Search

Intraseason timing of influenza infection among persons of different ages could reflect relative contributions to propagation of seasonal epidemics and has not been examined among ambulatory patients. Using data from the US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network, we calculated risk ratios derived from comparing weekly numbers of influenza cases prepeak with those postpeak during the 2010–2011 through 2018–2019 influenza seasons. We sought to determine age-specific differences during the ascent versus descent of an influenza season by influenza virus type and subtype. We estimated 95% credible intervals around the risk ratios using Bayesian joint posterior sampling of weekly cases. Our population consisted of ambulatory patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza who enrolled in an influenza vaccine effectiveness study at 5 US sites during 9 influenza seasons after the 2009 influenza A virus subtype H1N1 (H1N1) pandemic. We observed that young children aged <5 years tended to more often be infected with H1N1 during the prepeak period, while adults aged ≥65 years tended to more often be infected with H1N1 during the postpeak period. However, for influenza A virus subtype H3N2, children aged <5 years were more often infected during the postpeak period. These results may reflect a contribution of different age groups to seasonal spread, which may differ by influenza virus type and subtype. [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]

Background Yearly influenza immunization is recommended for immunocompromised (IC) individuals, although immune responses are lower than that for the nonimmunocompromised and the data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the IC is scarce. We evaluated VE against influenza-associated hospitalization among IC adults. Methods We analyzed data from adults ≥ 18 years hospitalized with acute respiratory illness (ARI) during the 2017–2018 influenza season at 10 hospitals in the United States. IC adults were identified using prespecified case definitions using electronic medical record data. VE was evaluated with a test-negative case-control design using multivariable logistic regression with polymerase chain reaction–confirmed influenza as the outcome and vaccination status as the exposure, adjusting for age, enrolling site, illness onset date, race, days from onset to specimen collection, self-reported health, and self-reported hospitalizations. Results Of 3524 adults hospitalized with ARI, 1210 (34.3%) had an immunocompromising condition. IC adults were more likely to be vaccinated than non-IC (69.5% vs 65.2%) and less likely to have influenza (22% vs 27.8%). The mean age did not differ among IC and non-IC (61.4 vs 60.8 years of age). The overall VE against influenza hospitalization, including immunocompetent adults, was 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21–44). VE among IC vs non-IC adults was lower at 5% (95% CI, –29% to 31%) vs 41% (95% CI, 27–52) (P <.05 for interaction term). Conclusions VE in 1 influenza season was very low among IC individuals. Future efforts should include evaluation of VE among the different immunocompromising conditions and whether enhanced vaccines improve the suboptimal effectiveness among the immunocompromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background At the start of the 2019–2020 influenza season, concern arose that circulating B/Victoria viruses of the globally emerging clade V1A.3 were antigenically drifted from the strain included in the vaccine. Intense B/Victoria activity was followed by circulation of genetically diverse A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses that were also antigenically drifted. We measured vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the United States against illness from these emerging viruses. Methods We enrolled outpatients aged ≥6 months with acute respiratory illness at 5 sites. Respiratory specimens were tested for influenza by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Using the test-negative design, we determined influenza VE by virus subtype/lineage and genetic subclades by comparing odds of vaccination in influenza cases versus test-negative controls. Results Among 8845 enrollees, 2722 (31%) tested positive for influenza, including 1209 (44%) for B/Victoria and 1405 (51%) for A(H1N1)pdm09. Effectiveness against any influenza illness was 39% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 32–44), 45% (95% CI: 37–52) against B/Victoria and 30% (95% CI: 21–39) against A(H1N1)pdm09-associated illness. Vaccination offered no protection against A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses with antigenically drifted clade 6B.1A 183P-5A+156K HA genes (VE 7%; 95% CI: –14 to 23%) which predominated after January. Conclusions Vaccination provided protection against influenza illness, mainly due to infections from B/Victoria viruses. Vaccine protection against illness from A(H1N1)pdm09 was lower than historically observed effectiveness of 40%–60%, due to late-season vaccine mismatch following emergence of antigenically drifted viruses. The effect of drift on vaccine protection is not easy to predict and, even in drifted years, significant protection can be observed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We compared effects of prior vaccination and added or lost protection from current season vaccination among those previously vaccinated. Methods Our analysis included data from the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Network among participants ≥9 years old with acute respiratory illness from 2012–2013 through 2017–2018. Vaccine protection was estimated using multivariate logistic regression with an interaction term for effect of prior season vaccination on current season vaccine effectiveness. Models were adjusted for age, calendar time, high-risk status, site, and season for combined estimates. We estimated protection by combinations of current and prior vaccination compared to unvaccinated in both seasons or current vaccination among prior vaccinated. Results A total of 31 819 participants were included. Vaccine protection against any influenza averaged 42% (95% confidence interval [CI], 38%–47%) among those vaccinated only the current season, 37% (95% CI, 33–40) among those vaccinated both seasons, and 26% (95% CI, 18%–32%) among those vaccinated only the prior season, compared with participants vaccinated neither season. Current season vaccination reduced the odds of any influenza among patients unvaccinated the prior season by 42% (95% CI, 37%–46%), including 57%, 27%, and 55% against A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and influenza B, respectively. Among participants vaccinated the prior season, current season vaccination further reduced the odds of any influenza by 15% (95% CI, 7%–23%), including 29% against A(H1N1) and 26% against B viruses, but not against A(H3N2). Conclusions Our findings support Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations for annual influenza vaccination. Benefits of current season vaccination varied among participants with and without prior season vaccination, by virus type/subtype and season. [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]

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. [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 Since 2013, quadrivalent influenza vaccines containing 2 B viruses gradually replaced trivalent vaccines in the United States. We compared the vaccine effectiveness of quadrivalent to trivalent inactivated vaccines (IIV4 to IIV3, respectively) against illness due to influenza B during the transition, when IIV4 use increased rapidly. Methods The US Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (Flu VE) Network analyzed 25 019 of 42 600 outpatients aged ≥6 months who enrolled within 7 days of illness onset during 6 seasons from 2011–2012. Upper respiratory specimens were tested for the influenza virus type and B lineage. Using logistic regression, we estimated IIV4 or IIV3 effectiveness by comparing the odds of an influenza B infection overall and the odds of B lineage among vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants. Over 4 seasons from 2013–2014, we compared the relative odds of an influenza B infection among IIV4 versus IIV3 recipients. Results Trivalent vaccines included the predominantly circulating B lineage in 4 of 6 seasons. During 4 influenza seasons when both IIV4 and IIV3 were widely used, the overall effectiveness against any influenza B was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45–59) for IIV4 versus 45% (95% CI, 34–54) for IIV3. IIV4 was more effective than IIV3 against the B lineage not included in IIV3, but comparative effectiveness against illnesses related to any influenza B favored neither vaccine valency. Conclusions The uptake of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines was not associated with increased protection against any influenza B illness, despite the higher effectiveness of quadrivalent vaccines against the added B virus lineage. Public health impact and cost-benefit analyses are needed globally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Seasonal influenza imposes a substantial personal morbidity and societal cost burden. Vaccination is the major strategy for influenza prevention; however, because antigenically drifted influenza A and B viruses circulate annually, influenza vaccines must be updated to provide protection against the predicted prevalent strains for the next influenza season. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of a trivalent inactivated split virion influenza vaccine (TIV) in healthy adults over two influenza seasons in the US. Methods The primary endpoint of this double-blind, randomized study was the average efficacy of TIV versus placebo for the prevention of vaccine-matched, culture-confirmed influenza (VMCCI) across the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 influenza seasons. Secondary endpoints included the prevention of laboratory-confirmed (defined by culture and/or serology) influenza, as well as safety, reactogenicity, immunogenicity, and consistency between three consecutive vaccine lots. Participants were assessed actively during both influenza seasons, and nasopharyngeal swabs were collected for viral culture from individuals with influenza-like illness. Blood specimens were obtained for serology one month after vaccination and at the end of each influenza season's surveillance period. Results Although the point estimate for efficacy in the prevention of all laboratory-confirmed influenza was 63.2% (97.5% confidence interval [CI] lower bound of 48.2%), the point estimate for the primary endpoint, efficacy of TIV against VMCCI across both influenza seasons, was 46.3% with a 97.5% CI lower bound of 9.8%. This did not satisfy the pre-specified success criterion of a one-sided 97.5% CI lower bound of >35% for vaccine efficacy. The VMCCI attack rates were very low overall at 0.6% and 1.2% in the TIV and placebo groups, respectively. Apart from a mismatch for influenza B virus lineage in 2005-2006, there was a good match between TIV and the circulating strains. TIV was highly immunogenic, and immune responses were consistent between three different TIV lots. The most common reactogenicity events and spontaneous adverse events were associated with the injection site, and were mild in severity. Conclusions Despite a good immune response, and an average efficacy over two influenza seasons against laboratory-confirmed influenza of 63.2%, the pre-specified target (lower one-sided 97.5% confidence bound for efficacy > 35%) for the primary efficacy endpoint, the prevention of VMCCI, was not met. However, the results should be interpreted with caution in view of the very low attack rates we observed at the study sites in the 2005-2006 and 2006-2007, which corresponded to relatively mild influenza seasons in the US. Overall, the results showed that TIV has an acceptable safety profile and offered clinical benefit that exceeded risk. Trial registration NCT00216242

