Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Alpha- and Delta-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021

Members of the I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital study teams (in addition to the named authors): Svjetlana Karabuva, Petra Tomaš Petrić, Marija Marković, Sandra Ljubičić, Bojana Mahmutović, Irena Tabain, Petra Smoljo, Iva Pem Novosel, Tanya Melillo, John Paul Cauchi, Benédicte Lissoir, Xavier Holemans, Marc Hainaut, Nicolas Dauby, Benedicte Delaere, Marc Bourgeois, Evelyn Petit, Marijke Reynders, Door Jouck, Koen Magerman, Marieke Bleyen, Melissa Vermeulen, Sébastien Fierens, François Dufrasne, Siel Daelemans, Ala’a Al Kerwi, Francoise Berthet, Guy Fagherazzi, Myriam Alexandre, Charlene Bennett, Jim Christle, Jeff Connell, Peter Doran, Laura Feeney, Binita Maharjan, Sinead McDermott, Rosa McNamara, Nadra Nurdin, Salif Mamadou Cissé, Anne-Sophie L'Honneur, Xavier Duval, Yolande Costa, Fidouh Nadhira, Florence Galtier, Laura Crantelle, Vincent Foulongne, Phillipe Vanhems, Sélilah Amour, Bruno Lina, Fabrice Lainé, Laetitia Gallais, Gisèle Lagathu, Anna Maisa, Yacine Saidi, Christine Durier, Rebecca Bauer, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Adriana Silva, Raquel Guiomar, Margarida Tavares, Débora Pereira, Maria José Manata, Heidi Gruner, André Almeida, Paula Pinto, Cristina Bárbara, Itziar Casado, Ana Miqueleiz, Ana Navascués, Camino Trobajo-Sanmartín, Miguel Fernández-Huerta, María Eugenia Portillo, Carmen Ezpeleta, Nerea Egüés, Manuel García Cenoz, Eva Ardanaz, Marcela Guevara, Conchi Moreno-Iribas, Hana Orlíková, Carmen Mihaela Dorobat, Carmen Manciuc, Simin Aysel Florescu, Alexandru Marin, Sorin Dinu, Catalina Pascu, Alina Ivanciuc, Iulia Bistriceanu, Mihaela Oprea, Maria Elena Mihai, Silke Buda, Ute Preuss, Marianne Wedde, Auksė Mickienė, Giedrė Gefenaitė, Alain Moren, Anthony NardoneIntroduction: Two large multicentre European hospital networks have estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19 since 2021. Aim: We aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalised severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) patients ≥ 20 years, combining data from these networks during Alpha (March–June)- and Delta (June–December)-dominant periods, 2021. Methods: Forty-six participating hospitals across 14 countries follow a similar generic protocol using the test-negative case–control design. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) as two doses of a two-dose or one of a single-dose vaccine ≥ 14 days before onset. Results: We included 1,087 cases (538 controls) and 1,669 cases (1,442 controls) in the Alpha- and Delta-dominant periods, respectively. During the Alpha period, VE against hospitalisation with SARS-CoV2 for complete Comirnaty PSV was 85% (95% CI: 69–92) overall and 75% (95% CI: 42–90) in those aged ≥ 80 years. During the Delta period, among SARI patients ≥ 20 years with symptom onset ≥ 150 days from last PSV dose, VE for complete Comirnaty PSV was 54% (95% CI: 18–74). Among those receiving Comirnaty PSV and mRNA booster (any product) ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose, VE was 91% (95% CI: 57–98). In time-since-vaccination analysis, complete all-product PSV VE was > 90% in those with their last dose < 90 days before onset; ≥ 70% in those 90–179 days before onset. Conclusions: Our results from this EU multi-country hospital setting showed that VE for complete PSV alone was higher in the Alpha- than the Delta-dominant period, and addition of a first booster dose during the latter period increased VE to over 90%.Key public health message: - What did you want to address in this study? To understand how well the COVID-19 vaccine was performing in Europe against hospitalisation during SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Delta variant periods, we present vaccine effectiveness results from a multi-country study of complete and booster dose COVID-19 vaccination among adults (aged 20 years and over). - What have we learnt from this study? Between March and June 2021 (Alpha period), vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% for partial vaccination and 86% for complete vaccination. For June to December 2021 (Delta period), vaccine effectiveness for complete vaccination was lower (52%) but with addition of an mRNA booster dose, effectiveness reached 91%, and remained > 90% up to 119 days after the booster dose. - What are the implications of your findings for public health? In Europe in 2021, COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness results for the Alpha period indicated an excellent benefit for preventing hospitalisation after complete vaccination. During Delta variant circulation, however, a booster dose was required to achieve this level of effectiveness, and this was maintained for up to 4 months post booster.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalisation in adults (≥ 20 years) during Omicron-dominant circulation: I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS SARI VE networks, Europe, 2021 to 2022

Introduction: The I-MOVE-COVID-19 and VEBIS hospital networks have been measuring COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in participating European countries since early 2021. Aim: We aimed to measure VE against PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in patients ≥ 20 years hospitalised with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) from December 2021 to July 2022 (Omicron-dominant period). Methods: In both networks, 46 hospitals (13 countries) follow a similar test-negative case-control protocol. We defined complete primary series vaccination (PSV) and first booster dose vaccination as last dose of either vaccine received ≥ 14 days before symptom onset (stratifying first booster into received < 150 and ≥ 150 days after last PSV dose). We measured VE overall, by vaccine category/product, age group and time since first mRNA booster dose, adjusting by site as a fixed effect, and by swab date, age, sex, and presence/absence of at least one commonly collected chronic condition. Results: We included 2,779 cases and 2,362 controls. The VE of all vaccine products combined against hospitalisation for laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% (95% CI: 29-54) for complete PSV (with last dose received ≥ 150 days before onset), while it was 59% (95% CI: 51-66) after addition of one booster dose. The VE was 85% (95% CI: 78-89), 70% (95% CI: 61-77) and 36% (95% CI: 17-51) for those with onset 14-59 days, 60-119 days and 120-179 days after booster vaccination, respectively. Conclusions: Our results suggest that, during the Omicron period, observed VE against SARI hospitalisation improved with first mRNA booster dose, particularly for those having symptom onset < 120 days after first booster dose.Key public health message: 1. What did you want to address in this study? In order to understand how well the COVID-19 vaccine is performing in Europe against hospitalisation during the period when the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was circulating, we investigated vaccine effectiveness using data from a multi-country study of complete and booster-dose COVID-19 vaccination among adults aged 20 years and over. 2. What have we learnt from this study? Between December 2021 and July 2022, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 was 43% for complete vaccination. With addition of an mRNA booster dose, effectiveness was 59% overall. It was higher when onset of illness was close to the date of the last vaccination, at 85% when last booster dose was 14–59 days before onset, at 70% for 60–119 days, and falling below 40% for 120–179 days. 3. What are the implications of your findings for public health? In European hospital settings in 2022, during the Omicron period, COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccine provided an improved benefit for preventing hospitalisation, particularly if disease onset was within 4 months of receiving the booster dose.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

COVID-19 Vaccines against Omicron Variant: Real-World Data on Effectiveness

The efficacy of vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has now been well established in phase III clinical trials. However, clinical studies based on real-world data remain critical to assess vaccines effectiveness (VE), especially in specific populations and against variants of concern (VOC). This review presents the principles and methods of VE studies and the main available results on VE of COVID-19 vaccines at the time of Omicron circulation. References for this narrative review were identified through searches of PubMed database up to 13 September 2022. The results of phase III clinical trials have been globally confirmed by VE in real-life studies, including in the elderly. Emergence of VOC Omicron emphasized the importance of booster doses to maintain a high level of protection against severe forms. There are still numerous challenges regarding booster(s) and duration of immunity, particularly in specific subpopulations, and regarding the need for adapted vaccines

Modelling human-to-human transmission of monkeypox

International audienc

TREAT-B or Treat All: time for a broader vision on hepatitis B elimination – Author's reply

International audienceNo abstract availabl

Performance of two simplified HBV treatment criteria (TREAT-B score and WHO guidelines) in Burkina Faso, West Africa

International audienc

Health Literacy and Health Care System Confidence as Determinants of Attitudes to Vaccines in France: Representative Cross-Sectional Study

BackgroundHealth literacy involves individuals’ knowledge, personal skills, and confidence to take action to evaluate and appraise health-related information and improve their health or that of their community. ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze the association between health literacy and attitude toward vaccines, adjusted with other factors. MethodsWe used the SLAVACO Wave 3, a survey conducted in December 2021 among a sample of 2022 individuals, representative of the French adult population. We investigated factors associated with the attitude toward vaccines using respondents’ different sociodemographic data, health literacy levels, and the health care system confidence levels using a multinomial logistic regression analysis. ResultsAmong the participants, 440.4 (21.8%) were classified as “distrustful of vaccines in general,” 729.2 (36.1%) were “selectively hesitant,” and 852.4 (42.2%) were “nonhesitant.” In our model, the level of health literacy was not statistically different between the “distrustful of vaccines in general” and the “selectively hesitant” (P=.48), but it was associated with being a “nonhesitant” (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.86, 95% CI 1.25-2.76). The confidence in the health care system was a strong predictor for a “nonhesitant” attitude toward vaccines (aOR 12.4, 95% CI 7.97-19.2). We found a positive correlation of 0.34 (P<.001) between health literacy and confidence in the health care system, but the interaction term between health literacy and health care system confidence was not significant in our model. ConclusionsHealth literacy was associated with a “nonhesitant” attitude toward vaccines. The findings demonstrated that health literacy and confidence in the health care system are modestly correlated. Therefore, to tackle the subject of vaccine hesitancy, the main focus should be on increasing the population’s confidence and on increasing their health literacy levels or providing vaccine information addressing the needs of less literate citizens

Immunological and clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations: a systematic review

International audienceBackground: Available data show that COVID-19 vaccines may be less effective in immunocompromised populations, who are at increased risk of severe COVID-19.Objectives: We conducted a systematic review of literature to assess immunogenicity, efficacy and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations.Data sources: We searched Medline and Embase databases.Study eligibility criteria, patients, interventions: We included studies of COVID-19 vaccines after complete vaccination in immunocompromised patients until 31 August 2021. Studies with <10 patients, safety data only and case series of breakthrough infections were excluded.Methods: Risk of bias was assessed via the tool developed by the National Institutes of Health on interventional and observational studies. Immunogenicity was assessed through non-response rate defined as no anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies, efficacy and effectiveness by the relative reduction in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19. We collected factors associated with the risk of non-response. We presented collected data by immunosuppression type.Results: We screened 5917 results, included 162 studies. There were 157 on immunogenicity in 25 209 participants, including 7835 cancer or haematological malignancy patients (31.1%), 6302 patients on dialysis (25.0%), 5974 solid organ transplant recipients (23.7%) and 4680 immune-mediated disease patients (18.6%). Proportion of non-responders seemed higher among solid organ transplant recipients (range 18-100%) and patients with haematological malignancy (range 14-61%), and lower in patients with cancer (range 2-36%) and patients on dialysis (range 2-30%). Risk factors for non-response included older age, use of corticosteroids, immunosuppressive or anti-CD20 agent. Ten studies evaluated immunogenicity of an additional dose. Five studies evaluated vaccine efficacy or effectiveness: three on SARS-CoV-2 infection (range 71-81%), one on COVID-19-related hospitalization (62.9%), one had a too small sample size.Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the risk of low immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in immunocompromised populations, especially solid organ transplant recipients and patients with haematological malignancy. Despite lack of vaccine effectiveness data, enhanced vaccine regimens may be necessary

Recurrent Bordetella holmesii Bacteremia and Nasal Carriage in a Patient Receiving Rituximab

International audienc

Performances of Dried Blood Spots and Point-of-Care Devices to Identify Virological Failure in HIV-Infected Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

International audienceTo broaden access to HIV viral load monitoring (VLM), the use of blood samples from dried blood spots (DBS) or point-of-care (POC) devices, could be of great help in settings where plasma is not easily accessible. The variety of assays available makes the choice complex. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of DBS and POC devices to identify patients in virological failure using World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations (viral load ≥1000 copies/mL), compared with plasma, for the assays currently available. Four databases were searched for articles, and two reviewers independently identified articles reporting sensitivity and specificity of DBS and/or POC to identify patients in virological failure. We excluded articles that used other thresholds as well as articles with a total number of participants below 50 to avoid reporting bias. Heterogeneity and factors associated with assays' performances were assessed by I2 statistics and metaregression. The protocol of this review follows the PRISMA guidelines. Out of 941 articles, 47 were included: 32 DBS evaluations and 16 POC evaluations. Overall, when using DBS, the Abbott RT HIV-1, Roche CAP-CTM, NucliSENS BioMerieux and Aptima assays presented sensitivity and specificity exceeding 85%, but reported results were highly heterogeneous. Factors associated with better performances were high volume of blood and the use of the same assay for DBS and plasma VLM. Regarding the POC devices, SAMBA I, SAMBA II, and GeneXpert devices presented high sensitivity and specificity exceeding 90%, with less heterogeneity. DBS is suitable VLM, but performances can vary greatly depending on the protocols, and should be performed in trained centers. POC is suitable for VLM with less risk of heterogeneity but is more intensive in costs and logistics