Assessing the Reliability of SARS-CoV-2 Neutralization Studies That Use Post-Vaccination Sera

Assessing COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants is crucial for determining future vaccination strategies and other public health strategies. When clinical effectiveness data are unavailable, a common method of assessing vaccine performance is to utilize neutralization assays using post-vaccination sera. Neutralization studies are typically performed across a wide array of settings, populations and vaccination strategies, and using different methodologies. For any comparison and meta-analysis to be meaningful, the design and methodology of the studies used must at minimum address aspects that confer a certain degree of reliability and comparability. We identified and characterized three important categories in which studies differ (cohort details, assay details and data reporting details) and that can affect the overall reliability and/or usefulness of neutralization assay results. We define reliability as a measure of methodological accuracy, proper study setting concerning subjects, samples and viruses, and reporting quality. Each category comprises a set of several relevant key parameters. To each parameter, we assigned a possible impact (ranging from low to high) on overall study reliability depending on its potential to influence the results. We then developed a reliability assessment tool that assesses the aggregate reliability of a study across all parameters. The reliability assessment tool provides explicit selection criteria for inclusion of comparable studies in meta-analyses of neutralization activity of SARS-CoV-2 variants in post-vaccination sera and can also both guide the design of future neutralization studies and serve as a checklist for including important details on key parameters in publications

Monitoring the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines into West Africa: design and implementation of a population-based surveillance system.

Routine use of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) in developing countries is expected to lead to a significant reduction in childhood deaths. However, PCVs have been associated with replacement disease with non-vaccine serotypes. We established a population-based surveillance system to document the direct and indirect impact of PCVs on the incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and radiological pneumonia in those aged 2 months and older in The Gambia, and to monitor changes in serotype-specific IPD. Here we describe how this surveillance system was set up and is being operated as a partnership between the Medical Research Council Unit and the Gambian Government. This surveillance system is expected to provide crucial information for immunisation policy and serves as a potential model for those introducing routine PCV vaccination in diverse settings

Effect of 10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on the incidence of radiologically-confirmed pneumonia and clinically-defined pneumonia in Kenyan children: an interrupted time-series analysis

BACKGROUND: Pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) are highly protective against invasive pneumococcal disease caused by vaccine serotypes, but the burden of pneumococcal disease in low-income and middle-income countries is dominated by pneumonia, most of which is non-bacteraemic. We examined the effect of 10-valent PCV on the incidence of pneumonia in Kenya. METHODS: We linked prospective hospital surveillance for clinically-defined WHO severe or very severe pneumonia at Kilifi County Hospital, Kenya, from 2002 to 2015, to population surveillance at Kilifi Health and Demographic Surveillance System, comprising 45 000 children younger than 5 years. Chest radiographs were read according to a WHO standard. A 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae protein D conjugate vaccine (PCV10) was introduced in Kenya in January, 2011. In Kilifi, there was a three-dose catch-up campaign for infants (aged <1 year) and a two-dose catch-up campaign for children aged 1-4 years, between January and March, 2011. We estimated the effect of PCV10 on the incidence of clinically-defined and radiologically-confirmed pneumonia through interrupted time-series analysis, accounting for seasonal and temporal trends. FINDINGS: Between May 1, 2002 and March 31, 2015, 44 771 children aged 2-143 months were admitted to Kilifi County Hospital. We excluded 810 admissions between January and March, 2011, and 182 admissions during nurses' strikes. In 2002-03, the incidence of admission with clinically-defined pneumonia was 2170 per 100 000 in children aged 2-59 months. By the end of the catch-up campaign in 2011, 4997 (61·1%) of 8181 children aged 2-11 months had received at least two doses of PCV10 and 23 298 (62·3%) of 37 416 children aged 12-59 months had received at least one dose. Across the 13 years of surveillance, the incidence of clinically-defined pneumonia declined by 0·5% per month, independent of vaccine introduction. There was no secular trend in the incidence of radiologically-confirmed pneumonia over 8 years of study. After adjustment for secular trend and season, incidence rate ratios for admission with radiologically-confirmed pneumonia, clinically-defined pneumonia, and diarrhoea (control condition), associated temporally with PCV10 introduction and the catch-up campaign, were 0·52 (95% CI 0·32-0·86), 0·73 (0·54-0·97), and 0·63 (0·31-1·26), respectively. Immediately before PCV10 was introduced, the annual incidence of clinically-defined pneumonia was 1220 per 100 000; this value was reduced by 329 per 100 000 at the point of PCV10 introduction. INTERPRETATION: Over 13 years, admissions to Kilifi County Hospital for clinically-defined pneumonia decreased sharply (by 27%) in association with the introduction of PCV10, as did the incidence of radiologically-confirmed pneumonia (by 48%). The burden of hospital admissions for childhood pneumonia in Kilifi, Kenya, has been reduced substantially by the introduction of PCV10. FUNDING: Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance and Wellcome Trust

Systematic Evaluation of Serotypes Causing Invasive Pneumococcal Disease among Children Under Five: The Pneumococcal Global Serotype Project

Hope Johnson and colleagues calculate the global and regional burden of serotype-specific pneumococcal disease in children under the age of five

Should Controls With Respiratory Symptoms Be Excluded From Case-Control Studies of Pneumonia Etiology? Reflections From the PERCH Study.

Many pneumonia etiology case-control studies exclude controls with respiratory illness from enrollment or analyses. Herein we argue that selecting controls regardless of respiratory symptoms provides the least biased estimates of pneumonia etiology. We review 3 reasons investigators may choose to exclude controls with respiratory symptoms in light of epidemiologic principles of control selection and present data from the Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) study where relevant to assess their validity. We conclude that exclusion of controls with respiratory symptoms will result in biased estimates of etiology. Randomly selected community controls, with or without respiratory symptoms, as long as they do not meet the criteria for case-defining pneumonia, are most representative of the general population from which cases arose and the least subject to selection bias

Bayesian Estimation of Pneumonia Etiology: Epidemiologic Considerations and Applications to the Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health Study.

In pneumonia, specimens are rarely obtained directly from the infection site, the lung, so the pathogen causing infection is determined indirectly from multiple tests on peripheral clinical specimens, which may have imperfect and uncertain sensitivity and specificity, so inference about the cause is complex. Analytic approaches have included expert review of case-only results, case-control logistic regression, latent class analysis, and attributable fraction, but each has serious limitations and none naturally integrate multiple test results. The Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) study required an analytic solution appropriate for a case-control design that could incorporate evidence from multiple specimens from cases and controls and that accounted for measurement error. We describe a Bayesian integrated approach we developed that combined and extended elements of attributable fraction and latent class analyses to meet some of these challenges and illustrate the advantage it confers regarding the challenges identified for other methods

The Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health Project: A 21st Century Childhood Pneumonia Etiology Study

The Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health (PERCH) project is a 7-country, standardized, comprehensive evaluation of the etiologic agents causing severe pneumonia in children from developing countries. During previous etiology studies, between one-quarter and one-third of patients failed to yield an obvious etiology; PERCH will employ and evaluate previously unavailable innovative, more sensitive diagnostic techniques. Innovative and rigorous epidemiologic and analytic methods will be used to establish the causal association between presence of potential pathogens and pneumonia. By strategic selection of study sites that are broadly representative of regions with the greatest burden of childhood pneumonia, PERCH aims to provide data that reflect the epidemiologic situation in developing countries in 2015, using pneumococcal and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccines. PERCH will also address differences in host, environmental, and/or geographic factors that might determine pneumonia etiology and, by preserving specimens, will generate a resource for future research and pathogen discovery

Duration of effectiveness of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease: results of a systematic review and meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Knowing whether COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness wanes is crucial for informing vaccine policy, such as the need for and timing of booster doses. We aimed to systematically review the evidence for the duration of protection of COVID-19 vaccines against various clinical outcomes, and to assess changes in the rates of breakthrough infection caused by the delta variant with increasing time since vaccination. METHODS: This study was designed as a systematic review and meta-regression. We did a systematic review of preprint and peer-reviewed published article databases from June 17, 2021, to Dec 2, 2021. Randomised controlled trials of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and observational studies of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness were eligible. Studies with vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates at discrete time intervals of people who had received full vaccination and that met predefined screening criteria underwent full-text review. We used random-effects meta-regression to estimate the average change in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness 1-6 months after full vaccination. FINDINGS: Of 13 744 studies screened, 310 underwent full-text review, and 18 studies were included (all studies were carried out before the omicron variant began to circulate widely). Risk of bias, established using the risk of bias 2 tool for randomised controlled trials or the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool was low for three studies, moderate for eight studies, and serious for seven studies. We included 78 vaccine-specific vaccine efficacy or effectiveness evaluations (Pfizer-BioNTech-Comirnaty, n=38; Moderna-mRNA-1273, n=23; Janssen-Ad26.COV2.S, n=9; and AstraZeneca-Vaxzevria, n=8). On average, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased from 1 month to 6 months after full vaccination by 21·0 percentage points (95% CI 13·9-29·8) among people of all ages and 20·7 percentage points (10·2-36·6) among older people (as defined by each study, who were at least 50 years old). For symptomatic COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 24·9 percentage points (95% CI 13·4-41·6) in people of all ages and 32·0 percentage points (11·0-69·0) in older people. For severe COVID-19 disease, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness decreased by 10·0 percentage points (95% CI 6·1-15·4) in people of all ages and 9·5 percentage points (5·7-14·6) in older people. Most (81%) vaccine efficacy or effectiveness estimates against severe disease remained greater than 70% over time. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19 vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against severe disease remained high, although it did decrease somewhat by 6 months after full vaccination. By contrast, vaccine efficacy or effectiveness against infection and symptomatic disease decreased approximately 20-30 percentage points by 6 months. The decrease in vaccine efficacy or effectiveness is likely caused by, at least in part, waning immunity, although an effect of bias cannot be ruled out. Evaluating vaccine efficacy or effectiveness beyond 6 months will be crucial for updating COVID-19 vaccine policy. FUNDING: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations