Suchergebnisse

Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co-circulated in Europe in 2014/15. We undertook a multicentre case-control study in eight European countries to measure 2014/15 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed all or a systematic sample of ILI patients. We compared the odds of vaccination of ILI influenza positive patients to negative patients. We calculated adjusted VE by influenza type/subtype, and age group. Among 6,579 ILI patients included, 1,828 were A(H3N2), 539 A(H1N1)pdm09 and 1,038 B. VE against A(H3N2) was 14.4% (95% confidence interval (CI): -6.3 to 31.0) overall, 20.7% (95%CI: -22.3 to 48.5), 10.9% (95%CI -30.8 to 39.3) and 15.8% (95% CI: -20.2 to 41.0) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 years, respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 54.2% (95%CI: 31.2 to 69.6) overall, 73.1% (95%CI: 39.6 to 88.1), 59.7% (95%CI: 10.9 to 81.8), and 22.4% (95%CI: -44.4 to 58.4) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 years respectively. VE against B was 48.0% (95%CI: 28.9 to 61.9) overall, 62.1% (95%CI: 14.9 to 83.1), 41.4% (95%CI: 6.2 to 63.4) and 50.4% (95%CI: 14.6 to 71.2) among those aged 0-14, 15-59 and ≥60 years respectively. VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 and B was moderate. The low VE against A(H3N2) is consistent with the reported mismatch between circulating and vaccine strains. ; Sí

Free PMC article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/32258201/ ; Background: Morbidity, severity, and mortality associated with annual influenza epidemics are of public health concern. We analyzed surveillance data on hospitalized laboratory-confirmed influenza cases admitted to intensive care units to identify common determinants for fatal outcome and inform and target public health prevention strategies, including risk communication. Methods: We performed a descriptive analysis and used Poisson regression models with robust variance to estimate the association of age, sex, virus (sub)type, and underlying medical condition with fatal outcome using European Union data from 2009 to 2017. Results: Of 13 368 cases included in the basic dataset, 2806 (21%) were fatal. Age ≥40 years and infection with influenza A virus were associated with fatal outcome. Of 5886 cases with known underlying medical conditions and virus A subtype included in a more detailed analysis, 1349 (23%) were fatal. Influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09 or A(H3N2) infection, age ≥60 years, cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection and/or other immune deficiency, and heart, kidney, and liver disease were associated with fatal outcome; the risk of death was lower for patients with chronic lung disease and for pregnant women. Conclusions: This study re-emphasises the importance of preventing influenza in the elderly and tailoring strategies to risk groups with underlying medical conditions. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Background: Morbidity, severity, and mortality associated with annual influenza epidemics are of public health concern. We analyzed surveillance data on hospitalized laboratory-confirmed influenza cases admitted to intensive care units to identify common determinants for fatal outcome and inform and target public health prevention strategies, including risk communication. Methods: We performed a descriptive analysis and used Poisson regression models with robust variance to estimate the association of age, sex, virus (sub)type, and underlying medical condition with fatal outcome using European Union data from 2009 to 2017. Results: Of 13 368 cases included in the basic dataset, 2806 (21%) were fatal. Age ≥40 years and infection with influenza A virus were associated with fatal outcome. Of 5886 cases with known underlying medical conditions and virus A subtype included in a more detailed analysis, 1349 (23%) were fatal. Influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09 or A(H3N2) infection, age ≥60 years, cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection and/or other immune deficiency, and heart, kidney, and liver disease were associated with fatal outcome; the risk of death was lower for patients with chronic lung disease and for pregnant women. Conclusions: This study re-emphasises the importance of preventing influenza in the elderly and tailoring strategies to risk groups with underlying medical conditions. ; This work was funded by an internal ECDC budget. ; Sí

