipt of the second dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines ≥14 days before illness onset), with a median interval of 65 days (range = 14-166 days) after receipt of second dose. VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalization during the full surveillance period was 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 82%-88%) overall and 90% (95% CI = 87%-92%) among adults without immunocompromising conditions. VE against COVID-19- associated hospitalization was 86% (95% CI = 82%-90%) 2-12 weeks and 84% (95% CI = 77%-90%) 13-24 weeks from receipt of the second vaccine dose, with no significant change between these periods (p = 0.854). Whole genome sequencing of 454 case-patient specimens found that 242 (53.3%) belonged to the B.1.1.7 (Alpha) lineage and 74 (16.3%) to the B.1.617.2 (Delta) lineage. Effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was sustained over a 24-week period, including among groups at higher risk for severe COVID-19; ongoing monitoring is needed as new SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge. To reduce their risk for hospitalization, all eligible persons should be offered COVID-19 vaccination., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Samuel M. Brown reports personal fees from Hamilton, institutional fees from Faron Pharmaceuticals and Sedana, grants from Janssen, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Department of Defense (DoD), book royalties from Oxford University and Brigham Young University, outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang was a speaker for La Jolla Pharmaceuticals in 2018 and consulted for PureTech Health in 2020. James D. Chappell reports grants from NIH during the conduct of the study. Matthew C. Exline reports support from Abbott Labs for sponsored talks, outside the submitted work. D. Clark Files reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and is a data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) member from Medpace, outside the submitted work. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from NIH, DoD, AbbVie, and Faron Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from NIH and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), DSMB membership fees from Regeneron, and personal fees from Philips Healthcare, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consultancy fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur; grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, NIH, the Food and Drug Administration, AHQR, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. David N. Hager reports salary support from Incyte Corporation, the Marcus Foundation, and EMPACT Precision Medicine via Vanderbilt University Medical Center, outside the submitted work. Natasha Halasa reports grants and nonfinancial support from Sanofi, and Quidel outside the submitted work. Daniel J. Henning reports personal consultant fees from Cytovale and Opticyte. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Johnson & Johnson, 4D Medical, Lung LLC, and Reata Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Adam S. Lauring reports personal fees from Sanofi and Roche, outside the submitted work. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from NIH, DoD, and the Marcus Foundation; contract fees from bioMerieux, Endpoint LLC, and Entegrion Inc, outside the submitted work and has a patent for risk stratification in sepsis and septic shock issued. Emily T. Martin reports personal fees from Pfizer and grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Arnold S. Monto reports consulting fees from Sanofi-Pasteur and Seqirus outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from NIH and Janssen Pharmaceuticals and institutional support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports personal fees from Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and personal fees from Avisa Pharma, LLC and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Wesley H. Self reports consulting fees from Aeprio Pharmaceuticals and Merck outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations among adults during the 2018-2019 influenza season. Adults admitted with acute respiratory illness to 14 hospitals of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) and testing positive for influenza were cases; patients testing negative were controls. VE was estimated using logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting. We analyzed data from 2863 patients with a mean age of 63 years. Adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalization was 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 25%-68%). Adjusted VE against influenza A(H3N2) virus-associated hospitalization was -2% (95% CI, -65% to 37%) and differed significantly by age, with VE of -130% (95% CI, -374% to -27%) among adults 18 to ≤56 years of age. Although vaccination halved the risk of influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-associated hospitalizations, it conferred no protection against influenza A(H3N2)-associated hospitalizations. We observed negative VE for young and middle-aged adults but cannot exclude residual confounding as a potential explanation., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2020.)

Adults aged ≥65 years are at increased risk for severe outcomes from COVID-19 and were identified as a priority group to receive the first COVID-19 vaccines approved for use under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) in the United States (1-3). In an evaluation at 24 hospitals in 14 states,* the effectiveness of partial or full vaccination † with Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccines against COVID-19-associated hospitalization was assessed among adults aged ≥65 years. Among 417 hospitalized adults aged ≥65 years (including 187 case-patients and 230 controls), the median age was 73 years, 48% were female, 73% were non-Hispanic White, 17% were non-Hispanic Black, 6% were Hispanic, and 4% lived in a long-term care facility. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years was estimated to be 94% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 49%-99%) for full vaccination and 64% (95% CI = 28%-82%) for partial vaccination. These findings are consistent with efficacy determined from clinical trials in the subgroup of adults aged ≥65 years (4,5). This multisite U.S. evaluation under real-world conditions suggests that vaccination provided protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years. Vaccination is a critical tool for reducing severe COVID-19 in groups at high risk., Competing Interests: All authors have completed and submitted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors form for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. Christopher J. Lindsell reports grants from National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Defense, Marcus Foundation, Endpoint Health, Entegrion, bioMerieux, and Bioscape Digital, outside the submitted work. Jay S. Steingrub reports grants from National Institutes of Health, outside the submitted work. Akram Khan reports grants from United Therapeutics, Actelion Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron, and Reata Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. Samuel M. Brown reports grants from National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Defense, Intermountain Research and Medical Foundation, and Janssen, and consulting fees paid to his employer from Faron and Sedana, all outside the submitted work. Ithan D. Peltan reports grants from National Institutes of Health and, outside the submitted work, grants from Asahi Kasei Pharma, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Regeneron. Adit A. Ginde reports grants from National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Defense and AbbVie, outside the submitted work. Carlos G. Grijalva reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, and Sanofi-Pasteur, grants from Campbell Alliance/Syneos Health, National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration, and Agency for Health Care Research and Quality, outside the submitted work. Michelle N. Gong reports grants from National Institutes of Health, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and consulting fees from Regeneron, Philips Healthcare, all outside the submitted work. Steven Y. Chang reports consulting fees from PureTech Health and speaker fees from La Jolla Pharmaceuticals, both outside the submitted work. Jonathan D. Casey reports grants from National Institutes of Health, outside the submitted work. Todd W. Rice reports grants from National Institutes of Health and Endpoint Health, consulting work for Cumberland Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and Sanofi, Inc., outside the submitted work. Manjusha Gaglani reports grants from CDC-Abt Associates, outside the submitted work. Emily T. Martin reports personal fees from Pfizer and grants from Merck, outside the submitted work. Anurag Malani reports shareholder of Pfizer pharmaceuticals. Arnold S. Monto reports personal fees from Sanofi Pasteur and Seqirus, outside the submitted work. Fernanda P. Silveira reports grants from Shire, Qiagen, Ansun, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. Richard K. Zimmerman reports grants from Sanofi Pasteur, outside the submitted work. Donald B. Middleton reports grants and personal fees from Pfizer and personal fees from Seqirus, Sanofi Pasteur, and GlaxoSmithKline, outside the submitted work. No other potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Background: Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) varies by season, circulating influenza strain, age, and geographic location. There have been few studies of influenza VE among hospitalized children, particularly in Europe and the Middle East., Methods: We estimated VE against influenza hospitalization among children aged 6 months to 8 years at Clalit Health Services hospitals in Israel in the 2015-2016, 2016-2017, and 2017-2018 influenza seasons, using the test-negative design. Estimates were computed for full and partial vaccination., Results: We included 326 influenza-positive case patients and 2821 influenza-negative controls (140 case patients and 971 controls from 2015-2016, 36 case patients and 1069 controls from 2016-2017, and 150 case patients and 781 controls from 2017-2018). Over all seasons, VE was 53.9% for full vaccination (95% confidence interval [CI], 38.6%-68.3%), and 25.6% for partial vaccination (-3% to 47%). In 2015-2016, most viruses were influenza A(H1N1) and vaccine lineage-mismatched influenza B/Victoria; the VE for fully vaccinated children was statistically significant for influenza A (80.7%; 95% CI, 40.3%-96.1%) but not B (23.0%; -38.5% to 59.4%). During 2016-2017, influenza A(H3N2) predominated, and VE was (70.8%; 95% CI, 17.4%-92.4%). In 2017-2018, influenza A(H3N2), H1N1 and lineage-mismatched influenza B/Yamagata cocirculated; VE was statistically significant for influenza B (63.0%; 95% CI, 24.2%-83.7%) but not influenza A (46.3%; -7.2% to 75.3%)., Conclusions: Influenza vaccine was effective in preventing hospitalizations among fully vaccinated Israeli children over 3 influenza seasons, but not among partially vaccinated children. There was cross-lineage protection in a season where the vaccine contained B/Victoria and the circulating strain was B/Yamagata, but not in a season with the opposite vaccine-circulating strain distribution., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Evidence establishing effectiveness of influenza vaccination for prevention of severe illness is limited. The US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) is a multiyear test-negative case-control study initiated in 2015-2016 to estimate effectiveness of vaccine in preventing influenza hospitalization among adults., Methods: Adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 8 US hospitals with acute respiratory illness and testing positive for influenza by polymerase chain reaction were cases; those testing negative were controls. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated with logistic regression adjusting for age, comorbidities, and other confounding factors and stratified by frailty, 2-year vaccination history, and clinical presentation., Results: We analyzed data from 236 cases and 1231 controls; mean age was 58 years. More than 90% of patients had ≥1 comorbidity elevating risk of influenza complications. Fifty percent of cases and 70% of controls were vaccinated. Vaccination was 51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29%-65%) and 53% (95% CI, 11%-76%) effective in preventing hospitalization due to influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza B virus infection, respectively. Vaccine was protective for all age groups., Conclusions: During the 2015-2016 US influenza A(H1N1)pdm09-predominant season, we found that vaccination halved the risk of influenza-association hospitalization among adults, most of whom were at increased risk of serious influenza complications due to comorbidity or age., (Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2019.)

Over five seasons, we determined the proportion of outpatients with laboratory-confirmed, influenza-associated illness who were hospitalized within 30 days following the outpatient visit. Overall, 136 (1.7%) of 7813 influenza-positive patients were hospitalized a median of 4 days after an outpatient visit. Patients aged ≥ 65 years and those with high-risk conditions were at increased risk of hospitalization. After controlling for age and high-risk conditions, vaccination status and infecting influenza virus type were not associated with hospitalization risk among adults., (Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Influenza vaccines are important for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalization. However, the effectiveness of influenza vaccines can vary by year and influenza type and subtype and mechanisms underlying this variation are incompletely understood. Assessments of serologic correlates of protection can support interpretation of influenza vaccine effectiveness in hospitalized populations., Methods: We enrolled adults hospitalized for treatment of acute respiratory illnesses during the 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 influenza seasons whose symptoms began <10 days prior to enrollment. Influenza infection status was determined by RT-PCR. Influenza vaccination status was defined by self-report and medical record/registry documentation. Serum specimens collected at hospital admission were tested in hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) and neuraminidase-inhibition (NAI) assays. We evaluated how well antibody measured in these specimens represented pre-infection immune status, and measured associations between antibody and influenza vaccination and infection., Results: Serum specimens were retrieved for 315 participants enrolled during the 2014-2015 season and 339 participants during the 2015-2016 season. Specimens were collected within 3 days of illness onset from 65% of participants. Geometric mean titers (GMTs) did not vary by the number of days from illness onset to specimen collection among influenza positive participants suggesting that measured antibody was representative of pre-infection immune status rather than a de novo response to infection. In both seasons, vaccinated participants had higher HAI and NAI GMTs than unvaccinated. HAI titers against the 2014-2015 A(H3N2) vaccine strain did not correlate with protection from infection with antigenically-drifted A(H3N2) viruses that circulated that season. In contrast, higher HAI titers against the A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine strain were associated with reduced odds of A(H1N1)pdm09 infection in 2015-2016., Conclusions: Serum collected shortly after illness onset at hospital admission can be used to assess correlates of protection against influenza infection. Broader implementation of similar studies would provide an opportunity to understand the successes and shortcomings of current influenza vaccines., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The importance of Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) is increasingly recognized in hospitalized adults, but mainly in those ≥ 65 years., Objectives: We sought to describe the epidemiology and clinical severity of RSV compared to influenza in hospitalized adults ≥18 years., Study Design: Adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illnesses (ARI) of ≤10days duration were prospectively enrolled from two Michigan hospitals during two influenza seasons. Collected specimens were tested for RSV and influenza by real-time, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Viral load and subtype were determined for RSV-positive specimens. We evaluated factors associated with RSV and outcomes of infection using multivariable logistic regression. RSV-positive patients were separately compared to two reference groups: RSV-negative and influenza-negative, and influenza-positive patients., Results: RSV was detected in 84 (7%) of 1259 hospitalized individuals (55 RSV-B, 29 RSV-A). The highest prevalence was found in 50-64year olds (40/460; 8.7%); 98% of RSV cases in this age group had at least one chronic comorbidity. RSV detection was associated with obesity (OR: 1.71 95% CI: 0.99-3.06, p=0.03). Individuals with RSV were admitted to the hospital later in their illness and had a higher median Charlson comborbidity index (3 vs 2 p<0.001) compared to those with influenza. Clinical severity of RSV-associated hospitalizations was similar to influenza-associated hospitalizations., Discussion: In this study we observed the highest frequency of RSV-associated hospitalizations among adult 50-64 years old; many of whom had chronic comorbidities. Our results suggest the potential benefit of including these individuals in future RSV vaccination strategies., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The 2014-2015 influenza season was severe, with circulating influenza A (H3N2) viruses that were antigenically drifted from the vaccine virus. Reported vaccine effectiveness (VE) estimates from ambulatory care settings were markedly decreased., Methods: Adults, hospitalized at 2 hospitals in southeast Michigan for acute respiratory illnesses, defined by admission diagnoses, of ≤10 days duration were prospectively enrolled. Throat and nasal swab specimens were collected, combined, and tested for influenza by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. VE was estimated by comparing the vaccination status of those testing positive for influenza with those testing negative in logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, hospital, calendar time, time from illness onset to specimen collection, frailty score, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI)., Results: Among 624 patients included in the analysis, 421 (68%) were vaccinated, 337 (54%) were female, 220 (35%) were age ≥65 years, and 92% had CCI > 0, indicating ≥1 comorbid conditions. Ninety-eight (16%) patients tested positive for influenza A (H3N2); among 60 (61%) A (H3N2) viruses tested by pyrosequencing, 53 (88%) belonged to the drifted 3C.2a genetic group. Adjusted VE was 43% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-67) against influenza A (H3N2); 40% (95% CI, -13 to 68) for those <65 years, and 48% (95% CI, -33 to 80) for those ≥65 years. Sensitivity analyses largely supported these estimates., Conclusions: VE estimates appeared higher than reports from similar studies in ambulatory care settings, suggesting that the 2014-2015 vaccine may have been more effective in preventing severe illness requiring hospitalization., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines were authorized in the United States in December 2020. Although vaccine effectiveness (VE) against mild infection declines markedly after several months, limited understanding exists on the long-term durability of protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization.MethodsCase-control analysis of adults (≥18 years) hospitalized at 21 hospitals in 18 states 11 March-15 December 2021, including COVID-19 case patients and reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-negative controls. We included adults who were unvaccinated or vaccinated with 2 doses of a mRNA vaccine before the date of illness onset. VE over time was assessed using logistic regression comparing odds of vaccination in cases versus controls, adjusting for confounders. Models included dichotomous time (

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

BackgroundTest-negative design (TND) studies have produced validated estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) for influenza vaccine studies. However, syndrome-negative controls have been proposed for differentiating bias and true estimates in VE evaluations for COVID-19. To understand the use of alternative control groups, we compared characteristics and VE estimates of syndrome-negative and test-negative VE controls.MethodsAdults hospitalized at 21 medical centers in 18 states March 11-August 31, 2021 were eligible for analysis. Case patients had symptomatic acute respiratory infection (ARI) and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Control groups were test-negative patients with ARI but negative SARS-CoV-2 testing, and syndrome-negative controls were without ARI and negative SARS-CoV-2 testing. Chi square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to detect differences in baseline characteristics. VE against COVID-19 hospitalization was calculated using logistic regression comparing adjusted odds of prior mRNA vaccination between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and each control group.Results5811 adults (2726 cases, 1696 test-negative controls, and 1389 syndrome-negative controls) were included. Control groups differed across characteristics including age, race/ethnicity, employment, previous hospitalizations, medical conditions, and immunosuppression. However, control-group-specific VE estimates were very similar. Among immunocompetent patients aged 18-64 years, VE was 93 % (95 % CI: 90-94) using syndrome-negative controls and 91 % (95 % CI: 88-93) using test-negative controls.ConclusionsDespite demographic and clinical differences between control groups, the use of either control group produced similar VE estimates across age groups and immunosuppression status. These findings support the use of test-negative controls and increase confidence in COVID-19 VE estimates produced by test-negative design studies.

Background . Adults in the United States (US) began receiving the adenovirus vector coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine, Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson [Janssen]), in February 2021. We evaluated Ad26.COV2.S vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization and high disease severity during the first 10 months of its use. Methods . In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults (≥18 years) hospitalized 11 March to 15 December 2021, we estimated VE against susceptibility to COVID-19 hospitalization (VEs), comparing odds of prior vaccination with a single dose Ad26.COV2.S vaccine between hospitalized cases with COVID-19 and controls without COVID-19. Among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, we estimated VE against disease progression (VEp) to death or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), comparing odds of prior vaccination between patients with and without progression. Results . After excluding patients receiving mRNA vaccines, among 3979 COVID-19 case-patients (5% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S) and 2229 controls (13% vaccinated with Ad26.COV2.S), VEs of Ad26.COV2.S against COVID-19 hospitalization was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 63-75%) overall, including 55% (29-72%) among immunocompromised patients, and 72% (64-77%) among immunocompetent patients, for whom VEs was similar at 14-90 days (73% [59-82%]), 91-180 days (71% [60-80%]), and 181-274 days (70% [54-81%]) postvaccination. Among hospitalized COVID-19 case-patients, VEp was 46% (18-65%) among immunocompetent patients. Conclusions . The Ad26.COV2.S COVID-19 vaccine reduced the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization by 72% among immunocompetent adults without waning through 6 months postvaccination. After hospitalization for COVID-19, vaccinated immunocompetent patients were less likely to require IMV or die compared to unvaccinated immunocompetent patients.

Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 hospitalization was evaluated among immunocompetent adults (≥18 years) during March-August 2021 using a case-control design. Among 1669 hospitalized COVID-19 cases (11% fully vaccinated) and 1950 RT-PCR-negative controls (54% fully vaccinated), VE was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93%-98%) among patients with no chronic medical conditions and 83% (95% CI, 76%-88%) among patients with ≥ 3 categories of conditions. VE was similar between those aged 18-64 years versus ≥65 years (P > .05). VE against severe COVID-19 was very high among adults without chronic conditions and lessened with increasing comorbidity burden.

BackgroundAs severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination coverage increases in the United States, there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes.MethodsIn a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11-May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent COVID-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with COVID-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2.ResultsAmong 1212 participants, including 593 cases and 619 controls, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.9% were Hispanic, and 21.0% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B0.1.1.7 (Alpha) was the most common variant (67.9% of viruses with lineage determined). Full vaccination (receipt of 2 vaccine doses ≥14 days before illness onset) had been received by 8.2% of cases and 36.4% of controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 87.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.7-91.3). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.4%; 95% CI, 79.3-9.7). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough COVID hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were ≥50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (62.9%; 95% CI,20.8-82.6) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI, 85.6-94.8).ConclusionDuring March-May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing COVID-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

ObjectivesTo characterize the clinical severity of covid-19 associated with the alpha, delta, and omicron SARS-CoV-2 variants among adults admitted to hospital and to compare the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines to prevent hospital admissions related to each variant.DesignCase-control study.Setting21 hospitals across the United States.Participants11 690 adults (≥18 years) admitted to hospital: 5728 with covid-19 (cases) and 5962 without covid-19 (controls). Patients were classified into SARS-CoV-2 variant groups based on viral whole genome sequencing, and, if sequencing did not reveal a lineage, by the predominant circulating variant at the time of hospital admission: alpha (11 March to 3 July 2021), delta (4 July to 25 December 2021), and omicron (26 December 2021 to 14 January 2022).Main outcome measuresVaccine effectiveness calculated using a test negative design for mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 related hospital admissions by each variant (alpha, delta, omicron). Among patients admitted to hospital with covid-19, disease severity on the World Health Organization's clinical progression scale was compared among variants using proportional odds regression.ResultsEffectiveness of the mRNA vaccines to prevent covid-19 associated hospital admissions was 85% (95% confidence interval 82% to 88%) for two vaccine doses against the alpha variant, 85% (83% to 87%) for two doses against the delta variant, 94% (92% to 95%) for three doses against the delta variant, 65% (51% to 75%) for two doses against the omicron variant; and 86% (77% to 91%) for three doses against the omicron variant. In-hospital mortality was 7.6% (81/1060) for alpha, 12.2% (461/3788) for delta, and 7.1% (40/565) for omicron. Among unvaccinated patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital, severity on the WHO clinical progression scale was higher for the delta versus alpha variant (adjusted proportional odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.46), and lower for the omicron versus delta variant (0.61, 0.49 to 0.77). Compared with unvaccinated patients, severity was lower for vaccinated patients for each variant, including alpha (adjusted proportional odds ratio 0.33, 0.23 to 0.49), delta (0.44, 0.37 to 0.51), and omicron (0.61, 0.44 to 0.85).ConclusionsmRNA vaccines were found to be highly effective in preventing covid-19 associated hospital admissions related to the alpha, delta, and omicron variants, but three vaccine doses were required to achieve protection against omicron similar to the protection that two doses provided against the delta and alpha variants. Among adults admitted to hospital with covid-19, the omicron variant was associated with less severe disease than the delta variant but still resulted in substantial morbidity and mortality. Vaccinated patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 had significantly lower disease severity than unvaccinated patients for all the variants.

