Search

Author(s): Matt D. T. Hitchings, Fatou Berthé, Philip Aruna, Ibrahim Shehu, Muhammed Ali Hamza, Siméon Nanama, Chizoba Steve-Edemba, Rebecca F. Grais, Sheila Isanaka There are errors in the Funding and [...]

Background The benefit of primary and booster vaccination in people who experienced a prior Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection remains unclear. The objective of this study was to estimate the effectiveness of primary (two-dose series) and booster (third dose) mRNA vaccination against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with a prior documented infection. Methods and findings We conducted a test-negative case-control study of reverse transcription PCRs (RT-PCRs) analyzed with the TaqPath (Thermo Fisher Scientific) assay and recorded in the Yale New Haven Health system from November 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Overall, 11,307 cases (positive TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs with S-gene target failure [SGTF]) and 130,041 controls (negative TaqPath analyzed RT-PCRs) were included (median age: cases: 35 years, controls: 39 years). Among cases and controls, 5.9% and 8.1% had a documented prior infection (positive SARS-CoV-2 test record [greater than or equal to]90 days prior to the included test), respectively. We estimated the effectiveness of primary and booster vaccination relative to SGTF-defined Omicron (lineage BA.1) variant infection using a logistic regression adjusted for date of test, age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance, comorbidities, social venerability index, municipality, and healthcare utilization. The effectiveness of primary vaccination 14 to 149 days after the second dose was 41.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14.1% to 59.4%, p 0.006) and 27.1% (95% CI: 18.7% to 34.6%, p < 0.001) for people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. The effectiveness of booster vaccination ([greater than or equal to]14 days after booster dose) was 47.1% (95% CI: 22.4% to 63.9%, p 0.001) and 54.1% (95% CI: 49.2% to 58.4%, p < 0.001) in people with and without a documented prior infection, respectively. To test whether booster vaccination reduced the risk of infection beyond that of the primary series, we compared the odds of infection among boosted ([greater than or equal to]14 days after booster dose) and booster-eligible people ([greater than or equal to]150 days after second dose). The odds ratio (OR) comparing boosted and booster-eligible people with a documented prior infection was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.54 to 1.16, p 0.222), whereas the OR comparing boosted and booster-eligible people without a documented prior infection was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.49 to 0.59, p < 0.001). This study's limitations include the risk of residual confounding, the use of data from a single system, and the reliance on TaqPath analyzed RT-PCR results. Conclusions In this study, we observed that primary vaccination provided significant but limited protection against Omicron (lineage BA.1) infection among people with and without a documented prior infection. While booster vaccination was associated with additional protection against Omicron BA.1 infection in people without a documented prior infection, it was not found to be associated with additional protection among people with a documented prior infection. These findings support primary vaccination in people regardless of documented prior infection status but suggest that infection history may impact the relative benefit of booster doses., Author(s): Margaret L. Lind 1,*, Alexander J. Robertson 1, Julio Silva 2, Frederick Warner 3,4, Andreas C. Coppi 3,4, Nathan Price 3,4, Chelsea Duckwall 1, Peri Sosensky 1, Erendira C. [...]

Background The structural environment of urban slums, including physical, demographic, and socioeconomic attributes, renders inhabitants more vulnerable to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Yet, little is known about the specific determinants that contribute to high transmission within these communities. We therefore aimed to investigate SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in an urban slum in Brazil. Methods and findings We performed a cross-sectional serosurvey of an established cohort of 2,041 urban slum residents from the city of Salvador, Brazil between November 2020 and February 2021, following the first Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic wave in the country and during the onset of the second wave. The median age in this population was 29 years (interquartile range [IQR] 16 to 44); most participants reported their ethnicity as Black (51.5%) or Brown (41.7%), and 58.5% were female. The median size of participating households was 3 (IQR 2 to 4), with a median daily per capita income of 2.32 (IQR 0.33-5.15) US Dollars. The main outcome measure was presence of IgG against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. We implemented multilevel models with random intercepts for each household to estimate seroprevalence and associated risk factors, adjusting for the sensitivity and specificity of the assay, and the age and gender distribution of our study population. We identified high seroprevalence (47.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 44.2% to 52.1%), particularly among female residents (50.3% [95% CI 46.3% to 54.8%] versus 44.6% [95% CI 40.1% to 49.4%] among male residents, p < 0.01) and among children (54.4% [95% CI 49.6% to 59.3%] versus 45.4% [95% CI 41.5% to 49.7%] among adults, p < 0.01). Adults residing in households with children were more likely to be seropositive (48.6% [95% CI 44.8% to 52.3%] versus 40.7% [95% CI 37.2% to 44.3%], p < 0.01). Women who were unemployed and living below the poverty threshold (daily per capita household income Conclusions Prior to the peak of the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, cumulative incidence as assessed by serology approached 50% in a Brazilian urban slum population. In contrast to observations from industrialized countries, SARS-CoV-2 incidence was highest among children, as well as women living in extreme poverty. These findings emphasize the need for targeted interventions that provide safe environments for children and mitigate the structural risks posed by crowding and poverty for the most vulnerable residents of urban slum communities., Author(s): Mariam O. Fofana 1,*, Nivison Nery 2,3, Juan P. Aguilar Ticona 1,2,3, Emilia M. M. de Andrade Belitardo 3, Renato Victoriano 3, Rôsangela O. Anjos 3, Moyra M. Portilho [...]

Background Community-based management of severe acute malnutrition (SAM) involves weekly or biweekly outpatient clinic visits for clinical surveillance and distribution of therapeutic foods. Distance to outpatient clinics and high opportunity costs for caregivers can represent major barriers to access. Reducing the frequency of outpatient visits while providing training to caregivers to recognize clinical danger signs at home between outpatient visits may increase acceptability, coverage, and public health impact of SAM treatment. We investigated the effectiveness of monthly clinic visits compared to the standard weekly follow-up in the outpatient treatment of uncomplicated SAM in northwestern Nigeria. Methods and findings We conducted a cluster randomized crossover trial to test the noninferiority of nutritional recovery in children with uncomplicated SAM receiving monthly follow-up compared to the standard weekly schedule. From January 2018 to November 2019, 3,945 children aged 6 to 59 months were enrolled at 10 health centers (5 assigned to monthly follow-up and 5 assigned to weekly follow-up) in Sokoto, Nigeria. In total, 96% of children (n = 1,976 in the monthly follow-up group and 1,802 in the weekly follow-up group) were followed until program discharge, and 91% (n = 1,873 in the monthly follow-up group and 1,721 in the weekly follow-up group) were followed to 3 months postdischarge. The mean age at admission was 15.8 months (standard deviation [SD] 7.1), 2,097/3,945 (53.2%) were girls, and the mean midupper arm circumference (MUAC) at admission was 105.8 mm (SD 6.0). In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome of nutritional recovery, defined as having MUAC [greater than or equal to]125 mm on 2 consecutive visits, was analyzed using generalized linear models, with generalized estimating equations to account for clustering. Nutritional recovery was lower in the monthly follow-up group compared to the weekly group (1,036/1,976, 52.4% versus 1,059/1,802, 58.8%; risk difference: -6.8%), and noninferiority was not demonstrated (lower bound of the confidence interval [CI] was -11.5%, lower than the noninferiority margin of 10%). The proportion of children defaulting was lower in the monthly group than in the weekly group (109/1,976, 5.5% versus 151/1,802, 8.4%, p = 0.03). Three months postdischarge, children in the monthly group were less likely to relapse compared to those in the weekly group (58/976, 5.9% versus 78/1,005, 7.8%, p = 0.03), but cumulative mortality at 3 months postdischarge was higher in the monthly group (159/1,873, 8.5% versus 106/1,721, 6.2%, p < 0.001). Study results may depend on context-specific factors including baseline level of care and the clinical status of children presenting to health centers, and, thus, generalizability of these results may be limited. Conclusions Where feasible, a weekly schedule of clinic visits should be preferred to maintain effectiveness of SAM treatment. Where geographic coverage of programs is low or frequent travel to outpatient clinics is difficult or impossible, a monthly schedule of visits may provide an alternative model to deliver treatment to those in need. Modifications to the outpatient follow-up schedule, for example, weekly clinic visits until initial weight gain has been achieved followed by monthly visits, could increase the effectiveness of the model and add flexibility for program delivery. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03140904., Author(s): Matt D. T. Hitchings 1,2, Fatou Berthé 3, Philip Aruna 4, Ibrahim Shehu 3, Muhammed Ali Hamza 5, Siméon Nanama 6, Chizoba Steve-Edemba 7, Rebecca F. Grais 8, Sheila [...]