BACKGROUND: Morbidity, severity, and mortality associated with annual influenza epidemics are of public health concern. We analyzed surveillance data on hospitalized laboratory-confirmed influenza cases admitted to intensive care units to identify common determinants for fatal outcome and inform and target public health prevention strategies, including risk communication. METHODS: We performed a descriptive analysis and used Poisson regression models with robust variance to estimate the association of age, sex, virus (sub)type, and underlying medical condition with fatal outcome using European Union data from 2009 to 2017. RESULTS: Of 13 368 cases included in the basic dataset, 2806 (21%) were fatal. Age ≥40 years and infection with influenza A virus were associated with fatal outcome. Of 5886 cases with known underlying medical conditions and virus A subtype included in a more detailed analysis, 1349 (23%) were fatal. Influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09 or A(H3N2) infection, age ≥60 years, cancer, human immunodeficiency virus infection and/or other immune deficiency, and heart, kidney, and liver disease were associated with fatal outcome; the risk of death was lower for patients with chronic lung disease and for pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: This study re-emphasises the importance of preventing influenza in the elderly and tailoring strategies to risk groups with underlying medical conditions.

Influenza A(H3N2) viruses predominated in Europe in 2016-17. In 2017-18 A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated. The A(H3N2) vaccine component was the same in both seasons; while the A(H1N1)pdm09 component changed in 2017-18. In both seasons, vaccine seed A(H3N2) viruses developed adaptations/alterations during propagation in eggs, impacting antigenicity. We used the test-negative design in a multicentre primary care case-control study in 12 European countries to measure 2016-17 and 2017-18 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) overall and by age group. During the 2017-18 season, the overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 59% (95% CI: 47-69). Among those aged 0-14, 15-64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 64% (95% CI: 37-79), 50% (95% CI: 28-66) and 66% (95% CI: 42-80), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H3N2) was 28% (95% CI: 17-38) in 2016-17 and 13% (95% CI: -15 to 34) in 2017-18. Among 0-14-year-olds VE against A(H3N2) was 28% (95%CI: -10 to 53) and 29% (95% CI: -87 to 73), among 15-64-year-olds 34% (95% CI: 18-46) and 33% (95% CI: -3 to 56) and among those aged ≥65 years 15% (95% CI: -10 to 34) and -9% (95% CI: -74 to 32) in 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively. Our study suggests the new A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine component conferred good protection against circulating strains, while VE against A(H3N2) was <35% in 2016-17 and 2017-18. The egg propagation derived antigenic mismatch of the vaccine seed virus with circulating strains may have contributed to this low effectiveness. A(H3N2) seed viruses for vaccines in subsequent seasons may be subject to the same adaptations; in years with lower than expected VE, recommendations of preventive measures other than vaccination should be given in a timely manner. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. ECDC has contributed funds for the coordination and some study sites under the Framework contract no. ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. The WHO Regional office for Europe has contributed funds for the Romanian study site. ; Sí

I-MOVE/I-MOVE+ study team - Portugal: Verónica Gomez, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Baltazar Nunes (Departamento de Epidemiologia, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal); Pedro Pechirra, Paula Cristóvão, Patrícia Conde, Inês Costa (Departamento de Doenças Infeciosas, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon, Portugal). ; Background:During the 2015/16 influenza season in Europe, the co-circulating influenza viruses were A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria, which was antigenically distinct from the B/Yamagata component in the trivalent influenza vaccine. Methods:We used the test negative design in a multicentre case–control study in twelve European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as influenza. General practitioners swabbed a systematic sample of consulting ILI patients ainfluenza Vaccinend a random sample of influenza positive swabs were sequenced. We calculated adjusted VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 and influenza B overall and by age group. Results: We included 11,430 ILI patients, of which 2272 were influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and 2901 were influenza B cases. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 32.9% (95% CI: 15.5-46.7). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 31.9% (95% CI: -32.3-65.0), 41.4% (95%CI: 20.5-56.7) and 13.2% (95% CI: -38.0-45.3) respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 genetic group 6B.1 was 32.8% (95%CI: -4.1-56.7). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years VE against influenza B was -47.6% (95%CI: -124.9-3.1), 27.3% (95%CI: -4.6-49.4), and 9.3% (95%CI: -44.1-42.9) respectively. Conclusions: VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and its genetic group 6B.1 was moderate in children and adults, and low among individuals ≥65 years. VE against influenza B was low and heterogeneous among age groups. More information on effects of previous vaccination and previous infection are needed to understand the VE results against influenza B in the context of a mismatched vaccine. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. Framework contract No ECDC/2014/026 ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Free PMC Article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6086844/ ; I‐MOVE primary care multicentre case‐control team - Portugal: Baltazar Nunes, Ausenda Machado, Ana Paula Rodrigues, Verónica Gomez (Departamento de Epidemiologia, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge); Raquel Guiomar, Pedro Pechirra, Paula Cristóvão, Patrícia Conde, Inês Costa (Departamento de Doenças Infeciosas, Instituto Nacional de Saúde Dr. Ricardo Jorge) ; BACKGROUND: Results of previous influenza vaccination effects on current season influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To explore previous influenza vaccination effects on current season VE among population targeted for vaccination. METHODS: We used 2011/2012 to 2016/2017 I-MOVE primary care multicentre test-negative data. For each season, we compared current season adjusted VE (aVE) between individuals vaccinated and unvaccinated in previous season. Using unvaccinated in both seasons as a reference, we then compared aVE between vaccinated in both seasons, current only, and previous only. RESULTS: We included 941, 2645 and 959 influenza-like illness patients positive for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B, respectively, and 5532 controls. In 2011/2012, 2014/2015 and 2016/2017, A(H3N2) aVE point estimates among those vaccinated in previous season were -68%, -21% and -19%, respectively; among unvaccinated in previous season, these were 33%, 48% and 46%, respectively (aVE not computable for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B). Compared to current season vaccination only, VE for both seasons' vaccination was (i) similar in two of four seasons for A(H3N2) (absolute difference [ad] 6% and 8%); (ii) lower in three of four seasons for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 18%, 26% and 29%), in two seasons for influenza A(H3N2) (ad 27% and 39%) and in two of three seasons for influenza B (ad 26% and 37%); (iii) higher in one season for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 (ad 20%) and influenza B (ad 24%). CONCLUSIONS: We did not identify any pattern of previous influenza vaccination effect. Prospective cohort studies documenting influenza infections, vaccinations and vaccine types are needed to understand previous influenza vaccinations' effects. ; European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Grant Number: ECDC/2014/026 European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. Grant Number: 634446 WHO‐EURO ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Free PMC article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6807025/pdf/main.pdf ; Introduction: Influenza A(H3N2) viruses predominated in Europe in 2016–17. In 2017–18 A(H3N2) and A(H1N1)pdm09 viruses co-circulated. The A(H3N2) vaccine component was the same in both seasons; while the A(H1N1)pdm09 component changed in 2017–18. In both seasons, vaccine seed A(H3N2) viruses developed adaptations/alterations during propagation in eggs, impacting antigenicity. Methods: We used the test-negative design in a multicentre primary care case-control study in 12 European countries to measure 2016–17 and 2017–18 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and A(H3N2) overall and by age group. Results: During the 2017–18 season, the overall VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 59% (95% CI: 47–69). Among those aged 0–14, 15–64 and ≥65 years, VE against A(H1N1)pdm09 was 64% (95% CI: 37–79), 50% (95% CI: 28–66) and 66% (95% CI: 42–80), respectively. Overall VE against influenza A(H3N2) was 28% (95% CI: 17–38) in 2016–17 and 13% (95% CI: -15 to 34) in 2017–18. Among 0–14-year-olds VE against A(H3N2) was 28% (95%CI: -10 to 53) and 29% (95% CI: -87 to 73), among 15–64-year-olds 34% (95% CI: 18–46) and 33% (95% CI: -3 to 56) and among those aged ≥65 years 15% (95% CI: -10 to 34) and -9% (95% CI: -74 to 32) in 2016–17 and 2017–18, respectively. Conclusions: Our study suggests the new A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine component conferred good protection against circulating strains, while VE against A(H3N2) was <35% in 2016–17 and 2017–18. The egg propagation derived antigenic mismatch of the vaccine seed virus with circulating strains may have contributed to this low effectiveness. A(H3N2) seed viruses for vaccines in subsequent seasons may be subject to the same adaptations; in years with lower than expected VE, recommendations of preventive measures other than vaccination should be given in a timely manner. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement no. 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. ECDC has contributed funds for the coordination and some study sites under the Framework contract no. ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. The WHO Regional office for Europe has contributed funds for the Romanian study site ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

