Search

Objectives: To derive and validate risk prediction algorithms to estimate the risk of covid-19 related mortality and hospital admission in UK adults after one or two doses of covid-19 vaccination., Design: Prospective, population based cohort study using the QResearch database linked to data on covid-19 vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 results, hospital admissions, systemic anticancer treatment, radiotherapy, and the national death and cancer registries., Settings: Adults aged 19-100 years with one or two doses of covid-19 vaccination between 8 December 2020 and 15 June 2021., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was covid-19 related death. Secondary outcome was covid-19 related hospital admission. Outcomes were assessed from 14 days after each vaccination dose. Models were fitted in the derivation cohort to derive risk equations using a range of predictor variables. Performance was evaluated in a separate validation cohort of general practices., Results: Of 6 952 440 vaccinated patients in the derivation cohort, 5 150 310 (74.1%) had two vaccine doses. Of 2031 covid-19 deaths and 1929 covid-19 hospital admissions, 81 deaths (4.0%) and 71 admissions (3.7%) occurred 14 days or more after the second vaccine dose. The risk algorithms included age, sex, ethnic origin, deprivation, body mass index, a range of comorbidities, and SARS-CoV-2 infection rate. Incidence of covid-19 mortality increased with age and deprivation, male sex, and Indian and Pakistani ethnic origin. Cause specific hazard ratios were highest for patients with Down's syndrome (12.7-fold increase), kidney transplantation (8.1-fold), sickle cell disease (7.7-fold), care home residency (4.1-fold), chemotherapy (4.3-fold), HIV/AIDS (3.3-fold), liver cirrhosis (3.0-fold), neurological conditions (2.6-fold), recent bone marrow transplantation or a solid organ transplantation ever (2.5-fold), dementia (2.2-fold), and Parkinson's disease (2.2-fold). Other conditions with increased risk (ranging from 1.2-fold to 2.0-fold increases) included chronic kidney disease, blood cancer, epilepsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, thromboembolism, peripheral vascular disease, and type 2 diabetes. A similar pattern of associations was seen for covid-19 related hospital admissions. No evidence indicated that associations differed after the second dose, although absolute risks were reduced. The risk algorithm explained 74.1% (95% confidence interval 71.1% to 77.0%) of the variation in time to covid-19 death in the validation cohort. Discrimination was high, with a D statistic of 3.46 (95% confidence interval 3.19 to 3.73) and C statistic of 92.5. Performance was similar after each vaccine dose. In the top 5% of patients with the highest predicted covid-19 mortality risk, sensitivity for identifying covid-19 deaths within 70 days was 78.7%., Conclusion: This population based risk algorithm performed well showing high levels of discrimination for identifying those patients at highest risk of covid-19 related death and hospital admission after vaccination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from the NIHR for the submitted work; JH-C reports grants from NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, grants from John Fell Oxford University Press Research Fund, grants from Cancer Research UK, through the Cancer Research UK Oxford Centre, grants from the Oxford Wellcome Institutional Strategic Support Fund and other research councils, during the conduct of the study; JH-C is an unpaid director of QResearch, a not-for-profit organisation that is a partnership between the University of Oxford and EMIS Health, which supplied the QResearch database used for this work; JH-C is a founder and shareholder of ClinRisk and was its medical director until 31 May 2019 (ClinRisk produces open and closed source software to implement clinical risk algorithms (outside this work) into clinical computer systems); JH-C is chair of the NERVTAG risk stratification subgroup and a member of SAGE covid-19 groups and the NHS group advising on prioritisation of use of monoclonal antibodies in covid-19 infection; CACC reports receiving personal fees from ClinRisk outside this work, and is a member of the NERVTAG risk stratification subgroup; KK is supported by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration-East Midlands and the Leicester BRC and is a member of SAGE; RHK was supported by a UKRI Future Leaders Fellowship (MR/S017968/1); KD-O was supported by a grant from the Alan Turing Institute Health Programme (EP/T001569/1); AS is a member of the Scottish Government Chief Medical Officer’s covid-19 advisory group and a member of AstraZeneca’s thrombotic thrombocytopenic advisory group (both roles are unremunerated); RAL is a member of the Welsh government covid-19 technical advisory group (unrenumerated); MGS reports grants from Department of Health and Social Care NIHR UK, grants from the UK Medical Research Council, grants from Health Protection Research Unit in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections, University of Liverpool, during the conduct of the study, and other funds from Integrum Scientific, Greensboro, NC, USA, outside the submitted work; MGS is a member of NERVTAG and attends SAGE covid-19; AH is a member of NERVTAG and the NHS group advising on prioritisation of use of monoclonal antibodies in covid-19 infection; JV is national clinical director for diabetes and obesity at NHS England and Improvement; FK is a member of the Northern Ireland Chief Medical Officer’s pandemic modelling group and strategic intelligence group; JSN-V-T is seconded to the Department of Health and Social Care, England. The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Department of Health and Social Care or the UK government., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

ObjectivesTo examine the association between inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) administration and primary care consultation for joint pain, rheumatoid arthritis (RA) flare, corticosteroid prescription, vasculitis and unexplained fever in people with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs)., Methods: We undertook within-person comparisons using self-controlled case-series methodology. AIRD cases who received the IIV and had an outcome of interest in the same influenza cycle were ascertained in Clinical Practice Research Datalink. The influenza cycle was partitioned into exposure periods (1-14 days prevaccination and 0-14, 15-30, 31-60 and 61-90 days postvaccination), with the remaining time-period classified as non-exposed. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% CI for different outcomes were calculated., Results: Data for 14 928 AIRD cases (69% women, 80% with RA) were included. There was no evidence for association between vaccination and primary care consultation for RA flare, corticosteroid prescription, fever or vasculitis. On the contrary, vaccination associated with reduced primary care consultation for joint pain in the subsequent 90 days (IRR 0.91 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.94))., Conclusion: This study found no evidence for a significant association between vaccination and primary care consultation for most surrogates of increased disease activity or vaccine adverse-effects in people with AIRDs. It adds to the accumulating evidence to support influenza vaccination in AIRDs., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CDM is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care West Midlands, the NIHR School for Primary Care Research and an NIHR Research Professorship in General Practice (NIHR-RP-2014-04-026). JSN-V-T acknowledges funding from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (acute respiratory infections), MD and AA acknowledge funding from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (musculoskeletal theme) Nottingham. Potential conflicts of interest: JSN-V-T is currently on secondment to the Department of Health and Social Care, England (DHSC). The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the National Health Service, NIHR or DHSC. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To examine temporal trend in uptake of seasonal influenza vaccine (SIV) in the UK and explore disease and demographic factors associated with vaccination., Methods: From the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, 32 751 people with auto-immune rheumatic diseases prescribed DMARDs between 2006 and 2016 were identified. The proportion vaccinated between 1 September of one year and 31 March of the next year was calculated and stratified by age, other indications for vaccination, auto-immune rheumatic diseases type and number of DMARDs prescribed. Stata and Joinpoint regression programs were used., Results: SIV uptake was high in those aged ⩾65 years (82.3 and 80.7% in 2006-07 and 2015-16, respectively). It was significantly lower in other age groups, but improved over time with 51.9 and 61.9% in the 45-64 year age group, and 32.3 and 50.1% in the <45 year age group being vaccinated in 2006-07 and 2015-16, respectively. While 64.9% of the vaccinations in those ⩾65 years old occurred by 3 November, in time to mount a protective immune response before the influenza activity becomes substantial in the UK, only 38.9% in the 45-64 year and 26.2% in the <45 year age group without any other reason for vaccination received SIV by this date. Women, those with additional indications for vaccination, on multiple DMARDs and with SLE were more likely to be vaccinated., Conclusion: SIV uptake is low in the under 65s, and the majority of them are not vaccinated in time. Additional effort is required to promote timely uptake of SIV in this population.

Vaccination of immunocompromised patients is recommended in many national guidelines to protect against severe or complicated influenza infection. However, due to uncertainties over the evidence base, implementation is frequently patchy and dependent on individual clinical discretion. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence for influenza vaccination in this patient group. Healthcare databases and grey literature were searched and screened for eligibility. Data extraction and assessments of risk of bias were undertaken in duplicate, and results were synthesised narratively and using meta-analysis where possible. Our data show that whilst the serological response following vaccination of immunocompromised patients is less vigorous than in healthy controls, clinical protection is still meaningful, with only mild variation in adverse events between aetiological groups. Although we encountered significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity in many of our meta-analyses, we advocate that immunocompromised patients should be targeted for influenza vaccination., (© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at increased risk of exposure to respiratory pathogens and may transmit infection to vulnerable patients. This study summarises a recent systematic review, which aimed to assess evidence that influenza or pneumococcal vaccination of HCWs provides indirect protection for those patients most at risk of severe or complicated acute respiratory infection. A number of healthcare databases and sources of grey literature were searched using a predefined strategy, and citations screened for eligibility in accordance with specified inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using validated tools and results summarised qualitatively. Twenty papers were included in the final review, all of which considered influenza vaccination of HCW. As such, planned subanalysis of pneumococcal vaccination was discarded. The majority of primary research studies included (11/14) were conducted in long-term care facilities, but there was marked heterogeneity in terms of the population, intervention/exposure and outcomes considered. Consistency in the direction of effect was observed across several different outcome measures, suggesting that influenza vaccination of HCWs is likely to offer some protection. Further evidence is, however, required from acute care settings., (© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Many national guidelines recommend annual influenza vaccination of immunocompromised patients, although the decision to vaccinate is usually at clinical discretion. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses to assess the evidence for influenza vaccination in this group, and we report our results by etiology. Meta-analyses showed significantly lower odds of influenza-like illness after vaccination in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, patients with cancer, and transplant recipients and of laboratory-confirmed influenza in HIV-positive patients, compared with patients receiving placebo or no vaccination. Pooled odds of seroconversion and seroprotection were typically lower in HIV-positive patients, patients with cancer, and transplant recipients, compared with immunocompetent controls. Vaccination was generally well tolerated, with variation in mild adverse events between etiological groups. Limited evidence of a transient increase in viremia and a decrease in the percentage of CD4(+) cells in HIV-positive patients was found although not accompanied by worsening of clinical symptoms. Clinical judgment remains important when discussing the benefits and safety profile with immunocompromised patients.

Health care workers (HCWs) may transmit respiratory infection to patients. We assessed evidence for the effectiveness of vaccinating HCWs to provide indirect protection for patients at risk for severe or complicated disease after acute respiratory infection. We searched electronic health care databases and sources of gray literature by using a predefined strategy. Risk for bias was assessed by using validated tools, and results were synthesized by using a narrative approach. Seventeen of the 12,352 identified citations met the full inclusion criteria, and 3 additional articles were identified from reference or citation tracking. All considered influenza vaccination of HCWs, and most were conducted in long-term residential care settings. Consistency in the direction of effect was observed across several different outcome measures, suggesting a likely protective effect for patients in residential care settings. However, evidence was insufficient for us to confidently extrapolate this to other at-risk patient groups.

Background: Effective antigen-sparing vaccines are needed to confront pandemic influenza. Whole-virion and oil-in-water adjuvanted vaccines are the most effective formulations against H5N1 avian influenza. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity in adults in the UK of pandemic H1N1 whole-virion vaccine and oil-in-water adjuvanted vaccine purchased by the UK government in 2009., Methods: In our randomised, observer-blind, parallel-group, controlled trial, healthy adults aged 18-44 years, 45-64 years, and 65 years and older (from Oct 19, to Nov 12, 2009) received two doses of vaccine given 21 days apart: either 7·5 μg of haemagglutinin formulated as whole-virion vaccine, or 3·75 μg of haemagglutinin formulated as split-virion vaccine with AS03(A) oil-in-water adjuvant. Assignment was by a computer-generated code, with random permuted blocks of two, four, and six. All participants and investigators were unaware of vaccine assignments. The trial was done at three hospitals in the UK. We measured antibody titres with a haemagglutination-inhibition assay at baseline; 7, 14, and 21 days after each vaccination; and at 6 months after the first dose. Primary outcome was vaccine immunogenicity of the full analysis set by the EU Committee of Human Medicinal Products licensing criteria. This study is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN92328241., Findings: At day 0, baseline antibody (titre ≥1/8) was detected in 44 (13%) of 347 participants. Sera from 95% to 98% of participants were assessed for immunogenicity on days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, and 42, and at 6 months. On day 21 after one dose of adjuvanted AS03(A) or whole-virion vaccine, 63 (94%, 95 CI 85·4-98·4) of 67 and 50 (71%, 59·4-81·6) of 70 participants aged 18-44 years, 51 (77%, 65·3-86·7) of 66 and 26 (39%, 27·1-51·5) of 67 aged 45-64 years, and 19 (51%, 34·4-68·1) of 37 and 11 (32%, 17·4-50·5) of 34 aged 65 years or older had titres of 1:40 or greater. On day 42 (21 days after the second dose), 64 (100%, 94·4-100) of 64 and 49 (73%, 60·9-83·2) of 67 participants aged 18-44 years, 59 (91%, 81·0-96·5) of 65 and 29 (43·9%, 31·7-56·7) of 66 aged 45-64 years, and 28 (76%, 58·8-88·2) of 37 and 12 (36%, 20·4-54·9) of 33 aged 65 years or older had titres of 1/40 or greater. At 6 months, 62 (98%, 91·5-100) of 63 and 54 (78%, 66·7-87·3) of 69 participants aged 18-44 years, 54 (82%, 70·4-90·2) of 66 and 37 (55%, 42·6-67·4) of 67 aged 45-64 years, and 21 (57%, 39·5-72·9) of 37 and 10 (29%, 15·1-47·5) of 34 aged 65 years or older had titres of 1/40 or greater. There were no vaccine-related serious adverse events. Whole-virion vaccine was associated with fewer local and systemic reactions than adjuvanted vaccine., Interpretation: AS03(A)-adjuvanted vaccine was more immunogenic against pandemic influenza A H1N1 virus than whole-virion vaccine and offers greater antigen-sparing capacity. A two-dose strategy should be considered for older people., Funding: Department of Health, National Institute for Health Research Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To assess the feasibility of measuring influenza vaccination coverage during 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 seasons using a telephone survey; to compare these findings with routine vaccine uptake monitoring based on data provided by general practitioners., Study Design: Telephone-based survey., Methods: We interviewed a random sample of non-institutionalized individuals representative of the population aged 16 years and over. Four target groups were determined for analysis: (1) people aged 65 years and over; (2) healthcare workers; (3) people under 65 years with chronic illnesses, which placed them at risk for influenza; and (4) a group composed of all three previous groups combined., Results: The overall sample consisted of 4054 people (about 2000 per season). Population influenza vaccine coverage in the UK increased from 22.3% in 2002-2003 to 24.2% in 2003-2004. Vaccine uptake was strongly age dependent, even in people aged 65 years and over (the ages at which all people are routinely targeted). In both seasons, the estimates of vaccine uptake in people aged 65 years and over were remarkably consistent with those obtained through routine monitoring. Vaccine uptake in healthcare workers was markedly suboptimal., Conclusions: In the UK, a telephone-based system of monitoring influenza vaccine uptake seems robust enough to generate data that are comparable with routine vaccine monitoring undertaken using data provided by general practitioners. Although such a system cannot easily contribute towards monitoring of vaccination at local and regional levels, it offers a validated method of estimating vaccine uptake that is independent of healthcare workers' time. This may be especially important for a pandemic vaccination programme, especially in countries in which healthcare resources are scarce, or where the configuration of healthcare services is less conducive to internal monitoring than is the case in the UK.

The safety of the UK anthrax vaccine in British service personnel was evaluated by a retrospective cohort study of randomly selected personnel from five Royal Air Force bases by investigating adverse medical events and consultation rates for a period before and after vaccination. Vaccination acceptance rate varied from 27 to 89% (P=0.0001). In the vaccinated cohort 11.1% (n=368) reported side-effects. The number of consultations in the year prior to vaccination (P=0.04) and RAF base (P=0.0085) were associated with side-effects. Only the RAF base remained a statistically significant factor (P=0.007) after adjusting for other factors. The anthrax vaccine resulted in mild side-effects in 11%, and no serious side-effects were observed. Acceptors of vaccine did not have significantly more medical consultations following vaccination than their unvaccinated counterparts.

In the 1997-98 academic year, we conducted a longitudinal study of meningococcal carriage and acquisition among first-year students at Nottingham University, Nottingham, United Kingdom. We examined the dynamics of long-term meningococcal carriage with detailed characterization of the isolates. Pharyngeal swabs were obtained from 2,453 first-year students at the start of the academic year (October), later on during the autumn term, and again in March. Swabs were immediately cultured on selective media, and meningococci were identified and serologically characterized. Nongroupable strains were genetically grouped using a PCR-based assay. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis was used to determine the link between sequential isolates. Of the carriers initially identified in October, 44.1% (98 of 222) were still positive later on in the autumn (November or December); 57.1% of these remained persistent carriers at 6 months. Of the index carriers who lost carriage during the autumn, 16% were recolonized at 6 months. Of 344 index noncarriers followed up, 22.1% acquired carriage during the autumn term and another 13.7% acquired carriage by March. Overall, 43.9% (397 of 904) of the isolates were noncapsulated (serologically nongroupable); by PCR-based genogrouping, a quarter of these belonged to the capsular groups B and C. The ratio of capsulated to noncapsulated forms for group B and C strains was 2.9 and 0.95, respectively. Sequential isolates of persistent carriers revealed that individuals may carry the same or entirely different organisms at different times. We identified three strains that clearly switched their capsular expression on and off at different times in vivo. One student developed invasive meningococcal disease after carrying the same organism for over 7 weeks. The study revealed a high rate of turnover of meningococcal carriage among students. Noncapsulated organisms are capable of switching their capsular expression on and off (both ways) in the nasopharynx, and group C strains are more likely to be noncapsulated than group B strains. Carriage of a particular meningococcal strain does not necessarily protect against colonization or invasion by a homologous or heterologous strain.