Search

On September 19, 2014, CDC published the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommendation for the routine use of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) among adults aged ≥65 years, to be used in series with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) (1). This replaced the previous recommendation that adults aged ≥65 years should be vaccinated with a single dose of PPSV23. As a proxy for estimating PCV13 and PPSV23 vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥65 years before and after implementation of these revised recommendations, CDC analyzed claims for vaccination submitted for reimbursement to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Claims from any time during a beneficiary's enrollment in Medicare Parts A (hospital insurance) and B (medical insurance) since reaching age 65 years were assessed among beneficiaries continuously enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B during annual periods from September 19, 2009, through September 18, 2016. By September 18, 2016, 43.2% of Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥65 years had claims for at least 1 dose of PPSV23 (regardless of PCV13 status), 31.5% had claims for at least 1 dose of PCV13 (regardless of PPSV23 status), and 18.3% had claims for at least 1 dose each of PCV13 and PPSV23. Claims for either type of pneumococcal vaccine were highest among beneficiaries who were older, white, or with chronic and immunocompromising medical conditions than among healthy adults. Implementation of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee's standards for adult immunization practice to assess vaccination status at every patient encounter, recommend needed vaccines, and administer vaccination or refer to a vaccinating provider might help increase pneumococcal vaccination coverage and reduce the risk for pneumonia and invasive pneumococcal disease among older adults (2). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a serious acute demyelinating disease that causes weakness and paralysis. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began collaborating with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to develop near real-time vaccine safety surveillance capabilities in 2006 and has been monitoring for the risk of GBS after influenza vaccination for every influenza season since 2008. Methods We present results from the 2010/11 to 2013/14 influenza seasons using the Updating Sequential Probability Ratio Test (USPRT), with an overall 1-sided α of 0.05 apportioned equally using a constant alpha-spending plan among 20 consecutive weekly tests, 5 ad hoc tests, and a 26th final end of season test. Observed signals were investigated using the self-controlled risk interval (SCRI) design. Results Over 15 million people were vaccinated in each influenza season. In the 2010/11 influenza season, we observed an elevated GBS risk during the season, with an end of season SCRI analysis finding a nonsignificant increased risk (RR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.96–1.63). A sensitivity analysis applying the positive predictive value of the ICD-9 code for GBS from the 2009/10 season estimated a RR = 1.98 (95% CI: 1.42–2.76). Although the 2010/11 influenza vaccine suggested an increased GBS risk, surveillance of the identical vaccine in the 2011/12 influenza season did not find an increased GBS risk after vaccination. No signal was observed in the subsequent three influenza seasons. Conclusions Conducting near real-time surveillance using USPRT has proven to be an excellent method for near real-time GBS surveillance after influenza vaccination, as demonstrated by our surveillance efforts during the 2010/11–2013/14 influenza seasons. In the 2010/2011 influenza season, in addition to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, using near real-time surveillance we were able to observe a signal early in the influenza season and the method has now become routine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous analyses have shown that there is lower mortality with cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators (CRT-D) in patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) but demonstrated mixed results in patients without LBBB. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of CRT-D versus standard implantable defibrillators (ICDs) separately in patients with LBBB and right bundle branch block (RBBB) using Medicare claims data. Medicare records from CRT-D and ICD recipients from 2002 to 2009 that were followed up for up to 48 months were analyzed. We used propensity scores to match patients with ICD to those with CRT-D. In LBBB, 1:1 matching with replacement resulted in 54,218 patients with CRT-D and 20,763 with ICD, and in RBBB, 1:1 matching resulted in 7,298 patients with CRT-D and 7,298 with ICD. In LBBB, CRT-D had a 12% lower risk of heart failure hospitalization or death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 0.90) and 5% lower death risk (HR 0.95, 0.92 to 0.97) compared with ICD. In RBBB, CRT-D had a 15% higher risk of heart failure hospitalization or death (HR 1.15, 1.10 to 1.20) and 13% higher death risk (HR 1.13, 1.07 to 1.18). Sensitivity analysis revealed that accounting for covariates not captured in the Medicare database may lead to increased benefit with CRT-D in LBBB and no difference in RBBB. In conclusion, in a large Medicare population, CRT-D was associated with lower mortality in LBBB but higher mortality in RBBB. The absence of certain covariates, in particular those that determine treatment selection, may affect the results of comparative effectiveness studies using claims data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two category 5 hurricanes, Irma and Maria, arrived in the Caribbean in September 2017 in rapid succession. On September 6, Irma devastated the islands of St. Thomas and St. John, in the Virgin Islands of the United States (USVI). Most medical infrastructure was damaged, including hemodialysis facilities, paralyzing dialysis operations. After Irma's landfall, Puerto Rico served as a safehaven for thousands of displaced and repatriated persons from the impacted islands. These included a cohort of 129 hemodialysis patients evacuated from St. Thomas, USVI to San Juan, Puerto Rico from September 9-11, 2017. The hemodialysis patients arrived first at hotels in San Juan and were then transferred to a Special Needs Shelter, run by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and located in the Puerto Rico Convention Center. With the imminent arrival of Hurricane Maria, most patients were evacuated on September 19 to a special needs shelter on the campus of the Florida International University, in Miami, Florida. While in San Juan, hemodialysis treatments were provided by local nephrologists working with local hemodialysis centers. Here, we describe the challenges and the emergency management actions taken to ensure continuity of care, including providing dialysis, general medical care, shelter, food and transportation for USVI dialysis patients during their stay in San Juan, Puerto Rico. We describe here the experiences of federal and host state/territorial officials in the special needs shelter, in the context of the state/territorial and federal response to disasters, in order to provide ideas about challenges, solutions, and approaches to coordinating care for dialysis patients evacuated from a disaster. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nonvitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are alternatives to warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Randomized trials compared NOACs with warfarin, but none have compared individual NOACs against each other for safety and effectiveness.Methods: We performed a retrospective new-user cohort study of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation enrolled in US Medicare who initiated warfarin (n = 183,318), or a standard dose of dabigatran (150 mg twice daily; n = 86,198), rivaroxaban (20 mg once daily; n = 106,389), or apixaban (5 mg twice daily; n = 73,039) between October 2010 and September 2015. Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, major extracranial bleeding, and all-cause mortality, comparing each NOAC with warfarin, and with each other NOAC.Results: Compared with warfarin, each NOAC was associated with reduced risks of thromboembolic stroke (20%-29% reduction; P = .002 [dabigatran], P < 0.001 [rivaroxaban, apixaban]), intracranial hemorrhage (35%-62% reduction; P < 0.001 [each NOAC]), and mortality (19%-34% reduction; P < .001 [each NOAC]). The NOACs were similar for thromboembolic stroke but rivaroxaban was associated with increased risks of intracranial hemorrhage (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.35-2.17), major extracranial bleeding (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.45; vs apixaban: HR = 2.70; 95% CI, 2.38-3.05), and death (vs dabigatran: HR = 1.12; 95% CI, 1.01-1.24; vs apixaban: HR = 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.38). Dabigatran was associated with reduced risk of intracranial hemorrhage (HR = 0.70; 95% CI ,0.53-0.94) and increased risk of major extracranial bleeding (HR = 2.04; 95% CI, 1.78-2.32) compared with apixaban.Conclusions: Among patients treated with standard-dose NOAC for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and warfarin users with similar baseline characteristics, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than warfarin. Among NOAC users, dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a more favorable benefit-harm profile than rivaroxaban. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Institutionalized adults are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality from influenza and pneumococcal infection. Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination have been shown to be effective in reducing hospitalization and deaths due to pneumonia and influenza in this population. Objective To assess trends in influenza vaccination coverage among US nursing home residents from the 2005-2006 through 2014-2015 influenza seasons and trends in pneumococcal vaccination coverage from 2006 to 2014 among US nursing home residents, by state and demographic characteristics. Methods Data were analyzed from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS's) Minimum Data Set (MDS). Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination status were assessed for all residents of CMS-certified nursing homes using data reported to the MDS by all certified facilities. Results Influenza vaccination coverage increased from 71.4% in the 2005-2006 influenza season to 75.7% in the 2014-2015 influenza season and pneumococcal vaccination coverage increased from 67.4% in 2006 to 78.4% in 2014. Vaccination coverage varied by state, with influenza vaccination coverage ranging from 50.0% to 89.7% in the 2014-2015 influenza season and pneumococcal vaccination coverage ranging from 55.0% to 89.7% in 2014. Non-Hispanic black and Hispanic residents had lower coverage compared with non-Hispanic white residents for both vaccines, and these differences persisted over time. Conclusion Influenza and pneumococcal vaccination among US nursing home residents remains suboptimal. Nursing home staff can employ strategies such as provider reminders and standing orders to facilitate offering vaccination to all residents along with culturally appropriate vaccine promotion to increase vaccination coverage among this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To characterize cannabis-related disorder medical encounter trends in the US Medicare population during 2017 to 2022. Methods. We conducted a descriptive study, which included 56 624 432 beneficiaries aged 65 years or older and 10 247 953 aged 18 to 64 years with disability. All were continuously enrolled in Medicare (Fee-for-Service or Advantage) for 183 or more days before the first day of the calendar year. We identified cannabis-related disorder encounters using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes and computed annual encounter rates per 10 000 beneficiaries. We used the Mann-Kendall test to analyze trends over time. Results. Annual cannabis-related disorder encounter trends among beneficiaries aged 65 years or older ranged from 15.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.8, 16.0) to 39.3 (95% CI = 39.1, 39.5) per 10 000. Rates among beneficiaries aged 18 to 64 years with disability ranged from 274.8 (95% CI = 273.6, 276.0) to 373.7 (95% CI = 372.3, 375.2) per 10 000. Rates increased over time across both groups, with average annual increases of 4.3 (95% CI = 3.3, 5.3; P  = .01) and 17.1 (95% CI = 11.0, 23.2; P  = .02) per 10 000, respectively. Conclusions. Further work is needed to explore the impact of coexisting medical conditions on outcomes that result from cannabis-related disorders. ( Am J Public Health . 2024;114(S8):S694-S697. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307729).

Background: We assessed the added benefit and waning effectiveness of a third COVID-19 vaccine dose (original formula) for preventing COVID-19-related outcomes., Methods: We used Medicare claims data to conduct a retrospective cohort study in U.S. community-dwelling Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years during the BA.1/BA.2 Omicron period (December 19, 2021 - March 26, 2022). We estimated relative vaccine effectiveness (RVE) of 3 versus 2 doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines using marginal structural Cox regression models., Results: Among 8,135,020 eligible beneficiaries, 73.3% were 3-dose vaccinated by March 26, 2022. At 14-60 days since vaccination, a third dose provided significant added benefit against COVID-19-related hospitalization for Moderna (RVE: 77.2%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 76.0%, 78.4%) and Pfizer-BioNTech (RVE: 72.5%; 95% CI: 70.8%, 74.0%). Added benefit was lower >120 days. For those with prior medically attended COVID-19 diagnoses, Pfizer-BioNTech provided an added benefit for 120 days, while Moderna provided some added benefit >120 days. Added benefit for either vaccine was higher against death compared to less severe outcomes, which still decreased >120 days., Conclusions: A third dose COVID-19 vaccine provided significant added benefit against COVID-19-related hospitalization and death, even for beneficiaries with prior medically attended COVID-19 diagnoses. This added benefit decreased after 4 months., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

Background: Concerns have been raised regarding proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and risk of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Observational studies have yielded heterogeneous results and were subject to important methodological limitations., Aims: To examine the association between the receipt of PPIs and risk of COVID-19 hospitalizations and severe in-hospital outcomes or death., Methods: Case-control study among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 66+ years old with gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD). Within this population, we identified cases by an incident hospital discharge diagnosis of COVID-19 from April 1 to December 11, 2020, using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) U07.1, and randomly selected up to 10 controls per case, matched on date and neighborhood. We defined PPI use as a prescription providing ≥15 days of supply in the 30 days before admission, with H2-receptor antagonist (H2RA) use as the reference to account for indication. We analyzed uncomplicated hospitalizations and hospitalizations with severe outcomes (intensive/coronary care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death), estimating odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with multinomial conditional logistic regression adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, chronic medications, and health care utilization., Results: We matched 25,867 uncomplicated and 12,954 severe hospitalized COVID-19 cases to 146,972 and 73,104 controls, respectively. Cases tended to be older and have more comorbidities. Relative to H2RA use, we found no association of PPI use with uncomplicated COVID-19 hospitalization (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.06) or severe COVID-19 hospitalization (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10)., Conclusions: Relative to H2RA use, PPI use was not associated with uncomplicated or severe COVID-19 hospitalizations among Medicare beneficiaries with GERD., (Published 2024. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Objective: To compare the risk of intentional self-harm (ISH) and suicide in older men using 5-α reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) and alpha-blockers for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Observational research of older men with BPH suggested an increase in ISH with 5-ARI use compared with nonuse; we aimed to address potential confounding by indication with an active comparator reference group., Methods: Using Medicare data linked to the National Death Index (NDI) from 2007-2016, we implemented a retrospective cohort design in males aged ≥65 years who initiated 5-ARI or alpha-blocker use for BPH. ISH was identified using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes. Suicides were identified through cause-of-death information from the NDI. We used inverse probability of treatment weighted Cox proportional hazards regression to compare time-to-event between treatment groups, with robust variance estimation., Results: The event rates for ISH and suicide, respectively, were 0.314 and 0.308 per 1000 person-years (PY) among 5-ARI users (n = 181,675), and 0.364 and 0.382 per 1000PY among alpha-blocker users (n = 850,476). For 5-ARI use relative to alpha-blocker use, hazard ratios (HRs) for ISH and suicide, respectively, were 0.88 (95% CI:0.62-1.25) and 0.82 (95% CI:0.54-1.24); for the composite outcome (non-fatal ISH or suicide), the HR was 0.88 (95% CI:0.66-1.16). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses supported these results., Conclusion: 5-ARI use was not associated with an increased risk for ISH or suicide compared to alpha-blocker use in older men with BPH. Study limitations included low event rates and potentially low sensitivity for ISH events., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. SA, KBN, NF, MW and TEM were employees of Acumen, LLC at the time the study was conducted. This study was funded in full by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, through an interagency agreement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, for which Acumen, LLC is a contractor., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Anaphylaxis is a severe life-threatening allergic reaction, and its accurate identification in healthcare databases can harness the potential of "Big Data" for healthcare or public health purposes., Materials and Methods: This study used claims data obtained between October 1, 2015 and February 28, 2019 from the CMS database to examine the utility of machine learning in identifying incident anaphylaxis cases. We created a feature selection pipeline to identify critical features between different datasets. Then a variety of unsupervised and supervised methods were used (eg, Sammon mapping and eXtreme Gradient Boosting) to train models on datasets of differing data quality, which reflects the varying availability and potential rarity of ground truth data in medical databases., Results: Resulting machine learning model accuracies ranged from 47.7% to 94.4% when tested on ground truth data. Finally, we found new features to help experts enhance existing case-finding algorithms., Discussion: Developing precise algorithms to detect medical outcomes in claims can be a laborious and expensive process, particularly for conditions presented and coded diversely. We found it beneficial to filter out highly potent codes used for data curation to identify underlying patterns and features. To improve rule-based algorithms where necessary, researchers could use model explainers to determine noteworthy features, which could then be shared with experts and included in the algorithm., Conclusion: Our work suggests machine learning models can perform at similar levels as a previously published expert case-finding algorithm, while also having the potential to improve performance or streamline algorithm construction processes by identifying new relevant features for algorithm construction., Competing Interests: None declared., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2024.)

Background: While safety of influenza vaccines is well-established, some studies have suggested potential associations between influenza vaccines and certain adverse events (AEs). This study examined the safety of the 2022-2023 influenza vaccines among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years., Methods: A self-controlled case series compared incidence rates of anaphylaxis, encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), and transverse myelitis following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations (i.e., any, high-dose or adjuvanted) in risk and control intervals among Medicare beneficiaries ≥ 65 years. We used conditional Poisson regression to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) adjusted for event-dependent observation time and seasonality. Analyses also accounted for uncertainty from outcome misclassification where feasible. For AEs with any statistically significant associations, we stratified results by concomitant vaccination status., Results: Among 12.7 million vaccine recipients, we observed 76 anaphylaxis, 276 encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, 134 GBS and 75 transverse myelitis cases. Only rates of anaphylaxis were elevated in risk compared to control intervals. With all adjustments, an elevated, but non-statistically significant, anaphylaxis rate was observed following any (IRR: 2.40, 95% CI: 0.96-6.03), high-dose (IRR: 2.31, 95% CI: 0.67-7.91), and adjuvanted (IRR: 3.28, 95% CI: 0.71-15.08) influenza vaccination; anaphylaxis IRRs were 2.54 (95% CI: 0.49-13.05) and 1.64 (95% CI: 0.38-7.05) for persons with and without concomitant vaccination, respectively., Conclusions: Rates of encephalitis/encephalomyelitis, GBS, or transverse myelitis were not elevated following 2022-2023 seasonal influenza vaccinations among U.S. adults ≥ 65 years. There was an increased rate of anaphylaxis following influenza vaccination that may have been influenced by concomitant vaccination., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Increased risk of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) following adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccinations has been identified in passive surveillance systems. TTS incidence rates (IRs) in the United States (U.S.) are needed to contextualize reports following COVID-19 vaccination., Methods: We estimated annual and monthly IRs of overall TTS, common site TTS, and unusual site TTS for adults aged 18-64 years in Carelon Research and MarketScan commercial claims (2017-Oct 2020), CVS Health and Optum commercial claims (2019-Oct 2020), and adults aged ≥ 65 years using CMS Medicare claims (2019-Oct 2020); IRs were stratified by age, sex, and race/ethnicity (CMS Medicare)., Results: Across data sources, annual IRs for overall TTS were similar between Jan-Dec 2019 and Jan-Oct 2020. Rates were higher in Medicare (IRs: 370.72 and 365.63 per 100,000 person-years for 2019 and 2020, respectively) than commercial data sources (MarketScan IRs: 24.21 and 24.06 per 100,000 person-years; Optum IRs: 32.60 and 31.29 per 100,000 person-years; Carelon Research IRs: 24.46 and 26.16 per 100,000 person-years; CVS Health IRs: 30.31 and 30.25 per 100,000 person-years). Across years and databases, common site TTS IRs increased with age and were higher among males. Among adults aged ≥ 65 years, the common site TTS IR was highest among non-Hispanic black adults. Annual unusual site TTS IRs ranged between 2.02 and 3.04 (commercial) and 12.49 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Dec 2019; IRs ranged between 1.53 and 2.67 (commercial) and 11.57 (Medicare) per 100,000 person-years for Jan-Oct 2020. Unusual site TTS IRs were higher in males and increased with age in commercial data sources; among adults aged ≥ 65 years, IRs decreased with age and were highest among non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska native adults., Conclusion: TTS IRs were generally similar across years, higher for males, and increased with age. These rates may contribute to surveillance of post-vaccination TTS., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: KM is an employee of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals. RPO, KA, and JS are employees of Optum and may own stock in UnitedHealth Group. CKZ was employed by the FDA when actively contributing to the study. Currently, CKZis an employee of Moderna Inc and may own stock;CKZ also discloses previous employment (subsequent to study contributions) with Pfizer Inc., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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

Purpose: In the United States, the National Death Index (NDI) is the most complete source of death information, while epidemiologic studies with mortality outcomes often rely on U.S. Medicare data for outcome ascertainment. The purpose of this study was to assess the agreement of death information between the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare enrolment data and NDI., Methods: Using Medicare and NDI data from 1999 through 2016, we identified Medicare beneficiaries who were reported dead in the CMS Medicare enrolment database (EDB) and Common Medicare Environment (CME), linked these beneficiaries to the NDI using CMS Health Insurance Claim number, and compared death dates between the two data sources. To assess agreement between our data sources, we calculated kappa scores; where a kappa of 1 indicates perfect agreement and a kappa of 0 indicates agreement equivalent to chance. We also examined CMS to NDI linkage and death date matching for stability over time., Results: Of the 36 785 640, Medicare beneficiaries reported dead in CMS enrollment data from 1999 to 2016, 97.5% were linked to the NDI. A kappa score of 0.98 showed a near perfect agreement between NDI and CMS reported deaths. The percentage of linked cases exactly matching on death dates increased from 94.8% in 1999 to 99.4% in 2016., Conclusions: Our findings suggest strong concordance between death dates as recorded by CMS enrollment data and the NDI in the entire Medicare population., (Published 2024. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)

Importance: Dialysis-dependent patients experience high rates of morbidity from fractures, yet little evidence is available on optimal treatment strategies. Chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder is nearly universal in dialysis-dependent patients, complicating diagnosis and treatment of skeletal fragility., Objective: To examine the incidence and comparative risk of severe hypocalcemia with denosumab compared with oral bisphosphonates among dialysis-dependent patients treated for osteoporosis., Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of female dialysis-dependent Medicare patients aged 65 years or older who initiated treatment with denosumab or oral bisphosphonates from 2013 to 2020. Clinical performance measures including monthly serum calcium were obtained through linkage to the Consolidated Renal Operations in a Web-Enabled Network database., Exposures: Denosumab, 60 mg, or oral bisphosphonates., Main Outcomes and Measures: Severe hypocalcemia was defined as total albumin-corrected serum calcium below 7.5 mg/dL (1.88 mmol/L) or a primary hospital or emergency department hypocalcemia diagnosis (emergent care). Very severe hypocalcemia (serum calcium below 6.5 mg/dL [1.63 mmol/L] or emergent care) was also assessed. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted cumulative incidence, weighted risk differences, and weighted risk ratios were calculated during the first 12 treatment weeks., Results: In the unweighted cohorts, 607 of 1523 denosumab-treated patients and 23 of 1281 oral bisphosphonate-treated patients developed severe hypocalcemia. The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of severe hypocalcemia was 41.1% with denosumab vs 2.0% with oral bisphosphonates (weighted risk difference, 39.1% [95% CI, 36.3%-41.9%]; weighted risk ratio, 20.7 [95% CI, 13.2-41.2]). The 12-week weighted cumulative incidence of very severe hypocalcemia was also increased with denosumab (10.9%) vs oral bisphosphonates (0.4%) (weighted risk difference, 10.5% [95% CI, 8.8%-12.0%]; weighted risk ratio, 26.4 [95% CI, 9.7-449.5])., Conclusions and Relevance: Denosumab was associated with a markedly higher incidence of severe and very severe hypocalcemia in female dialysis-dependent patients aged 65 years or older compared with oral bisphosphonates. Given the complexity of diagnosing the underlying bone pathophysiology in dialysis-dependent patients, the high risk posed by denosumab in this population, and the complex strategies required to monitor and treat severe hypocalcemia, denosumab should be administered after careful patient selection and with plans for frequent monitoring.

Purpose: Pharmacy chains can differ with respect to the characteristics of their patient populations as well as their nonprescription products, services, and practices, and thus may serve as a surrogate for potential unmeasured confounding in observational studies of prescription drugs. This study evaluates whether a single-source drug can have different patient outcomes based on the dispensing pharmacy chain., Methods: Separate analyses for two anticoagulant drugs, rivaroxaban and apixaban, were conducted using Medicare Fee-for-Service claims evaluating the association between dispensing pharmacy chain and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, all-cause mortality, and major GI bleeding. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline covariates across pharmacy chain cohorts, and outcome association was assessed with a Cox Proportional Hazards model., Results: We observed no differences in outcomes across pharmacy chains for apixaban recipients. Rivaroxaban recipients from pharmacy chain C, however, had lower rates of GI bleeding (adjusted HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-1.00) and ischemic stroke (adjusted HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.38-0.87) as compared to chain A in primary analyses with a 3-day grace period. The results moved closer to the null when 14- and 30-day grace periods were implemented., Conclusions: These results suggest that dispensing pharmacy chains may have the potential to act as a confounder of associations between drug exposure and outcome in some observational studies. Additional studies of potential confounding by pharmacy chain are needed. Further evaluation of potential pharmacy chain effects on safe use would be of value., (© 2023 Acumen, LLC. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Long-term care residents were among the most vulnerable during the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated vaccine effectiveness of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in Medicare nursing home residents aged ≥65 years during pre-Delta and high Delta periods., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 13 December 2020 to 20 November 2021 using Medicare claims data. Exposures included 2 and 3 doses of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. We used inverse probability weighting and Cox proportional hazards models to estimate absolute and relative vaccine effectiveness., Results: Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related death was 69.8% (95% CI, 65.9%‒73.3%) during the pre-Delta period and 55.7% (49.5%‒61.1%) during the high Delta period, without adjusting for time since vaccination. We observed substantial waning of effectiveness from 65.1% (54.2%‒73.5%) within 6 months from second-dose vaccination to 45.2% (30.6%‒56.7%) ≥6 months after second-dose vaccination in the high Delta period. Three doses provided 88.7% (73.5%‒95.2%) vaccine effectiveness against death, and the incremental benefit of 3 vs 2 doses was 74.6% (40.4%‒89.2%) during high Delta. Among beneficiaries with a prior COVID-19 infection, 3-dose vaccine effectiveness for preventing death was 78.6% (50.0%‒90.8%), and the additional protection of 3 vs 2 doses was 70.0% (30.1%‒87.1%) during high Delta. Vaccine effectiveness estimates against less severe outcomes (eg, infection) were lower., Conclusions: This nationwide real-world study demonstrated that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines provided substantial protection against COVID-19-related death. Two-dose protection waned after 6 months. Third doses during the high Delta period provided significant additional protection for individuals with or without a prior COVID-19 infection., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: No reported conflicts., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2024.)

COVID-19 has been associated with an increased risk for thromboembolic events, including ischemic stroke, venous thromboembolism, and myocardial infarction. Studies have reported lower rates of COVID-19-related thromboembolic events among persons who received the COVID-19 vaccine compared with persons who did not, but rigorous estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing COVID-19-related thromboembolic events are lacking. This analysis estimated the incremental benefit of receipt of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine after receiving an original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. To estimate VE of a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 dose in preventing thromboembolic events compared with original monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses only, two retrospective cohort studies were conducted among Medicare fee-for-service enrollees during September 4, 2022-March 4, 2023. Effectiveness of a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose against COVID-19-related thromboembolic events compared with that of original vaccine alone was 47% (95% CI = 45%-49%) among Medicare enrollees aged ≥65 years and 51% (95% CI = 39%-60%) among adults aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease receiving dialysis. VE was similar among Medicare beneficiaries with immunocompromise: 46% (95% CI = 42%-49%) among adults aged ≥65 years and 45% (95% CI = 24%-60%) among those aged ≥18 years with end stage renal disease. To help prevent complications of COVID-19, including thromboembolic events, adults should stay up to date with 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. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Objective: Anaphylaxis is a severe life-threatening allergic reaction, and its accurate identification in healthcare databases can harness the potential of "Big Data" for healthcare or public health purposes., Methods: This study used claims data obtained between October 1, 2015 and February 28, 2019 from the CMS database to examine the utility of machine learning in identifying incident anaphylaxis cases. We created a feature selection pipeline to identify critical features between different datasets. Then a variety of unsupervised and supervised methods were used (eg, Sammon mapping and eXtreme Gradient Boosting) to train models on datasets of differing data quality, which reflects the varying availability and potential rarity of ground truth data in medical databases., Results: Resulting machine learning model accuracies ranged between 47.7% and 94.4% when tested on ground truth data. Finally, we found new features to help experts enhance existing case-finding algorithms., Discussion: Developing precise algorithms to detect medical outcomes in claims can be a laborious and expensive process, particularly for conditions presented and coded diversely. We found it beneficial to filter out highly potent codes used for data curation to identify underlying patterns and features. To improve rule-based algorithms where necessary, researchers could use model explainers to determine noteworthy features, which could then be shared with experts and included in the algorithm., Conclusion: Our work suggests machine learning models can perform at similar levels as a previously published expert case-finding algorithm, while also having the potential to improve performance or streamline algorithm construction processes by identifying new relevant features for algorithm construction., Competing Interests: None declared., (Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2023.)

Background: Alpha-1 adrenergic receptor antagonists prevent cytokine storm in mouse sepsis models. This led to the hypothesis that alpha-1 blockers may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is characterized by hypercytokinemia and progressive respiratory failure., Methods: We performed an observational case-control study in male Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older, with or without benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and treated with alpha-1 receptor blockers or 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for outcomes of uncomplicated and severe COVID-19 hospitalization (intensive care unit admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death)., Results: There were 20,963 cases of hospitalized COVID-19 matched to 101,161 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. In the primary analysis (males with BPH), there was no difference in risk of uncomplicated COVID-19 hospitalization (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.996-1.17) or hospitalization with severe complications (aOR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.08). In the secondary analysis (males with or without BPH), the corresponding aORs were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96-1.09) (uncomplicated) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.91-1.07) (complicated), respectively. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses yielded similar results. Of note, there was no difference in risk of severe COVID-19 hospitalization when comparing non-selective vs selective alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.10), higher- vs lower-dose alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86-1.08), or current vs remote alpha-1 blocker use (aOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91-1.18)., Conclusions: Prevalent use of alpha-1 receptor blockers was not associated with a protective or harmful effect on risk of uncomplicated or severe hospitalized COVID-19., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Our near-real-time safety monitoring of 16 adverse events (AEs) following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination identified potential elevation in risk for six AEs following primary series and monovalent booster dose administration. The crude association with AEs does not imply causality. Accordingly, we conducted robust evaluation of potential associations., Methods: We conducted two self-controlled case series studies of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) in U.S. Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years. Adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated following primary series doses for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), pulmonary embolism (PE), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC); and following monovalent booster doses for AMI, PE, ITP, Bell's Palsy (BP) and Myocarditis/Pericarditis (Myo/Peri)., Results: The primary series study included 3,360,981 individuals who received 6,388,542 primary series doses; the booster study included 6,156,100 individuals with one monovalent booster dose. The AMI IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.04 (95 % CI: 0.91 to 1.18) and 1.06 (95 % CI: 1.003 to 1.12), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.01 (95 % CI: 0.82 to 1.26) and 1.05 (95 % CI: 0.998 to 1.11), respectively. The hospital inpatient PE IRR following BNT162b2 primary series and booster was 1.19 (95 % CI: 1.03 to 1.38) and 0.86 (95 % CI: 0.78 to 0.95), respectively; for mRNA-1273 primary series and booster, 1.15 (95 % CI: 0.94 to 1.41) and 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.79 to 0.96), respectively. The studies' results do not support that exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines elevate the risk of ITP, DIC, Myo/Peri, and BP., Conclusion: We did not find an increased risk for AMI, ITP, DIC, BP, and Myo/Peri and there was not consistent evidence for PE after exposure to COVID-19 mRNA primary series or monovalent booster vaccines. These results support the favorable safety profile of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines administered in the U.S. elderly population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: Monitoring safety outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination is critical for understanding vaccine safety especially when used in key populations such as elderly persons age 65 years and older who can benefit greatly from vaccination. We present new findings from a nationally representative early warning system that may expand the safety knowledge base to further public trust and inform decision making on vaccine safety by government agencies, healthcare providers, interested stakeholders, and the public., Methods: We evaluated 14 outcomes of interest following COVID-19 vaccination using the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) data covering 30,712,101 elderly persons. The CMS data from December 11, 2020 through Jan 15, 2022 included 17,411,342 COVID-19 vaccinees who received a total of 34,639,937 doses. We conducted weekly sequential testing and generated rate ratios (RR) of observed outcome rates compared to historical (or expected) rates prior to COVID-19 vaccination., Findings: Four outcomes met the threshold for a statistical signal following BNT162b2 vaccination including pulmonary embolism (PE; RR = 1.54), acute myocardial infarction (AMI; RR = 1.42), disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC; RR = 1.91), and immune thrombocytopenia (ITP; RR = 1.44). After further evaluation, only the RR for PE still met the statistical threshold for a signal; however, the RRs for AMI, DIC, and ITP no longer did. No statistical signals were identified following vaccination with either the mRNA-1273 or Ad26 COV2.S vaccines., Interpretation: This early warning system is the first to identify temporal associations for PE, AMI, DIC, and ITP following BNT162b2 vaccination in the elderly. Because an early warning system does not prove that the vaccines cause these outcomes, more robust epidemiologic studies with adjustment for confounding, including age and nursing home residency, are underway to further evaluate these signals. FDA strongly believes the potential benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh the potential risks of COVID-19 infection., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Objective: Pimavanserin, a serotonin 5-HT 2 antagonist, is indicated for treatment of hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis. In premarketing trials in patients with Parkinson's disease psychosis, 11% of patients died during open-label pimavanserin treatment. Antipsychotics, which are used off-label in Parkinson's disease psychosis, increase mortality in dementia patients. The authors compared mortality with pimavanserin and atypical antipsychotics in a large database., Methods: This was a retrospective new-user cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with Parkinson's disease initiating pimavanserin (N=3,227) or atypical antipsychotics (N=18,442) from April 2016 to March 2019. All-cause mortality hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for pimavanserin compared with atypical antipsychotics, using segmented proportional hazards regression over 1-180 and 181+ days of treatment. Potential confounding was addressed through inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)., Results: Pimavanserin users had a mean age of approximately 78 years, and 45% were female. Before IPTW, some comorbidities were more prevalent in atypical antipsychotic users; after IPTW, comorbidities were well balanced between groups. In the first 180 days of treatment, mortality was approximately 35% lower with pimavanserin than with atypical antipsychotics (hazard ratio=0.65, 95% CI=0.53, 0.79), with approximately one excess death per 30 atypical antipsychotic-treated patients; however, during treatment beyond 180 days, there was no additional mortality advantage with pimavanserin (hazard ratio=1.05, 95% CI=0.82, 1.33). Pimavanserin showed no mortality advantage in nursing home patients., Conclusions: Pimavanserin use was associated with lower mortality than atypical antipsychotic use during the first 180 days of treatment, but only in community-dwelling patients, not nursing home residents.

Background: Influenza causes substantial mortality, especially among older persons. Influenza vaccines are rarely more than 50% effective and rarely reach more than half of the US Medicare population, which is primarily an aged population. We wished to estimate the association between vaccination and mortality reduction., Method: We used the US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) DataLink Project to determine vaccination status and timing during the 2017-2018 influenza season for more than 26 million Medicare enrollees. Patient-level demographic, health, co-morbidity, hospitalization, vaccination, and healthcare utilization claims data were supplied as covariates to general linear models in order to isolate and estimate the association between participation in the vaccination program and relative risk of death., Findings: The 2017-2018 seasonal influenza vaccine reduced (Relative Risk Ratio [RRR] 0.936 [95% CI = 0.918-0.954]) the risk of all-cause death among beneficiaries following a hospitalization for sepsis and moreover the risk of death without a prior hospitalization during the 2.5-month outcome window (RRR 0.870 [95% CI = 0.853-0.887]). We estimate the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent a death in the ten-week outcome window is between 1,515 beneficiaries (95% CI = 1,351-1,754; derived from the average treatment effect of augmented inverse probability weighting) and 1,960 beneficiaries (95% CI = 1,695-2,381; derived from the average marginal effect of logistic regression). Among beneficiaries requiring hospitalization, the greatest death risk reduction accrued to those 85 + years of age who were hospitalized with sepsis, RRR 0.92 [95% CI = 0.89-0.95]. No apparent benefit was realized by beneficiaries who required custodial (nursing home) care., Interpretation: Seasonal influenza immunization is associated with relative reduction of death risk among non-institutionalized Medicare beneficiaries., Funding: All authors are full-time or contractual employees of the United States Federal Government, Department of Health and Human Services, the funding agency., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Timothy G. Buchman reports a relationship with Society of Critical Care Medicine that includes: service as Editor-In-Chief of two journals. Steven Q. Simpson reports a relationship with American College of Chest Physicians that includes: board membership., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: There are theoretical concerns that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) could increase the risk of severe Covid-19., Objective: To determine if ACEIs and ARBs are associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization overall, or hospitalization involving intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death., Design: Observational case-control study., Participants: Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 66 years with hypertension, treated with ACEIs, ARBs, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), or thiazide diuretics., Main Measures: Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the outcomes of Covid-19 hospitalization, or hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death., Results: A total of 35,300 cases of hospitalized Covid-19 were matched to 228,228 controls on calendar date and neighborhood of residence. The median age of cases was 79 years, 57.4% were female, and the median duration of hospitalization was 8 days (interquartile range 5-12). ACEIs and ARBs were associated with a slight reduction in Covid-19 hospitalization risk compared with treatment with other first-line antihypertensives (OR for ACEIs 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98; OR for ARBs 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.97). Similar results were obtained for hospitalizations involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. There were no meaningful differences in risk for ACEIs compared with ARBs. In an analysis restricted to monotherapy with a first-line agent, CCBs were associated with a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization compared with ACEIs (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14), ARBs (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05-1.15), or thiazide diuretics (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19)., Conclusions: ACEIs and ARBs were not associated with an increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization or with hospitalization involving ICU admission, invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. The finding of a small increased risk of Covid-19 hospitalization with CCBs was unexpected and could be due to residual confounding., (© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

Importance: Guillain-Barré syndrome can be reported after vaccination. This study assesses the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after administration of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV or Shingrix), which is administered in 2 doses 2 to 6 months apart., Objective: Use Medicare claims data to evaluate risk of developing Guillain-Barré syndrome following vaccination with zoster vaccine., Design, Setting, and Participants: This case series cohort study included 849 397 RZV-vaccinated and 1 817 099 zoster vaccine live (ZVL or Zostavax)-vaccinated beneficiaries aged 65 years or older. Self-controlled analyses included events identified from 2 113 758 eligible RZV-vaccinated beneficiaries 65 years or older. We compared the relative risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome after RZV vs ZVL, followed by claims-based and medical record-based self-controlled case series analyses to assess risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during a postvaccination risk window (days 1-42) compared with a control window (days 43-183). In self-controlled analyses, RZV vaccinees were observed from October 1, 2017, to February 29, 2020. Patients were identified in the inpatient, outpatient procedural (including emergency department), and office settings using Medicare administrative data., Exposures: Vaccination with RZV or ZVL vaccines., Main Outcomes and Measures: Guillain-Barré syndrome was identified in Medicare administrative claims data, and cases were assessed through medical record review using the Brighton Collaboration case definition., Results: Amongst those who received RZV vaccinees, the mean age was 74.8 years at first dose, and 58% were women, whereas among those who received the ZVL vaccine, the mean age was 74.3 years, and 60% were women. In the cohort analysis we detected an increase in risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome among RZV vaccinees compared with ZVL vaccinees (rate ratio [RR], 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.41; P = .047). In the self-controlled analyses, we observed 24 and 20 cases during the risk and control period, respectively. Our claims-based analysis identified an increased risk in the risk window compared with the control window (RR, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.53-5.27; P = .001), with an attributable risk of 3 per million RZV doses (95% CI, 0.62-5.64). Our medical record-based analysis confirmed this increased risk (RR, 4.96; 95% CI, 1.43-17.27; P = .01)., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this case series cohort study indicate a slightly increased risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome during the 42 days following RZV vaccination in the Medicare population, with approximately 3 excess Guillain-Barré syndrome cases per million vaccinations. Clinicians and patients should be aware of this risk, while considering the benefit of decreasing the risk of herpes zoster and its complications through an efficacious vaccine, as risk-benefit balance remains in favor of vaccination.

Objectives: To provide updated information on the burdens of sepsis during acute inpatient admissions for Medicare beneficiaries., Design: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services DataLink Project., Setting: All U.S. acute-care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency)., Patients: All Medicare beneficiaries, January 2012-February 2020, with an explicit sepsis diagnostic code assigned during an inpatient admission., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: The count of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) plus Medicare Advantage inpatient sepsis admissions rose from 981,027 (CY2012) to 1,700,433 (CY 2019). The proportion of total admissions with sepsis in the Medicare Advantage population rose from 21.43% to 35.39%, reflecting the increasing beneficiary proportion enrolled in Medicare Advantage. In CY2019, 6-month mortality rates in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries for sepsis continued to decline, but remained high: 59.9% for septic shock, 35.5% for severe sepsis, 30.8% for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, and 26.5% for unspecified sepsis. Total fee-for-service-only inpatient hospital costs rose from $17.79B (CY2012) to $22.98B (CY2019). We estimated that the aggregate cost of sepsis hospital care for the entire U.S. population was at least $57.47B in 2019. Inclusion of 14 months' (January 2019-February 2020) newer data exposed new trends: the cost per patient, number of admissions, and fraction of patients with sepsis labeled as present on admission inflected around November 2015, coincident with the change to International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, and introduction of the Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Management Bundle (SEP-1) metric., Conclusions: Sepsis among Medicare beneficiaries precoronavirus disease 2019 imposed immense burdens upon patients, their families, and the taxpayers., Competing Interests: Drs. Frank, Buchman, Sciarretta, Sowers, Collier, Chavan, Lin, Oke, Rhodes, Santhosh, Chu, Patel, Disbrow, and Kelman disclosed government work. Dr. Buchman’s institution received funding from United States government Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA)/Division of Research, Innovation, and Ventures and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (Editor in Chief of Critical Care Medicine). Dr. Simpson disclosed he is the President of the American College of Chest Physicians. Dr. Sowers’s institution received funding from BARDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. Drs. Collier, Chavan, Lin, Oke, Rhodes, and Santhosh disclosed that this work was performed by Acumen, LLC under contract with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (Contract No. HHSM-500-2014-00027I; Task Order No. HHSM-500-T0004), with funding from U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. Dr. MaCurdy’s institution received funding from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, he received support for article research from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; and he disclosed work for hire. The remaining authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Objectives: To provide contemporary estimates of the burdens (costs and mortality) associated with acute inpatient Medicare beneficiary admissions for sepsis., Design: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services DataLink Project., Setting: All U.S. acute care hospitals, excluding federally operated hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency)., Patients: All Medicare beneficiaries, 2012-2018, with an inpatient admission including one or more explicit sepsis codes., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Total inpatient hospital and skilled nursing facility admission counts, costs, and mortality over time. From calendar year (CY)2012-CY2018, the total number of Medicare Part A/B (fee-for-service) beneficiaries with an inpatient hospital admission associated with an explicit sepsis code rose from 811,644 to 1,136,889. The total cost of inpatient hospital admission including an explicit sepsis code for those beneficiaries in those calendar years rose from $17,792,657,303 to $22,439,794,212. The total cost of skilled nursing facility care in the 90 days subsequent to an inpatient hospital discharge that included an explicit sepsis code for Medicare Part A/B rose from $3,931,616,160 to $5,623,862,486 over that same interval. Precise costs are not available for Medicare Part C (Medicare Advantage) patients. Using available federal data sources, we estimated the aggregate cost of inpatient admissions and skilled nursing facility admissions for Medicare Advantage patients to have risen from $6.0 to $13.4 billion over the CY2012-CY2018 interval. Combining data for fee-for-service beneficiaries and estimates for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, we estimate the total inpatient admission sepsis cost and any subsequent skilled nursing facility admission for all (fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage) Medicare patients to have risen from $27.7 to $41.5 billion. Contemporary 6-month mortality rates for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with a sepsis inpatient admission remain high: for septic shock, approximately 60%; for severe sepsis, approximately 36%; for sepsis attributed to a specific organism, approximately 31%; and for unspecified sepsis, approximately 27%., Conclusion: Sepsis remains common, costly to treat, and presages significant mortality for Medicare beneficiaries.

Objectives: To distinguish characteristics of Medicare beneficiaries who will have an acute inpatient admission for sepsis from those who have an inpatient admission without sepsis, and to describe their further trajectories during and subsequent to those inpatient admissions., Design: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services DataLink Project., Setting: All U.S. acute care hospitals, excepting federal hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency)., Patients: Medicare beneficiaries, 2012-2018, with an inpatient hospital admission including one or more explicit sepsis codes., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Prevalent diagnoses in the year prior to the inpatient admission; healthcare contacts in the week prior to the inpatient admission; discharges, transfers, readmissions, and deaths (trajectories) for 6 months following discharge from the inpatient admission. Beneficiaries with no sepsis inpatient hospital admission for a year prior to an index hospital admission for sepsis were nearly indistinguishable by accumulated diagnostic codes from beneficiaries who had an index hospital admission without sepsis. Although the timing of healthcare services in the week prior to inpatient hospital admission was similar among beneficiaries who would be admitted for sepsis versus those whose inpatient admission did not include a sepsis code, the setting differed: beneficiaries destined for a sepsis admission were more likely to have received skilled nursing or unskilled nursing (e.g., nursing aide for activities of daily living) care. In contrast, comparing beneficiaries who had been free of any inpatient admission for an entire year and then required an inpatient admission, acute inpatient stays that included a sepsis code led to more than three times as many deaths within 1 week of discharge, with more admissions to skilled nursing facilities and fewer discharges to home. Comparing all beneficiaries who were admitted to a skilled nursing facility after an inpatient hospital admission, those who had sepsis coded during the index admission were more likely to die in the skilled nursing facility; more likely to be readmitted to an acute inpatient hospital and subsequently die in that setting; or if they survive to discharge from the skilled nursing facility, they are more likely to go next to a custodial nursing home., Conclusions: Although Medicare beneficiaries destined for an inpatient hospital admission with a sepsis code are nearly indistinguishable by other diagnostic codes from those whose admissions will not have a sepsis code, their healthcare trajectories following the admission are worse. This suggests that an inpatient stay that included a sepsis code not only identifies beneficiaries who were less resilient to infection but also signals increased risk for worsening health, for mortality, and for increased use of advanced healthcare services during and postdischarge along with an increased likelihood of an inpatient hospital readmission.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of sepsis, age, and comorbidities on death following an acute inpatient admission and to model and forecast inpatient and skilled nursing facility costs for Medicare beneficiaries during and subsequent to an acute inpatient sepsis admission., Design: Analysis of paid Medicare claims via the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services DataLink Project (CMS) and leveraging the CMS-Hierarchical Condition Category risk adjustment model., Setting: All U.S. acute care hospitals, excepting federal hospitals (Veterans Administration and Defense Health Agency)., Patients: All Part A/B (fee-for-service) Medicare beneficiaries with an acute inpatient admission in 2017 and who had no inpatient sepsis admission in the prior year., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Logistic regression models to determine covariate risk contribution to death following an acute inpatient admission; conventional regression to predict Medicare beneficiary sepsis costs. Using the Hierarchical Condition Category risk adjustment model to illuminate influence of illness on outcome of inpatient admissions, representative odds ratios (with 95% CIs) for death within 6 months of an admission (referenced to beneficiaries admitted but without the characteristic) are as follows: septic shock, 7.27 (7.19-7.35); metastatic cancer and acute leukemia (Hierarchical Condition Category 8), 6.76 (6.71-6.82); all sepsis, 2.63 (2.62-2.65); respiratory arrest (Hierarchical Condition Category 83), 2.55 (2.35-2.77); end-stage liver disease (Hierarchical Condition Category 27), 2.53 (2.49-2.56); and severe sepsis without shock, 2.48 (2.45-2.51). Models of the cost of sepsis care for Medicare beneficiaries forecast arise approximately 13% over 2 years owing the rising enrollments in Medicare offset by the cost of care per admission., Conclusions: A sepsis inpatient admission is associated with marked increase in risk of death that is comparable to the risks associated with inpatient admissions for other common and serious chronic illnesses. The aggregate costs of sepsis care for Medicare beneficiaries will continue to increase.

Using Medicare claims data on prescriptions of oseltamivir dispensed to people 65 years old and older, we present a descriptive analysis of patterns of influenza activity in the United States for 579 core-based statistical areas (CBSAs) from the 2010-2011 through the 2015-2016 influenza seasons. During this time, 1,010,819 beneficiaries received a prescription of oseltamivir, ranging from 45,888 in 2011-2012 to 380,745 in 2014-2015. For each season, the peak weekly number of prescriptions correlated with the total number of prescriptions (Pearson's r ≥ 0.88). The variance in peak timing decreased with increasing severity (p < 0.0001). Among these 579 CBSAs, neither peak timing, nor relative timing, nor severity of influenza seasons showed evidence of spatial autocorrelation (0.02 ≤ Moran's I ≤ 0.23). After aggregating data to the state level, agreement between the seasonal severity at the CBSA level and the state level was fair (median Cohen's weighted κ = 0.32, interquartile range = 0.26-0.39). Based on seasonal severity, relative timing, and geographic place, we used hierarchical agglomerative clustering to join CBSAs into influenza zones for each season. Seasonal maps of influenza zones showed no obvious patterns that might assist in predicting influenza zones for future seasons. Because of the large number of prescriptions, these data may be especially useful for characterizing influenza activity and geographic distribution during low severity seasons, when other data sources measuring influenza activity are likely to be sparse., (Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Statins are used to reduce cardiovascular disease risk. Recent studies suggest that statin use may be associated with an increased influenza risk among influenza vaccinees. We used Medicare data to evaluate associations between statins and risks of influenza-related encounters among vaccinees., Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified Medicare beneficiaries aged > 65 years who received high-dose (HD) or standard-dose (SD) influenza vaccines at pharmacies from 2010-2011 through 2014-2015. Statin users were matched to nonusers by vaccine type, demographics, prior medical encounters, and comorbidities. We used multivariable Poisson models to estimate associations between statin use around the time of vaccination and risk of influenza-related encounters. Study outcomes included influenza-related office visits with a rapid test followed by dispensing of oseltamivir and influenza-related hospitalizations (including emergency room visits) during high influenza circulation periods., Results: The study included 1403651 statin users matched to nonusers. Cohorts were well balanced, with standardized mean differences ≤0.03 for all measured covariates. For statin users compared to nonusers, the adjusted relative risk was 1.086 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.025-1.150) for influenza-related visits and 1.096 (95% CI, 1.013-1.185) for influenza-related hospitalizations. The risk difference ranged from ‒0.02 to 0.23 for influenza-related visits and from ‒0.04 to 0.13 for hospitalizations, depending on season severity. Results were similar for HD and SD vaccinees and for nonsynthetic and synthetic statin users., Conclusions: Among 2.8 million Medicare beneficiaries, these results suggest that statin use around the time of vaccination does not substantially affect the risk of influenza-related medical encounters among older adults.

Background: The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) routinely recommends three vaccines - influenza, hepatitis B, and pneumococcal vaccines - for End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) dialysis patients., Methods: We sought to assess vaccination coverage among fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD who received Part B dialysis services at any point from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2015 (through June 30, 2016 for influenza). To assess influenza vaccination rates in a given influenza season, we restricted the population to beneficiaries who were continuously enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B throughout all twelve months of that season. To assess hepatitis B and pneumococcal vaccine coverage following dialysis initiation, we developed a Kaplan-Meier curve for all patients who began dialysis between 2006 and 2015., Results: For influenza vaccination, we identified an average of approximately 325,000 ESRD dialysis beneficiaries enrolled through each influenza season from 2006-2015. Seasonal influenza vaccination rates steadily increased during the 10-year period, from 52% in 2006-2007 to 71% in 2015-2016. The greatest increases in influenza vaccination appear in non-white beneficiaries with overall utilization in non-whites higher than in whites (p < .001). For the hepatitis B and pneumococcal vaccinations, we identified over 350,000 ESRD dialysis beneficiaries who began dialysis over the 10-year study window. The probability of receiving a hepatitis B vaccine within the first three years of entering into the ESRD program was higher (77%) than the probability of receiving any pneumococcal vaccine (53%). 45% of ESRD patients completed at least one dose of the two hepatitis B series (three-dose or four-dose) at any time during the study period., Conclusions: Opportunities exist at regional and facility levels to improve vaccination coverage. Compliance to ACIP recommendations may directly affect risk for ESRD dialysis patients for complications from diseases that can be mitigated by vaccination., (Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose: Assess angioedema risk with exposure to angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) compared with beta-blockers, by race/ethnicity., Methods: New-user cohorts of Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older initiating ACEI, ARB, or beta-blocker treatment from March 2007 to March 2014 were constructed. Angioedema incidence rates by drug and race/ethnicity were computed for 1-30 and 31-365 days of treatment. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine angioedema risk between cohorts., Results: Angioedema incidence rates (per 1000 person years) in beta-blocker users were 1.80 (whites), 4.11 (blacks), 1.89 (Asians), and 2.10 (Hispanics); in ACEI users, 4.03, 23.77, 2.94, and 4.27; and in ARB users, 1.73, 3.11, 1.10, and 1.90, respectively. Incidence rates were significantly higher in the first 30 days of exposure for all drug × race/ethnic groups. Overall, angioedema risk increased among ACEI users (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 2.75-3.07) but not ARB users (0.93, 0.85-1.02) versus beta-blocker users. Angioedema risk with ACEIs versus beta-blockers increased more in blacks (6.28, 5.44-7.24) than whites (2.33, 2.19-2.48), Hispanics (2.04, 1.36-3.07), and Asians (1.48, 0.94-2.35). Compared with white beta-blocker users, angioedema risk was increased 2.9-fold in whites, 20.2-fold in blacks, and 2.3-fold in other race/ethnic groups combined during the first 30 days of ACEI exposure., Conclusions: There was significant effect modification of angioedema risk by race and ACEI use for blacks, but not for other race/ethnicity groups. Angioedema risk was significantly greater in the first 30 days of exposure for all, and highest among blacks., (Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Purpose: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims comprise an administrative database of beneficiary-specific clinical information. This study evaluates the impacts of (i) claim information updates (claims adjudication) and (ii) delay in claim processing (claims delay) on real-time evaluation of health service and drug safety signals using the Medicare database., Methods: Using Medicare claims data accumulated through May 2009 on health services rendered in 2006 and drugs dispensed in 2007, this study measures the frequency with which clinical information changes in the database as a result of (i) claims adjudication and (ii) claims delay., Results: Over 85% of health services claims were processed within 8 weeks after the date of service, and 72% of drug claims were processed within 3 months after the dispense date. Clinical information changed for no more than 3% of unique claim groups in inpatient hospital, outpatient institutional, physician's office, and prescription drug Medicare claim settings., Conclusions: Claims delay is consistent across time and is minimal. Claims adjudication does not substantially impact the content of clinical information in the Medicare claims database. Therefore, the Medicare claims database provides consistent information regarding health services and prescription drugs in a manner that is prompt enough to facilitate medical product safety evaluations in real time.