We measured COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection at primary care/outpatient level among adults ≥ 65 years old using a multicentre test-negative design in eight European countries. We included 592 SARS-CoV-2 cases and 4,372 test-negative controls in the main analysis. The VE was 62% (95% CI: 45-74) for one dose only and 89% (95% CI: 79-94) for complete vaccination. COVID-19 vaccines provide good protection against COVID-19 presentation at primary care/outpatient level, particularly among fully vaccinated individuals. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101003673. ; Sí

As the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020, primary care influenza sentinel surveillance networks within the Influenza - Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness in Europe (I-MOVE) consortium rapidly adapted to COVID-19 surveillance. This study maps system adaptations and lessons learned about aligning influenza and COVID-19 surveillance following ECDC / WHO/Europe recommendations and preparing for other diseases possibly emerging in the future. Using a qualitative approach, we describe the adaptations of seven sentinel sites in five European Union countries and the United Kingdom during the first pandemic phase (March–September 2020). Adaptations to sentinel systems were substantial (2/7 sites), moderate (2/7) or minor (3/7 sites). Most adaptations encompassed patient referral and sample collection pathways, laboratory testing and data collection. Strengths included established networks of primary care providers, highly qualified testing laboratories and stakeholder commitments. One challenge was the decreasing number of samples due to altered patient pathways. Lessons learned included flexibility establishing new routines and new laboratory testing. To enable simultaneous sentinel surveillance of influenza and COVID-19, experiences of the sentinel sites and testing infrastructure should be considered. The contradicting aims of rapid case finding and contact tracing, which are needed for control during a pandemic and regular surveillance, should be carefully balanced.

I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care study team (in addition to authors above): Nick Andrews, Jamie Lopez Bernal, Heather Whitaker, Caroline Guerrisi, Titouan Launay, Shirley Masse, Sylvie van der Werf, Vincent Enouf, John Cuddihy, Adele McKenna, Michael Joyce, Cillian de Gascun, Joanne Moran, Ana Miqueleiz, Ana Navascués, Camino Trobajo-Sanmartín, Carmen Ezpeleta, Paula López Moreno, Javier Gorricho, Eva Ardanaz, Fernando Baigorria, Aurelio Barricarte, Enrique de la Cruz, Nerea Egüés, Manuel García Cenoz, Marcela Guevara, Conchi Moreno-Iribas, Carmen Sayón, Verónica Gomez, Baltazar Nunes, Rita Roquete, Adriana Silva, Aryse Melo, Inês Costa, Nuno Verdasca, Patrícia Conde, Diogo FP Marques, Anna Molesworth, Leanne Quinn, Miranda Leyton, Selin Campbell, Janine Thoulass, Jim McMenamin, Ana Martínez Mateo, Luca Basile, Daniel Castrillejo, Carmen Quiñones Rubio, Concepción Delgado-Sanz, Jesús Oliva. ; The I-MOVE-COVID-19 network collates epidemiological and clinical information on patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19), including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virological characterisation in 11 European countries [1]. One component of I-MOVE-COVID-19 is the multicentre vaccine effectiveness (VE) study at primary care/outpatient level in nine European study sites in eight countries. We measured overall and product-specific COVID-19 VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among those aged 65 years and older. We also measured VE by time since vaccination. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101003673. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion