Search

During the COVID-19 pandemic, sizeable groups of unvaccinated people persist even in countries with high vaccine access1. As a consequence, vaccination became a controversial subject of debate and even protest2. Here we assess whether people express discriminatory attitudes in the form of negative affectivity, stereotypes and exclusionary attitudes in family and political settings across groups defined by COVID-19 vaccination status. We quantify discriminatory attitudes between vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens in 21 countries, covering a diverse set of cultures across the world. Across three conjoined experimental studies (n = 15,233), we demonstrate that vaccinated people express discriminatory attitudes towards unvaccinated individuals at a level as high as discriminatory attitudes that are commonly aimed at immigrant and minority populations3-5. By contrast, there is an absence of evidence that unvaccinated individuals display discriminatory attitudes towards vaccinated people, except for the presence of negative affectivity in Germany and the USA. We find evidence in support of discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated individuals in all countries except for Hungary and Romania, and find that discriminatory attitudes are more strongly expressed in cultures with stronger cooperative norms. Previous research on the psychology of cooperation has shown that individuals react negatively against perceived 'free-riders'6,7, including in the domain of vaccinations8,9. Consistent with this, we find that contributors to the public good of epidemic control (that is, vaccinated individuals) react with discriminatory attitudes towards perceived free-riders (that is, unvaccinated individuals). National leaders and vaccinated members of the public appealed to moral obligations to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake10,11, but our findings suggest that discriminatory attitudes-including support for the removal of fundamental rights-simultaneously emerged.

Numerous cases of glomerulonephritis manifesting shortly after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination have been reported, but causality remains unproven. Here, we studied the association between mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and new-onset glomerulonephritis using a nationwide retrospective cohort and a case-cohort design. Data from all Swiss pathology institutes processing native kidney biopsies served to calculate incidence of IgA nephropathy, pauci-immune necrotizing glomerulonephritis, minimal change disease, and membranous nephropathy in the adult Swiss population. The observed incidence during the vaccination campaign (January to August 2021) was not different from the expected incidence calculated using a Bayesian model based on the years 2015 to 2019 (incidence rate ratio 0.86, 95% credible interval 0.73-1.02) and did not cross the upper boundary of the 95% credible interval for any month. Among 111 patients 18 years and older with newly diagnosed glomerulonephritis between January and August 2021, 38.7% had received at least one vaccine dose before biopsy, compared to 39.5% of the general Swiss population matched for age and calendar-time. The estimated risk ratio for the development of new-onset biopsy-proven glomerulonephritis was not significant at 0.97 (95% confidence interval 0.66-1.42) in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals. Patients with glomerulonephritis manifesting within four weeks after vaccination did not differ clinically from those manifesting temporally unrelated to vaccination. Thus, vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 was not associated with new-onset glomerulonephritis in these two complementary studies with most temporal associations between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and glomerulonephritis likely coincidental.

Objectives We investigated the effect of a two-dose messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine on antibody levels against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and patient behaviour and shielding concerning fear of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus or rheumatoid arthritis. Methods Three hundred and three patients and 44 blood donors were included. All patients received two doses of an mRNA vaccine and had total antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 measured before vaccination and 2 and 9 weeks after the second vaccination. Further, patients answered an electronic questionnaire before and after vaccination concerning behaviour, anxiety, and symptoms of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9). Results Significantly fewer patients (90%) had measurable antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 compared to blood donors (100%) after the second vaccination (P Conclusion We find a very high seroconversion rate among rheumatic patients and reduced self-imposed isolation and shielding after COVID-19 vaccination.

BACKGROUND: Serological responses to COVID-19 vaccination are diminished in recipients of solid organ transplants, especially in lung transplant recipients (LTR), probably as result of immunosuppressive treatment. There is currently no marker of immunosuppression that can be used to predict the COVID-19 vaccination response. Here, we study whether torque tenovirus (TTV), a highly prevalent virus can be used as an indicator of immunosuppression.METHODS: The humoral response to the mRNA 1273 vaccine was assessed in 103 LTR, who received a transplant between 4 and 237 months prior to vaccination, by measuring Spike (S)-specific IgG levels at baseline, 28 days after first, and 28 days after the second vaccination. TTV loads were determined by RT-PCR and Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated to correlate serological responses to TTV load.RESULTS: Humoral responses to COVID-19 vaccination were observed in 41 of 103 (40%) LTR at 28 days after the second vaccination. Sixty-two of 103 (60%) were non-responders. Lower TTV loads at baseline (significantly) correlated with higher S-specific antibodies and a higher percentage of responders. Lower TTV loads also strongly correlated with longer time since transplantation, indicating that participants with lower TTV loads were longer after transplantation.CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a better humoral response to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in subjects with a lower TTV load pre-vaccination. In addition, TTV load correlates with the time after transplantation. Further studies on the use of TTV load in vaccination efficacy studies in immunocompromised cohorts should provide leads for the potential use of this marker for optimizing vaccination response.

Objectives: We compared socio-demographic characteristics, health-related variables, vaccination-related beliefs and attitudes, vaccination acceptance, and personality traits of individuals who vaccinated against COVID-19 and who did not vaccinate by December 2021.Methods: This cross-sectional study used data of 10,642 adult participants from the Corona Immunitas eCohort, an age-stratified random sample of the population of several cantons in Switzerland. We used multivariable logistic regression models to explore associations of vaccination status with socio-demographic, health, and behavioral factors.Results: Non-vaccinated individuals represented 12.4% of the sample. Compared to vaccinated individuals, non-vaccinated individuals were more likely to be younger, healthier, employed, have lower income, not worried about their health, have previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, express lower vaccination acceptance, and/or report higher conscientiousness. Among non-vaccinated individuals, 19.9% and 21.3% had low confidence in the safety and effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, respectively. However, 29.1% and 26.7% of individuals with concerns about vaccine effectiveness and side effects at baseline, respectively vaccinated during the study period.Conclusion: In addition to known socio-demographic and health-related factors, non-vaccination was associated with concerns regarding vaccine safety and effectiveness., + ID der Publikation: unilu_68453 + Sprache: Englisch + Letzte Aktualisierung: 2023-06-30 12:14:10

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review and summarise recent evidence on the effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation and death in adults as well as in specific population groups, namely pregnant women, and children and adolescents. We also sought to summarise evidence on vaccine safety in relation to cardiovascular and neurological complications. In order to do so, we drew primarily on evidence from two our own data platforms and supplement these with insights from related large population-based studies and systematic reviews.RECENT FINDINGS: All studies showed high vaccine effectiveness against confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and in particular against COVID-19 hospitalisation and death. However, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 infection waned over time. These studies also found that booster vaccines would be needed to maintain high vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19 outcomes. Rare cardiovascular and neurological complications have been reported in association with COVID-19 vaccines.SUMMARY: The findings from this paper support current recommendations that vaccination remains the safest way for adults, pregnant women, children and adolescents to be protected against COVID-19. There is a need to continue to monitor the effectiveness and safety of COVID-19 vaccines as these continue to be deployed in the evolving pandemic.

To gain medical insight into the clinical course and safety of otolaryngologic disorders following immunisation with severe acute respiratory coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) mRNA-based vaccines. Case description. We report four cases of transient audio-vestibular symptoms, which occurred shortly after inoculation of two BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech ® ) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna®) vaccines. Hearing loss was unilateral in all cases and recovered at least partially: it was associated with persistent gait instability in two cases, after 1 and 7 months. Trigger mechanisms underpinning audio-vestibular impairment remain uncertain. Immune tolerance mechanisms with off-target innate activation of T-lymphocytes may be involved in vestibulocochlear nerve disorders, as for other cranial nerves involvement. The occurrence of audio-vestibular manifestations following mRNA-based vaccines needs ENT monitoring to support their causality in such rare vaccine-related adverse events. Audio-vestibular disorders appeared of transitory nature, including hearing loss, and should not deter further efforts in large-scale vaccination campaigns against SARS-CoV-2.

Contains fulltext : 288037.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: The effects that therapies for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have on immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination are not yet fully known. Therefore, we sought to determine whether COVID-19 vaccine-induced antibody responses were altered in patients with IBD on commonly used immunosuppressive drugs. METHODS: In this multicentre, prospective, case-control study (VIP), we recruited adults with IBD treated with one of six different immunosuppressive treatment regimens (thiopurines, infliximab, a thiopurine plus infliximab, ustekinumab, vedolizumab, or tofacitinib) and healthy control participants from nine centres in the UK. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and had received two doses of COVID-19 vaccines (either ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [Oxford-AstraZeneca], BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech], or mRNA1273 [Moderna]) 6-12 weeks apart (according to scheduling adopted in the UK). We measured antibody responses 53-92 days after a second vaccine dose using the Roche Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. The primary outcome was anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations in participants without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, adjusted by age and vaccine type, and was analysed by use of multivariable linear regression models. This study is registered in the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN13495664, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 31 and Nov 24, 2021, we recruited 483 participants, including patients with IBD being treated with thiopurines (n=78), infliximab (n=63), a thiopurine plus infliximab (n=72), ustekinumab (n=57), vedolizumab (n=62), or tofacitinib (n=30), and 121 healthy controls. We included 370 participants without evidence of previous infection in our primary analysis. Geometric mean anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibody concentrations were significantly lower in patients treated with infliximab (156·8 U/mL [geometric SD 5·7]; p

Background Following COVID-19 and the lockdowns, maternity care and support for women after delivery have been temporary restructured. Studies show that COVID-19 adversely impacts pregnant and peripartum women in the general population, but experiences among women in the first year after delivery/in the wider postpartum period remain unexplored. Moreover, experiences among women with recent gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are lacking; though it is a group with a potential high need for support after delivery. The aim of our study was to investigate (i) how women with recent GDM experienced COVID-19 and the first lockdown in Denmark, and (ii) the women’s risk perception and health literacy in terms of interaction with the healthcare system in relation to COVID-19. Methods We performed a qualitative study among 11 women with recent GDM (infants aged 2-11 months old). Semi-structured interviews were conducted in April-May 2020 by telephone or Skype for Business, when Denmark was under lockdown. We analysed data using a thematic qualitative content analysis. Results Three themes emerged: i) Everyday life and family well-being, ii) Worries about COVID-19 and iii) Health literacy: Health information and access to healthcare. The women were generally not worried about their own or their infant’s risk of COVID-19. The lockdown had a negative impact on everyday life e.g. routines, loneliness, breastfeeding uncertainties and worries for the infant’s social well-being; but better family dynamics were also described. It was challenging to maintain healthy behaviours and thus the women described worries for the risk of type 2 diabetes and GDM in subsequent pregnancies. The women missed peer support and face-to-face visits from health visitors and found it difficult to navigate the restructured care with online/telephone set-ups. Conclusions COVID-19 and the lockdown affected everyday life among women with recent GDM both positively and negatively. Our findings suggest a need for care that are responsive to psychological and social aspects of health throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and support to limit worries about adaptation to motherhood and the infant’s social well-being. Communication focusing on the importance and relevance of contacting healthcare providers should also be strengthened.

Background Given the importance of flexible use of different COVID-19 vaccines within the same schedule to facilitate rapid deployment, we studied mixed priming schedules incorporating an adenoviral-vectored vaccine (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [ChAd], AstraZeneca), two mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 [BNT], Pfizer–BioNTech, and mRNA-1273 [m1273], Moderna) and a nanoparticle vaccine containing SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and Matrix-M adjuvant (NVX-CoV2373 [NVX], Novavax). Methods Com-COV2 is a single-blind, randomised, non-inferiority trial in which adults aged 50 years and older, previously immunised with a single dose of ChAd or BNT in the community, were randomly assigned (in random blocks of three and six) within these cohorts in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive a second dose intramuscularly (8–12 weeks after the first dose) with the homologous vaccine, m1273, or NVX. The primary endpoint was the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of serum SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG concentrations measured by ELISA in heterologous versus homologous schedules at 28 days after the second dose, with a non-inferiority criterion of the GMR above 0·63 for the one-sided 98·75% CI. The primary analysis was on the per-protocol population, who were seronegative at baseline. Safety analyses were done for all participants who received a dose of study vaccine. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 27841311. Findings Between April 19 and May 14, 2021, 1072 participants were enrolled at a median of 9·4 weeks after receipt of a single dose of ChAd (n=540, 47% female) or BNT (n=532, 40% female). In ChAd-primed participants, geometric mean concentration (GMC) 28 days after a boost of SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG in recipients of ChAd/m1273 (20 114 ELISA laboratory units [ELU]/mL [95% CI 18 160 to 22 279]) and ChAd/NVX (5597 ELU/mL [4756 to 6586]) was non-inferior to that of ChAd/ChAd recipients (1971 ELU/mL [1718 to 2262]) with a GMR of 10·2 (one-sided 98·75% CI 8·4 to ∞) for ChAd/m1273 and 2·8 (2·2 to ∞) for ChAd/NVX, compared with ChAd/ChAd. In BNT-primed participants, non-inferiority was shown for BNT/m1273 (GMC 22 978 ELU/mL [95% CI 20 597 to 25 636]) but not for BNT/NVX (8874 ELU/mL [7391 to 10 654]), compared with BNT/BNT (16 929 ELU/mL [15 025 to 19 075]) with a GMR of 1·3 (one-sided 98·75% CI 1·1 to ∞) for BNT/m1273 and 0·5 (0·4 to ∞) for BNT/NVX, compared with BNT/BNT; however, NVX still induced an 18-fold rise in GMC 28 days after vaccination. There were 15 serious adverse events, none considered related to immunisation. Interpretation Heterologous second dosing with m1273, but not NVX, increased transient systemic reactogenicity compared with homologous schedules. Multiple vaccines are appropriate to complete primary immunisation following priming with BNT or ChAd, facilitating rapid vaccine deployment globally and supporting recognition of such schedules for vaccine certification. Funding UK Vaccine Task Force, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and National Institute for Health Research. NVX vaccine was supplied for use in the trial by Novavax.

The risk of a severe course of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in adults with Down syndrome is increased, resulting in an up to 10-fold increase in mortality, in particular in those >40 years of age. After primary SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, the higher risks remain. In this prospective observational cohort study, SARS-CoV-2 spike S1–specific antibody responses after routine SARS-CoV-2 vaccination (BNT162b2, messenger RNA [mRNA]–1273, or ChAdOx1) in adults with Down syndrome and healthy controls were compared. Adults with Down syndrome showed lower antibody concentrations after 2 mRNA vaccinations or after 2 ChAdOx1 vaccinations. After 2 mRNA vaccinations, lower antibody concentrations were seen with increasing age. Clinical Trials Registration NCT05145348.

is missing (Short communication)

IntroductionConcern of a correlation between disease relapse in patients with acquired demyelinating disorders of central nervous system (CNS) and SARS-CoV2 vaccines has been raised. In this single center study, we retrospectively evaluated safety of SARS-CoV2 vaccination and COVID-19 short-term outcome in pediatric acquired demyelinating disorders of CNS.Materials and methodsPatients with multiple sclerosis (MS), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody associated disease (MOGAD) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) with disease onset before 18 years of age were included. Demographic and clinical data, and information regarding previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination were collected.ResultsWe included nine patients with MOGAD. Six patients received SARS-CoV2 vaccination and complained pain at injection site while only one had fever and fatigue. Median follow-up was 28 weeks (range 20-48). Seven patients had COVID-19 occurring with mild flu-like symptoms and median follow-up was 28 weeks (range 24-34). Nobody had disease relapse. Five patients with NMOSD were included. All patients received SARS-CoV2 vaccination (BNT162b2-Pfizer-BioNTech). The median follow-up was 20 weeks (range 14-24) and only two patients complained pain at injection site, fever and fatigue. Three patients had also COVID-19 with mild flu-like symptoms, despite two of them being under immunosuppressive treatment. Lastly, forty-three patients with MS were included. 35 out of 43 received SARS-CoV2 vaccination with a median follow-up of 24 weeks (range 8-36). Fourteen patients had no side effects, while 21 complained mild side effects (mainly pain at injection site) and one experienced a disease relapse with complete recovery after steroid therapy. At vaccination, all but one were under treatment. Sixteen patients had COVID-19 occurring with mild symptoms.DiscussionCOVID-19 outcome was good although many patients were under immunosuppressive treatment. Vaccine-related side effects were frequent but were mild and self-limited. Only one MS patient had a post-vaccination relapse with complete recovery after steroid therapy. In conclusion, our data support the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in pediatric MS, MOGAD and NMOSD.

Recurrent spillovers of α- and β-coronaviruses (CoV) such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV, Middle East respiratory syndrome-CoV, SARS-CoV-2, and possibly human CoV have caused serious morbidity and mortality worldwide. In this study, six receptor-binding domains (RBDs) derived from α- and β-CoV that are considered to have originated from animals and cross-infected humans were linked to a heterotrimeric scaffold, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) subunits, PCNA1, PCNA2, and PCNA3. They assemble to create a stable mosaic multivalent nanoparticle, 6RBD-np, displaying a ring-shaped disk with six protruding antigens, like jewels in a crown. Prime-boost immunizations with 6RBD-np in mice induced significantly high Ab titers against RBD antigens derived from α- and β-CoV and increased interferon (IFN-γ) production, with full protection against the SARS-CoV-2 wild type and Delta challenges. The mosaic 6RBD-np has the potential to induce intergenus cross-reactivity and to be developed as a pan-CoV vaccine against future CoV spillovers.

Introduction To treat and properly care for COVID-19 patients it is vital to have healthy healthcare workers to ensure the continued function of the healthcare system and to prevent transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to patients, co-workers, and the community. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can prevent healthcare workers from being infected with and transmitting SARS-CoV-2. Experience and training are pivotal to ensure optimal protection. This study aims to examine the use and failure of PPE and compliance with PPE guidelines during the first and the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among Danish healthcare workers. Methods Healthcare workers from the Central Denmark Region and the Capital Region of Denmark were invited to participate April–June 2020 during the first wave and November 2020–April 2021 during the second wave. Day-by-day, participants reported work procedures, use and failure of PPE, and compliance with PPE guidelines. Register-based information on sex, age, department, and profession was available for all participants. Results In total, 21 684 and 10 097 healthcare workers participated during the first and the second wave, respectively. During the first wave, 1.7% used filtering face piece-2 or -3 (FFP2 or FFP3) respirators and 8.2% used face masks [fluid resistant (type IIR) masks, masks with visor (typically type IIR), and other unspecified face masks] during physical contact with patients. During the second wave, the corresponding figures increased to 17.8% and 80.7%. During respiratory procedures, the use of FFP2 or FFP3 respirators increased from 5.6 to 24.3%, and the use of face masks from 14.7 to 77.8%. The no PPE use decreased from 21.3% during the first wave to 0.4% in the second wave, during respiratory procedures. Total PPE failures decreased from 0.7 to 0.4% from the first to second wave. The proportion not complying with PPE guidelines declined from 3.6 to 2.2% during physical contact with patients and from 6.5 to 4.6% during respiratory procedures. PPE failure and non-compliance varied by age, sex and type of department. Frequent reasons for non-compliance were forgetfulness and lack of time, and during the first but not during the second wave, limited availability of PPE. Conclusion We found a substantial increase in the use of PPE and a substantial decrease in PPE failures from the first to the second wave of COVID-19 in Denmark. However, there is still a need for continuous focus on compliance in use of PPE among healthcare workers.

Introduction Young adults are considered one of the most hesitant groups towards getting vaccinated in the UK, which threatens the success of the vaccination program in ending the pandemic. Identifying and understanding the socio-cognitive beliefs is important to effectively design and implement health communication interventions. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify the underlying beliefs regarding COVID-19 vaccinations among young adults in the UK. Methods The study consisted of online, one-on-one interviews with 18 individuals (6 males, 12 females) aged between 18 and 29 years, conducted in June 2021. The guiding theoretical framework was the I-Change Model. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were independently coded by two researchers by using the constructs of the I-Change Model. Belief statements were elicited from the codes and the frequency of belief statements was recorded and compared between intenders and non-intenders. Results Similar beliefs were observed in intenders and non-intenders for most constructs of the I-Change Model. However, non-intenders distinguished themselves from intenders by their higher perceived risks of side effects and higher perceived disadvantages of being vaccinated. Non-intenders expressed the belief that the risk of unknown or long-term side effects, such as blood clotting and impact on fertility, were the main reason for them not to be willing to vaccinate. In addition, in both groups, participants had mostly similar beliefs as their friends and family. Conclusion This research provides insights in the specific beliefs of the young adult population of the UK regarding COVID-19 vaccinations, which could have implications for health communication interventions. The findings suggest that such interventions should focus on reducing the uncertainty regarding short- and long-term effects and potentially having a focus on the entire social environment of young adults.

BackgroundThe Valneva COVID-19 vaccine (VLA2001; Valneva Austria, Vienna, Austria) is an inactivated whole-virus, adjuvanted SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of primary vaccination with VLA2001 versus the ChAdOx1-S (Oxford-AstraZeneca) adenoviral-vectored vaccine.MethodsIn this immunobridging phase 3 trial (COV-COMPARE), participants aged 18 years and older who were medically stable (as determined by an investigator) were enrolled at 26 sites in the UK. In the double-blind, randomised, controlled arm of the trial, participants aged 30 years and older were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive two doses of VLA2001 (0·5 mL; with 33 antigen units [AU] per dose) or ChAdOx1-S (0·5 mL; with 2·5 × 108 infectious units per dose) on days 1 and 29. In another arm, participants aged 18–29 years received two doses of VLA2001 (same dose) open label on days 1 and 29. The primary immunogenicity outcome was the immune response of a two-dose schedule of VLA2001 on day 43, in adults aged 30 years and older, versus two doses of ChAdOx1-S via superiority of geometric mean titres (GMTs) of neutralising antibodies (GMT ratio of >1 at a two-sided significance level of 5%) and non-inferiority of the seroconversion rate (non-inferiority margin of –10% for the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference between groups). The primary safety outcome was the frequency and severity of any adverse events in all participants up to day 43. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of vaccine. GMTs were assessed in a subset of participants aged 30 years and older who were seronegative at baseline, had at least one evaluable antibody titre measurement after vaccination, and had no confirmed COVID-19 during the study (immunogenicity population); and seroconversion was assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised the immunogenicity population but excluding any participants with major protocol violations. For each timepoint, only participants with available data were included in the analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04864561, and is ongoing.FindingsBetween April 28 and June 3, 2021, 4181 individuals were screened and 4017 enrolled, of whom 2975 (74%) were aged 30 years or older and randomly assigned to receive VLA2001 (n=1978) or ChAdOx1-S (n=997), and 1042 (26%) were aged 18–29 years (all received open-label VLA2001). 4012 participants received at least one dose of vaccine (1040 in the open-label VLA2001 group, 1977 in the randomised VLA2001 group, and 995 in the ChAdOx1-S group). The immunogenicity population comprised 492 participants in the randomised VLA2001 group and 498 in the ChAdOx1-S group; three participants in the VLA2001 group were excluded from the per-protocol population. VLA2001 induced higher neutralising GMTs than did ChAdOx1-S (803·5 [95% CI 748·5–862·6] vs 576·6 [543·6–611·7]; GMT ratio 1·39 [95% CI 1·25–1·56]; pInterpretationVLA2001 has a favourable tolerability profile and met superiority criteria for neutralising antibodies and non-inferiority criterion for seroconversion rates compared with ChAdOx1-S. The data presented here formed the basis of successful marketing approval for use of VLA2001 in primary vaccination in the EU, the UK, Bahrain, and United Arab Emirates.

COVID-19; Registries; Vaccination COVID-19; Registros; Vacunación COVID-19; Registres; Vacunació Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major barrier to achieving herd immunity against COVID-19. While multiple alternative and synergistic approaches including heterologous vaccination, booster doses, and antiviral drugs have been developed, equitable vaccine uptake remains the foremost strategy to manage pandemic. Although none of the currently approved vaccines are live-attenuated, several reports of disease flares, waning protection, and acute-onset syndromes have emerged as short-term adverse events after vaccination. Hence, scientific literature falls short when discussing potential long-term effects in vulnerable cohorts. The COVAD-2 survey follows on from the baseline COVAD-1 survey with the aim to collect patient-reported data on the long-term safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in immune modulation. The e-survey has been extensively pilot-tested and validated with translations into multiple languages. Anticipated results will help improve vaccination efforts and reduce the imminent risks of COVID-19 infection, especially in understudied vulnerable groups. HC is supported by the National Institution for Health Research Manchester Biomedical Research Centre Funding Scheme. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health.

Key points1 Maternity services across Europe during the pandemic has undergone changes to limit virus transmission; however, many changes are not evidence-based.2 Although these changes were introduced to keep women, babies and healthcare staff safe, the exclusion of companions and the separation of mothers and babies is particularly antithetical to a human rights-based approach to quality care.3 A poll of COST Action 18211 network members showed that inconsistency in the application of restrictions was high, and there were significant deviations from the recommendations of authoritative bodies.4 Concerns have emerged that restrictions in practice may have longer term negative impacts on mothers and their families and, in particular, may impact on the long-term health of babies.5 When practice changes deviate from evidence-based frameworks that underpin quality care, they must be monitored, appraised and evaluated to minimise unintended iatrogenic effects.

Health Impact Assessment is a key approach used internationally to identify positive or negative impacts of policies, plans and proposals on health and well-being. In 2020, HIAs were undertaken in Scotland and Wales to identify the potential health and well-being impacts of the 'stay at home' and physical distancing measures implemented at the start of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. There is sparse evidence evaluating whether the impacts predicted in HIAs occur following policy implementation. This paper evaluates the impacts anticipated in the COVID-19 HIAs against actual observed trends. The processes undertaken were compared and predicted impacts were tabulated by population groups and main determinants of health. Routine data and literature evidence were collated to compare predicted and observed impacts. Nearly all health impacts anticipated in both HIAs have occurred in the direction predicted. There have been significant adverse impacts through multiple direct and indirect pathways including loss of income, social isolation, disruption to education and services, and psychosocial effects. This research demonstrates the value of prediction in impact assessment and fills a gap in the literature by comparing the predicted impacts identified within the HIAs with observed trends. Post-COVID-19 recovery should centre health and well-being within future policies and decisions. Processes like HIA can support this as part of a 'health in all policies' approach to improve the health and well-being of populations.Health Impact Assessment (HIA) is an approach used to identify positive or negative impacts of policies, plans and proposals on health and well-being. In 2020, HIAs were undertaken in Scotland and Wales to identify the potential health and well-being impacts of the ‘stay at home’ and physical distancing measures (commonly called ‘lockdown’) which were put in place at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper evaluates whether these assessments were correct in their predictions. It finds that most of the health impacts anticipated in both assessments have occurred. These include significant impacts on income, employment and mental health. Using HIAs can help policymakers to take full account of these wider impacts on health and develop policies that benefit health and health equity.

Repetitive screening in enterprises was one of the measures recommended in Switzerland in the fight against COVID-19. In the canton of Vaud, 70 companies participated in the program, 73 % of which were small and medium-sized enterprises. The SARS-CoV-2 positivity rate was 0.07 % out of 70'105 tests performed. The impossibility of teleworking and the reduction of transmission were the main motivations for joining the program. The facilitating elements were the availability of the Cantonal Medical Office, the existence of a starter kit and the support of the hierarchy within the companies. The main obstacles were the arrival of vaccination, the multiplicity of screening providers and the workload. The program was a pragmatic action tool for companies rather than a population-based strategy.

Background Priming COVID-19 vaccine schedules have been deployed at variable intervals globally, which might influence immune persistence and the relative importance of third-dose booster programmes. Here, we report exploratory analyses from the Com-COV trial, assessing the effect of 4-week versus 12-week priming intervals on reactogenicity and the persistence of immune response up to 6 months after homologous and heterologous priming schedules using the vaccines BNT162b2 (tozinameran, Pfizer/BioNTech) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca). Methods Com-COV was a participant-masked, randomised immunogenicity trial. For these exploratory analyses, we used the trial's general cohort, in which adults aged 50 years or older were randomly assigned to four homologous and four heterologous vaccine schedules using BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with 4-week or 12-week priming intervals (eight groups in total). Immunogenicity analyses were done on the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, comprising participants with no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline or for the trial duration, to assess the effect of priming interval on humoral and cellular immune response 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, in addition to the effects on reactogenicity and safety. The Com-COV trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 69254139 (EudraCT 2020–005085–33). Findings Between Feb 11 and 26, 2021, 730 participants were randomly assigned in the general cohort, with 77–89 per group in the ITT analysis. At 28 days and 6 months post-second dose, the geometric mean concentration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike IgG was significantly higher in the 12-week interval groups than in the 4-week groups for homologous schedules. In heterologous schedule groups, we observed a significant difference between intervals only for the BNT162b2–ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group at 28 days. Pseudotyped virus neutralisation titres were significantly higher in all 12-week interval groups versus 4-week groups, 28 days post-second dose, with geometric mean ratios of 1·4 (95% CI 1·1–1·8) for homologous BNT162b2, 1·5 (1·2–1·9) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19–BNT162b2, 1·6 (1·3–2·1) for BNT162b2–ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and 2·4 (1·7–3·2) for homologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. At 6 months post-second dose, anti-spike IgG geometric mean concentrations fell to 0·17–0·24 of the 28-day post-second dose value across all eight study groups, with only homologous BNT162b2 showing a slightly slower decay for the 12-week versus 4-week interval in the adjusted analysis. The rank order of schedules by humoral response was unaffected by interval, with homologous BNT162b2 remaining the most immunogenic by antibody response. T-cell responses were reduced in all 12-week priming intervals compared with their 4-week counterparts. 12-week schedules for homologous BNT162b2 and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19–BNT162b2 were up to 80% less reactogenic than 4-week schedules. Interpretation These data support flexibility in priming interval in all studied COVID-19 vaccine schedules. Longer priming intervals might result in lower reactogenicity in schedules with BNT162b2 as a second dose and higher humoral immunogenicity in homologous schedules, but overall lower T-cell responses across all schedules. Future vaccines using these novel platforms might benefit from schedules with long intervals. Funding UK Vaccine Taskforce and National Institute for Health and Care Research.

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of population level implementation of a test-and-treat approach to correction of suboptimal vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) DesignPhase 3 open label randomised controlled trial.SettingUnited Kingdom.Participants6200 people aged ≥16 years who were not taking vitamin D supplements at baseline.InterventionsOffer of a postal finger prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a six month supply of lower dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) or higher dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one swab test or doctor confirmed acute respiratory tract infection of any cause. A secondary outcome was the proportion of participants with swab test confirmed covid-19. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios and associated 95% confidence intervals. The primary analysis was conducted by intention to treat.ResultsOf 3100 participants offered a vitamin D test, 2958 (95.4%) accepted and 2674 (86.3%) had 25(OH)D concentrations ConclusionsAmong people aged 16 years and older with a high baseline prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduction in risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection or covid-19.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.govNCT04579640.

ImportanceIt has become common practice to offer immunocompromised patients with hematologic cancers a third COVID-19 vaccination dose, but data substantiating this are scarce.ObjectiveTo assess whether a third mRNA-1273 vaccination is associated with increased neutralizing antibody concentrations in immunocompromised patients with hematologic cancers comparable to levels obtained in healthy individuals after the standard 2-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination schedule.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective observational cohort study was conducted at 4 university hospitals in the Netherlands and included 584 evaluable patients spanning the spectrum of hematologic cancers and 44 randomly selected age-matched adults without malignant or immunodeficient comorbidities.ExposuresOne additional mRNA-1273 vaccination 5 months after completion of the standard 2-dose mRNA-1273 vaccination schedule.Main Outcomes and MeasuresSerum immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to spike subunit 1 (S1) antigens prior to and 4 weeks after a third mRNA-1273 vaccination, and antibody neutralization capacity of wild-type, Delta, and Omicron variants in a subgroup of patients.ResultsIn this cohort of 584 immunocompromised patients with hematologic cancers (mean [SD] age, 60 [11.2] years; 216 [37.0%] women), a third mRNA-1273 vaccination was associated with median S1-IgG concentrations comparable to concentrations obtained by healthy individuals after the 2-dose mRNA-1273 schedule. The rise in S1-IgG concentration after the third vaccination was most pronounced in patients with a recovering immune system, but potent responses were also observed in patients with persistent immunodeficiencies. Specifically, patients with myeloid cancers or multiple myeloma and recipients of autologous or allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) reached median S1-IgG concentrations similar to those obtained by healthy individuals after a 2-dose schedule. Patients receiving or shortly after completing anti-CD20 therapy, CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy recipients, and patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia receiving ibrutinib were less responsive or unresponsive to the third vaccination. In the 27 patients who received cell therapy between the second and third vaccination, S1 antibodies were preserved, but a third mRNA-1273 vaccination was not associated with significantly enhanced S1-IgG concentrations except for patients with multiple myeloma receiving autologous HCT. A third vaccination was associated with significantly improved neutralization capacity per antibody.Conclusions and RelevanceResults of this cohort study support that the primary schedule for immunocompromised patients with hematologic cancers should be supplemented with a delayed third vaccination. Patients with B-cell lymphoma and allogeneic HCT recipients need to be revaccinated after treatment or transplantation.Trial RegistrationEudraCT Identifier: 2021-001072-41

Evangelical Christians are among the most hesitant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. This study examined the extent to which COVID-19 vaccination uptake among Evangelicals is explained by demographic characteristics, Health Belief Model constructs, and faith-based support factors. Survey research firm Qualtrics recruited 531 U.S. adults and conducted a survey to explore predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake among people who self-identified as Evangelicals in September 2021. A logistic regression showed that those reporting high perceived benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated, while those reporting high perceived barriers were less likely to be vaccinated. Those whose healthcare provider asked them about the vaccine were more likely to be vaccinated than those whose healthcare provider did not ask. Finally, while those who reported information seeking from religious leaders were less likely to be vaccinated, those who reported more faith-based support for vaccination were more likely to be vaccinated. In addition to beliefs about benefits and barriers to vaccination, the role of healthcare providers and clergy were important factors influencing vaccination status. Intervention efforts that capitalize on partnerships between health providers and clergy in supportive congregations may be able to reach undecided Evangelicals.

BACKGROUND The rapid course of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic calls for fast implementation of clinical trials to assess the effects of new treatment and prophylactic interventions. Building trial platforms embedded in existing data infrastructures is an ideal way to address such questions within well-defined subpopulations. METHODS We developed a trial platform building on the infrastructure of two established national cohort studies: the Swiss human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) Cohort Study (SHCS) and Swiss Transplant Cohort Study (STCS). In a pilot trial, termed Corona VaccinE tRiAL pLatform (COVERALL), we assessed the vaccine efficacy of the first two licensed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in Switzerland and the functionality of the trial platform. RESULTS Using Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap), we developed a trial platform integrating the infrastructure of the SHCS and STCS. An algorithm identifying eligible patients, as well as baseline data transfer ensured a fast inclusion procedure for eligible patients. We implemented convenient re-directions between the different data entry systems to ensure intuitive data entry for the participating study personnel. The trial platform, including a randomization algorithm ensuring balance among different subgroups, was continuously adapted to changing guidelines concerning vaccination policies. We were able to randomize and vaccinate the first trial participant the same day we received ethics approval. Time to enroll and randomize our target sample size of 380 patients was 22 days. CONCLUSION Taking the best of each system, we were able to flag eligible patients, transfer patient information automatically, randomize and enroll the patients in an easy workflow, decreasing the administrative burden usually associated with a trial of this size.

Firearm-related injury is a leading cause of death disproportionately affecting adolescents and young adults across the world, especially in the Americas. Little progress has been made over the past four decades, as inaction and the adoption of ineffective or unevidenced interventions have become commonplace. The COVID-19 pandemic reconfigured health systems towards prevention and harm reduction, sharpened public attention to the burden of preventable deaths, and inspired a fresh ambition of eliminating avertable deaths. In this Viewpoint, we argue that preventing firearm injury should garner bolder action in post-pandemic public health and we present a case for reducing the global burden of firearm injury supported by evidence and international examples. Crucially, we aim to guide policy making in directions that end the cycle of grief, anger, activism, deflection, and inaction and create more peaceful and fairer societies.

Background Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has been the main tool to contain the pandemic. The rush development of the 3 vaccines and their expedited approval have led to inoculation of millions of patients around the world, leading to a containment of the disease. Despite continuous viral mutations and the identification of weaker variants, the severity of the infections has been mild, with many patients being either asymptomatic or recovering at home. Currently the focus has shifted from the host of organ damage related to the infection to potential side effects of the vaccine. Myocarditis has been reported as one of the potential side effects from the mRNA vaccine, affecting young healthy individuals. Up to September 30, 2021, 1.243 cases of myocarditis after vaccination with BNT162b2 Comirnaty© were registered in young adults by the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute in Germany alone. The exact pathophysiology and the risk factors for myocarditis following vaccination remain unclear. We present a case series of eight patients with cardiac symptom shortly after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination (BNT162b6, Biontech, Comirnaty© or mRNA-1237 Moderna, Spikevax©). Patients and methods Eight patients between 13 and 56 years of age, vaccinated with either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 mRNA vaccine between January and August 2021 developed cardiac side effects shortly after either their first or second dose of the vaccine. Clinical data were retrieved from the clinical information system and analyzed. To support diagnosis of myocarditis or pericarditis, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed shortly after the onset of symptoms, with further investigations in severe cases. Symptoms were defined as dyspnea, chest pain and cardiac arrhythmia as determined by electrocardiography. Results Eight patients (5 males and 3 females) developed cardiac symptoms compatible with myocarditis, according to the CDC criteria, shortly after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Three patients (2 males, 1 female) required hospitalization due to severe chest pain and elevated troponin levels. All patients recovered fully within 7 days from the symptom onset. Conclusions Our data suggest that cardiac adverse events such as myocarditis or pericarditis shortly after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination are rare but possible and occur particularly in male patients.

BackgroundCOVID-19 lockdowns may lead to physical inactivity, a major risk factor for non-communicable diseases. This study aims to determine: 1) the trajectory in daily step counts before, during and after the lockdown in China, and 2) the characteristics associated with the trajectories.MethodsFrom December 2019 to July 2020, smartphone-based step counts were continuously collected in 815 Chinese adults residing in Shanghai over 202 days across three phases: before, during, and after the lockdown. Participant characteristics were reported, and height, weight and body composition measured before the lockdown. A ‘sharp’ regression discontinuity design with cluster robust standard errors was used to test the effect of the lockdown and reopening on daily steps and a linear mixed model was used to examine the characteristics associated with trajectories during the observed period.ResultsBased on 164,630 person-days of data, we found a sharp decline in daily step counts upon the lockdown (24/01/2020) by an average of 3796 (SE = 88) steps, followed by a significant trend of increase by 34 steps/day (SE = 2.5;p p = 0.029). Those who were older, married, university educated, insufficiently active, had an ‘at risk’ body composition, and those in the control group, were slower at recovering step counts during the lockdown, and those who were older, married, without university education and with an ‘at risk’ body composition recovered step counts at a slower pace after the reopening.ConclusionsDespite later increases in step counts, COVID-19 lockdown led to a sustained period of reduced physical activity, which may have adverse health implications. Governments and health professionals around the world should continue to encourage and facilitate physical activity during the pandemic.

On March 15, 2020, the Dutch Government implemented COVID-19 lockdown measures. Although self-quarantine and social-distancing measures were implemented, restrictions were less severe compared to several other countries. The aim of this study was to assess changes in eating behavior and food purchases among a representative adult sample in the Netherlands (n = 1030), five weeks into lockdown. The results show that most participants did not change their eating behaviors (83.0%) or food purchases (73.3%). However, socio-demographic differences were observed among those that reported changes during lockdown. For example, participants with overweight (OR = 2.26, 95%CI = 1.24–4.11) and obesity (OR = 4.21, 95%CI = 2.13–8.32) were more likely to indicate to eat unhealthier during lockdown compared to participants with a healthy weight. Those with a high educational level (OR = 2.25, 95%-CI = 1.03–4.93) were also more likely to indicate to eat unhealthier during lockdown compared to those with a low educational level. Older participants were more likely to indicate to experience no differences in their eating behaviors compared to those of younger age, who were more likely to indicate that they ate healthier (OR = 1.03, 95%CI = 1.01–1.04) as well as unhealthier (OR = 1.04, 95%CI = 1.02–1.06) during lockdown. Participants with obesity were more likely to indicate to purchase more chips/snacks (OR = 2.79, 95%CI = 1.43–5.45) and more nonalcoholic beverages (OR = 2.74, 95%CI = 1.36–5.50) during lockdown in comparison with those with a healthy weight. Of those that used meal delivery services before, 174 (29.5%) indicated to use meal delivery services more frequently during lockdown. Although the results confirm the persistence of dietary routines, profound socio-demographic differences were observed for those that did report changes. Especially for individuals with overweight and obesity, the lockdown has taken its toll on healthy dietary choices. Further research should unravel underlying mechanisms for these observations.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: The COVID-19 pandemic has shown the importance of infection prevention and control (IPC) measures in health care settings, including primary care. We aimed to describe how it influenced adherence to infection prevention and control measures in private practices in the Swiss sentinel network (Sentinella). METHOD: An online cross-sectional survey was sent to the 181 Sentinella practices in 2021 that included questions on the practice’s spatial organisation, staff habits and vaccination coverage, ventilation, mask wearing, hand hygiene, as well as triage and separation of patients with suspected infection. Results were compared with those of a 2019 survey conducted in the same setting. RESULTS: We received 127 valid questionnaires (70.2% response rate). At the time of the study, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was underway among physicians (51.3%). Between 2019 and 2021, an absence of specific recommendations on mask wearing for staff (55.7%) changed into a recommendation for continuous wearing (93.7%); hand hygiene improved, especially upon arrival at the practice (63.9% vs 85.8%; p

Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence from 23 studies including 117,552 COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant people, almost exclusively with mRNA vaccines. We show that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 days after second dose was 89·5% (95% CI 69·0-96·4%, 18,828 vaccinated pregnant people, I2 = 73·9%). The risk of stillbirth was significantly lower in the vaccinated cohort by 15% (pooled OR 0·85; 95% CI 0·73–0·99, 66,067 vaccinated vs. 424,624 unvaccinated, I2 = 93·9%). There was no evidence of a higher risk of adverse outcomes including miscarriage, earlier gestation at birth, placental abruption, pulmonary embolism, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal death, intensive care unit admission, lower birthweight Z-score, or neonatal intensive care unit admission (p > 0.05 for all). COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy appears to be safe and is associated with a reduction in stillbirth.

Copyright © 2022 Bouça, Roldão, Bogalho, Cerqueira and Silva-Nunes. Introduction: Cases of central diabetes insipidus (CDI) have been reported after COVID-19 infection, with hypophysitis being the most likely cause. COVID-19 vaccines potential adverse effects may mimetize some of these complications. Case Report: Woman 37 years old, with rheumatoid arthritis under adalimumab (40 mg twice a month) since December 2018. She was in her usual state of health when she has received the second dose of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (June 2021). Seven days later, she started reporting intense thirst and polyuria and consulted her family physician. Blood Analysis: creatinine 0.7 mg/dL, glucose 95mg/dL, Na+ 141mEq/L, K+ 3.9 mEq/L, TSH 3.8 mcUI/L (0.38-5.33), FT4 0.9 ng/dL (0.6-1.1), cortisol 215.4 nmol/L (185-624), ACTH 21.9 pg/mL (6- 48), FSH 4.76 UI/L, LH5.62 UI/L, estradiol 323 pmol/L, IGF1 74.8 ng/mL (88-209), PRL 24.7mcg/L (3.3-26.7) osmolality 298.2 mOs/Kg (250- 325); Urine analysis: volume 10200 mL/24h, osmolality 75 mOs/Kg (300-900), density 1.002. On water restriction test: 0' - Serum osmolality 308.8mOsm/Kg vs. urine osmolality 61.0 mOsm/Kg; 60' - urine osmolality 102 mOsm/Kg; urine osmolality 1 h after desmopressine was 511mOsm/kg. MRI revealed no abnormal signs consistent with hypophysitis except for the loss of the posterior pituitary bright spot on T1 weighted imaging. Diagnosis of CDI was assumed, and started therapy with desmopressine. A report of potential adverse effect was addressed to national health authorities. Conclusion: In hypophysitis MRI often shows loss of posterior pituitary bright spot on T1 weighted imaging, pituitary enlargement or stalk thickening but those findings were not present in this patient. To the best of our knowledge, CDI has never been reported following administration of a COVID-19 vaccine. publishersversion published

ObjectivesRespiratory tract infections (RTIs) are extremely common, usually self-limiting, but responsible for considerable work sickness absence, reduced quality of life, inappropriate antibiotic prescribing and healthcare costs. Patients who experience recurrent RTIs and those with certain comorbid conditions have higher personal impact and healthcare costs and may be more likely to suffer disease exacerbations, hospitalisation and death. We explored how these patients experience and perceive their RTIs to understand how best to engage them in prevention behaviours.DesignA qualitative interview study.SettingPrimary care, UK.Methods23 participants who reported recurrent RTIs and/or had relevant comorbid health conditions were interviewed about their experiences of RTIs. Interviews took place as the COVID-19 pandemic began. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.ResultsThree themes were developed: Understanding causes and vulnerability, Attempting to prevent RTIs, Uncertainty and ambivalence about prevention, along with an overarching theme; Changing experiences because of COVID-19. Participants’ understandings of their susceptibility to RTIs were multifactorial and included both transmission via others and personal vulnerabilities. They engaged in various approaches to try to prevent infections or alter their progression yet perceived they had limited personal control. The COVID-19 pandemic had improved their understanding of transmission, heightened their concern and motivation to avoid RTIs and extended their repertoire of protective behaviours.ConclusionsPatients who experience frequent or severe RTIs are likely to welcome and benefit from advice and support regarding RTI prevention. To engage people effectively, those developing interventions or delivering health services must consider their beliefs and concerns about susceptibility and prevention.

ObjectivesTo evaluate humoral and cellular immune responses and adverse events (AEs) after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS) compared to healthy controls (HC), and disease activity following vaccination in patients with pSS.Methods67 patients with pSS and 33 HC (ratio 2:1) received COVID-19 vaccinations following the Dutch vaccination programme. Patients with pSS did not use immunomodulatory drugs, except hydroxychloroquine. Anti-spike 1 receptor binding domain IgG serum antibody levels were measured 28 days after complete vaccination. AEs were collected 7 days after vaccination. In a subgroup, salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and T-cell response by interferon-γ enzyme-linked immune absorbent spot was measured.Results47 patients with pSS (70%) and 14 HC (42%) received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNtech), 13 (19%) and 5 (15%) received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), 6 (9%) and 8 (24%) received mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and 1 (1%) and 6 (18%) received Ad.26.COV2.S (Janssen). All participants had positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels (>2500 AU/mL) postvaccination. No differences in anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels were observed between patients with pSS and HC, for each vaccine type. Salivary anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies also increased, and a T-cell response was observed in patients with pSS and HC. Frequencies of systemic AEs were comparable between patients with pSS and HC (first vaccination: 34/67 (51%) vs 16/33 (48%), p=0.83; second: 41/66 (62%) vs 14/25 (56%), p=0.59). No significant worsening was observed in patient-reported and systemic disease activity, including auto-antibodies.ConclusionsPatients with pSS had similar humoral and cellular immune responses as HC, suggesting COVID-19 vaccination is effective in patients with pSS. AEs were also comparable, and no increase in disease activity was seen in patients with pSS.