Background: Routine influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) surveillance networks use frequentist methods to estimate VE. With data from more than a decade of VE surveillance from diverse global populations now available, using Bayesian methods to explicitly account for this knowledge may be beneficial. This study explores differences between Bayesian vs. frequentist inference in multiple seasons with varying VE.Methods: We used data from the United States Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (US Flu VE) Network. Ambulatory care patients with acute respiratory illness were enrolled during seasons of varying observed VE based on traditional frequentist methods. We estimated VE against A(H1N1)pdm in 2015/16, dominated by A(H1N1)pdm; against A(H3N2) in 2017/18, dominated by A(H3N2); and compared VE for live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) vs. inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) among children aged 2-17 years in 2013/14, also dominated by A(H1N1)pdm. VE was estimated using both frequentist and Bayesian methods using the test-negative design. For the Bayesian estimates, prior VE distributions were based on data from all published test-negative studies of the same influenza type/subtype available prior to the season of interest.Results: Across the three seasons, 16,342 subjects were included in the analyses. For 2015/16, frequentist and Bayesian VE estimates were essentially identical (41% each). For 2017/18, frequentist and Bayesian estimates of VE against A(H3N2) viruses were also nearly identical (26% vs. 23%, respectively), even though the presence of apparent antigenic match could potentially have pulled Bayesian estimates upward. Precision of estimates was similar between methods in both seasons. Frequentist and Bayesian estimates diverged for children in 2013/14. Under the frequentist approach, LAIV effectiveness was 62 percentage points lower than IIV, while LAIV was only 27 percentage points lower than IIV under the Bayesian approach.Conclusion: Bayesian estimates of influenza VE can differ from frequentist estimates to a clinically meaningful degree when VE diverges substantially from previous seasons. [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]

We compared symptoms and characteristics of 4961 ambulatory patients with and without laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Findings indicate that clinical symptoms alone would be insufficient to distinguish between coronavirus disease 2019 and other respiratory infections (eg, influenza) and/or to evaluate the effects of preventive interventions (eg, vaccinations). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the 2019-20 influenza season, influenza-like illness (ILI)* activity first exceeded the national baseline during the week ending November 9, 2019, signaling the earliest start to the influenza season since the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. Activity remains elevated as of mid-February 2020. In the United States, annual vaccination against seasonal influenza is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months (1). During each influenza season, CDC estimates seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza associated with medically attended acute respiratory illness (ARI). This interim report used data from 4,112 children and adults enrolled in the U.S. Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (U.S. Flu VE Network) during October 23, 2019-January 25, 2020. Overall, vaccine effectiveness (VE) against any influenza virus associated with medically attended ARI was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36%-53%). VE was estimated to be 50% (95% CI = 39%-59%) against influenza B/Victoria viruses and 37% (95% CI = 19%-52%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, indicating that vaccine has significantly reduced medical visits associated with influenza so far this season. Notably, vaccination provided substantial protection (VE = 55%; 95% CI = 42%-65%) among children and adolescents aged 6 months-17 years. Interim VE estimates are consistent with those from previous seasons, ranging from 40%-60% when influenza vaccines were antigenically matched to circulating viruses. CDC recommends that health care providers continue to administer influenza vaccine to persons aged ≥6 months because influenza activity is ongoing, and the vaccine can still prevent illness, hospitalization, and death associated with currently circulating influenza viruses as well as other influenza viruses that might circulate later in the season. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assessed determinants of work attendance during the first 3 days after onset of acute respiratory illness (ARI) among workers 19-64 years of age who had medically attended ARI or influenza during the 2017-2018 influenza season. The total number of days worked included days worked at the usual workplace and days teleworked. Access to paid leave was associated with fewer days worked overall and at the usual workplace during illness. Participants who indicated that employees were discouraged from coming to work with influenza-like symptoms were less likely to attend their usual workplace. Compared with workers without a telework option, those with telework access worked more days during illness overall, but there was no difference in days worked at the usual workplace. Both paid leave benefits and business practices that actively encourage employees to stay home while sick are necessary to reduce the transmission of ARI and influenza in workplaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]