Background Current understanding of severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections in adults is limited by clinical underrecognition. We compared the prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of RSV infections vs influenza in adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illnesses (ARIs) in a prospective national surveillance network. Methods Hospitalized adults who met a standardized ARI case definition were prospectively enrolled across 3 respiratory seasons from hospitals participating across all sites of the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (2016–2019). All participants were tested for RSV and influenza using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assay. Multivariable logistic regression was used to test associations between laboratory-confirmed infection and characteristics and clinical outcomes. Results Among 10 311 hospitalized adults, 6% tested positive for RSV (n = 622), 18.8% for influenza (n = 1940), and 75.1% negative for RSV and influenza (n = 7749). Congestive heart failure (CHF) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was more frequent with RSV than influenza (CHF: 37.3% vs 28.8%, P <.0001; COPD: 47.6% vs 35.8%, P <.0001). Patients with RSV more frequently had longer admissions (odds ratio [OR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06–1.80) for stays >1 week) and mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.09–1.93) compared with influenza but not compared with the influenza-negative group (OR, 1.03; 95% CI,.82–1.28 and OR, 1.17; 95% CI,.91–1.49, respectively). Conclusions The prevalence of RSV across 3 seasons was considerable. Our findings suggest that those with RSV have worse outcomes compared with influenza and frequently have cardiopulmonary conditions. This study informs future vaccination strategies and underscores a need for RSV surveillance among adults with severe ARI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Evidence for vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza-associated pneumonia has varied by season, location, and strain. We estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified influenza-associated pneumonia during 2015–2016 to 2017–2018 seasons in the US Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN). Methods Among adults aged ≥18 years admitted to 10 US hospitals for acute respiratory illness (ARI), clinician-investigators used keywords from reports of chest imaging performed during 3 days around hospital admission to assign a diagnosis of "definite/probable pneumonia." We used a test-negative design to estimate VE against hospitalization for radiographically identified laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia, comparing reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction–confirmed influenza cases with test-negative subjects. Influenza vaccination status was documented in immunization records or self-reported, including date and location. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for age, site, season, calendar-time, and other factors. Results Of 4843 adults hospitalized with ARI included in the primary analysis, 266 (5.5%) had "definite/probable pneumonia" and confirmed influenza. Adjusted VE against hospitalization for any radiographically confirmed influenza-associated pneumonia was 38% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17–53%); by type/subtype, it was 74% (95% CI, 52–87%) influenza A (H1N1)pdm09, 25% (95% CI, −15% to 50%) A (H3N2), and 23% (95% CI, −32% to 54%) influenza B. Adjusted VE against intensive care for any influenza was 57% (95% CI, 19–77%). Conclusions Influenza vaccination was modestly effective among adults in preventing hospitalizations and the need for intensive care associated with influenza pneumonia. VE was significantly higher against A (H1N1)pdm09 and was low against A (H3N2) and B. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is frequently compared with influenza. The Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (HAIVEN) conducts studies on the etiology and characteristics of U.S. hospitalized adults with influenza. It began enrolling patients with COVID-19 hospitalizations in March 2020. Patients with influenza were compared with those with COVID-19 in the first months of the U.S. epidemic. Methods Adults aged ≥ 18 years admitted to hospitals in 4 sites with acute respiratory illness were tested by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for influenza and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus causing COVID-19. Demographic and illness characteristics were collected for influenza illnesses during 3 seasons 2016–2019. Similar data were collected on COVID-19 cases admitted before June 19, 2020. Results Age groups hospitalized with COVID-19 (n = 914) were similar to those admitted with influenza (n = 1937); 80% of patients with influenza and 75% of patients with COVID-19 were aged ≥50 years. Deaths from COVID-19 that occurred in younger patients were less often related to underlying conditions. White non-Hispanic persons were overrepresented in influenza (64%) compared with COVID-19 hospitalizations (37%). Greater severity and complications occurred with COVID-19 including more ICU admissions (AOR = 15.3 [95% CI: 11.6, 20.3]), ventilator use (AOR = 15.6 [95% CI: 10.7, 22.8]), 7 additional days of hospital stay in those discharged alive, and death during hospitalization (AOR = 19.8 [95% CI: 12.0, 32.7]). Conclusions While COVID-19 can cause a respiratory illness like influenza, it is associated with significantly greater severity of illness, longer hospital stays, and higher in-hospital deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We observed decreased effectiveness of influenza vaccine with increasing time since vaccination for prevention of influenza A(H3N2), influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and influenza B/Yamagata–associated hospitalizations among adults. Maximum vaccine effectiveness (VE) was observed shortly after vaccination, followed by an absolute decline in VE of about 8%–9% per month postvaccination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Demonstration of influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalized illness in addition to milder outpatient illness may strengthen vaccination messaging. Our objective was to compare patient characteristics and VE between United States (US) inpatient and outpatient VE networks. Methods We tested adults with acute respiratory illness (ARI) for influenza within 1 outpatient-based and 1 hospital-based VE network from 2015 through 2018. We compared age, sex, and high-risk conditions. The test-negative design was used to compare vaccination odds in influenza-positive cases vs influenza-negative controls. We estimated VE using logistic regression adjusting for site, age, sex, race/ethnicity, peak influenza activity, time to testing from, season (overall VE), and underlying conditions. VE differences (ΔVE) were assessed with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) determined through bootstrapping with significance defined as excluding the null. Results The networks enrolled 14 573 (4144 influenza-positive) outpatients and 6769 (1452 influenza-positive) inpatients. Inpatients were older (median, 62 years vs 49 years) and had more high-risk conditions (median, 4 vs 1). Overall VE across seasons was 31% (95% CI, 26%–37%) among outpatients and 36% (95% CI, 27%–44%) among inpatients. Strain-specific VE (95% CI) among outpatients vs inpatients was 37% (25%–47%) vs 53% (37%–64%) against H1N1pdm09; 19% (9%–27%) vs 23% (8%–35%) against H3N2; and 46% (38%–53%) vs 46% (31%–58%) against B viruses. ΔVE was not significant for any comparison across all sites. Conclusions Inpatients and outpatients with ARI represent distinct populations. Despite comparatively poor health among inpatients, influenza vaccination was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 influenza seasons were notable for the high number of hospitalizations for influenza A(H3N2) despite vaccine and circulating strain match.Methods: We evaluated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against hospitalization in the test-negative HAIVEN study. Nasal-throat swabs were tested by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for influenza and VE was determined based on odds of vaccination by generalized estimating equations. Vaccine-specific antibody was measured in a subset of enrollees.Results: A total of 6129 adults were enrolled from 10 hospitals. Adjusted VE against A(H3N2) was 22.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3% to 35.0%), pooled across both years and 49.4% (95% CI, 34.3% to 61.1%) against B/Yamagata. In 2017-2018, the A(H3N2) VE point estimate for the cell-based vaccine was 43.0% (95% CI, -36.3% to 76.1%; 56 vaccine recipients) compared to 24.0% (95% CI, 3.9% to 39.9%) for egg-based vaccines. Among 643 with serology data, hemagglutinin antibodies against the egg-based A(H3N2) vaccine strain were increased in influenza-negative individuals.Conclusions: Low VE for the A/Hong Kong/4801/2014 vaccine virus in both A(H3N2) seasons emphasizes concerns for continued changes in H3N2 antigenic epitopes, including changes that may impact glycosylation and ultimately reduce VE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Seasonal influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality in older adults. High-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV), with increased antigen content compared to standard-dose influenza vaccines (SD-IIV), is licensed for use in people aged ≥65 years. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of HD-IIV and SD-IIV for prevention of influenza-associated hospitalizations. Methods Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness were enrolled in an observational vaccine effectiveness study at 8 hospitals in the United States Hospitalized Adult Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network during the 2015–2016 and 2016–2017 influenza seasons. Enrolled patients were tested for influenza, and receipt of influenza vaccine by type was recorded. Effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using a test-negative design (comparing odds of influenza among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients). Relative effectiveness of SD-IIV and HD-IIV was estimated using logistic regression. Results Among 1487 enrolled patients aged ≥65 years, 1107 (74%) were vaccinated; 622 (56%) received HD-IIV, and 485 (44%) received SD-IIV. Overall, 277 (19%) tested positive for influenza, including 98 (16%) who received HD-IIV, 87 (18%) who received SD-IIV, and 92 (24%) who were unvaccinated. After adjusting for confounding variables, effectiveness of SD-IIV was 6% (95% confidence interval [CI] −42%, 38%) and that of HD-IIV was 32% (95% CI −3%, 54%), for a relative effectiveness of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV of 27% (95% CI −1%, 48%). Conclusions During 2 US influenza seasons, vaccine effectiveness was low to moderate for prevention of influenza hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years. High-dose vaccine offered greater effectiveness. None of these findings were statistically significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The test-negative design is validated in outpatient, but not inpatient, studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness. The prevalence of chronic pulmonary disease among inpatients can lead to nonrepresentative controls. Test-negative design estimates are biased if vaccine administration is associated with incidence of noninfluenza viruses. We evaluated whether control group selection and effects of vaccination on noninfluenza viruses biased vaccine effectiveness in our study. Subjects were enrolled at the University of Michigan and Henry Ford hospitals during the 2014–2015 and 2015–2016 influenza seasons. Patients presenting with acute respiratory infection were enrolled and tested for respiratory viruses. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated using 3 control groups: negative for influenza, positive for other respiratory virus, and pan-negative individuals; it was also estimated for other common respiratory viruses. In 2014–2015, vaccine effectiveness was 41.1% (95% CI: 1.7, 64.7) using influenza-negative controls, 24.5% (95% CI: −42.6, 60.1) using controls positive for other virus, and 45.8% (95% CI: 5.7, 68.9) using pan-negative controls. In 2015–2016, vaccine effectiveness was 68.7% (95% CI: 44.6, 82.5) using influenza-negative controls, 63.1% (95% CI: 25.0, 82.2) using controls positive for other virus, and 71.1% (95% CI: 46.2, 84.8) using pan-negative controls. Vaccination did not alter odds of other respiratory viruses. Results support use of the test-negative design among inpatients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• A frailty short interview was adapted for use during acute respiratory illness. • Frailty short interview was moderately correlated with a validated frailty index. • Those with higher frailty index were more likely to receive influenza vaccination. • Frailty short interview was not associated with influenza vaccination. Frailty is an important physiologic factor in studies of influenza and influenza vaccines carried out in older adults and hospitalized populations. Unfortunately, comprehensive assessments of frailty requiring physical assessments and extensive medical record review are not often feasible in time- and resource-limited settings common to studies of influenza and influenza vaccines. We developed a 5-question frailty short interview, and implemented it in a multicenter, hospital-based study of influenza over two years. Frailty status defined by the frailty short interview was compared to a validated frailty index based on medical record review of 59 parameters. Agreement between the two frailty measures was assessed, and multivariable linear regression models were used to explore differences between the measures. The association between each frailty measure and likelihood of influenza vaccination was also assessed. During the 2015–2016 and 2016–2017 influenza seasons, 2070 adult patients hospitalized with acute respiratory illness were enrolled and included in analyses. Frailty was frequently identified in the study population; 43% of participants were defined as frail by the frailty short interview and 32% by frailty index. Responses to the frailty short interview were only moderately correlated with the frailty index, and agreement between the two frailty measures was low. Women were more likely to be defined as frail by the frailty short interview than men. White individuals were more likely than other races to be defined as frail by the frailty index. Increasing frailty index was associated with increased likelihood of influenza vaccination, but the frailty short interview was not associated with vaccination. The frailty short interview provided a feasible and consistent measure of frailty across study hospitals and study years. However, its modest correlation with the frailty index and differential association with likelihood of influenza vaccination highlight differences in the conceptualization of frailty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the study about the data trend for the increase use of neuraminidase inhibitors for treatment of severe influenza to hospital children and adults. Topics discussed include the data released by the U.S.-based national surveillance system Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Network (FluSurv-NET), the positive development of the increase number of hospitalized patients and the controversy behind the effectiveness of neuraminidae inhibitors.