Serological assays used to estimate the prevalence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) often rely on manufacturers' cutoffs established on the basis of severe cases. We conducted a household-based serosurvey of 4,677 individuals in Chennai, India, from January to May 2021. Samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies to the spike (S) and nucleocapsid (N) proteins. We calculated seroprevalence, defining seropositivity using manufacturer cutoffs and using a mixture model based on measured IgG level. Using manufacturer cutoffs, there was a 5-fold difference in seroprevalence estimated by each assay. This difference was largely reconciled using the mixture model, with estimated anti-S and anti-N IgG seroprevalence of 64.9% (95% credible interval (CrI): 63.8, 66.0) and 51.5% (95% CrI: 50.2, 52.9), respectively. Age and socioeconomic factors showed inconsistent relationships with anti-S and anti-N IgG seropositivity using manufacturer cutoffs. In the mixture model, age was not associated with seropositivity, and improved household ventilation was associated with lower seropositivity odds. With global vaccine scale-up, the utility of the more stable anti-S IgG assay may be limited due to the inclusion of the S protein in several vaccines. Estimates of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence using alternative targets must consider heterogeneity in seroresponse to ensure that seroprevalence is not underestimated and correlates are not misinterpreted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Household transmission studies inform how viruses spread among close contacts, but few characterize household transmission of endemic coronaviruses.Methods: We used data collected from 223 households with school-age children participating in weekly disease surveillance over two respiratory virus seasons (December 2015 to May 2017), to describe clinical characteristics of endemic human coronaviruses (HCoV-229E, HCoV-HKU1, HCoV-NL63, HCoV-OC43) infections, and community and household transmission probabilities using a chain-binomial model correcting for missing data from untested households.Results: Among 947 participants in 223 households, we observed 121 infections during the study, most commonly subtype HCoV-OC43. Higher proportions of infected children (<19y) displayed ILI symptoms than infected adults (relative risk 3.0, 95% credible interval (CrI) 1.5, 6.9). The estimated weekly household transmission probability was 9% (95% CrI 6, 13) and weekly community acquisition probability was 7% (95% CrI 5, 10). We found no evidence for differences in community or household transmission probabilities by age or symptom status. Simulations suggest that our study was underpowered to detect such differences.Conclusion: Our study highlights the need for large household studies to inform household transmission, the challenges in estimating household transmission probabilities from asymptomatic individuals, and implications for controlling endemic CoVs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact variant-specific immune evasion and waning protection have on declining COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness remains unclear. Using whole-genome-sequencing (WGS), we examined the contribution of these factors on the decline observed following the introduction of the Delta variant. Further, we evaluated the utility of calendar-period-based classification as an alternative to WGS.Methods: We conducted a test-negative-case-control study among people who received SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing in the Yale New Haven Health System between April 1 and August 24, 2021. Variant classification was performed using WGS and calendar-period.Results: Overall, 2,029 cases (RT-PCR positive, sequenced samples [infections]) and 343,985 controls (negative RT-PCRs) were included. VE 14-89 days after 2nd dose was significantly higher against WGS-classified Alpha-infection (84.4%, CI: 75.6-90.0%) than Delta-infection (68.9%, CI: 58.0-77.1%, p-value = 0.013). The odds of WGS-classified Delta-infection were significantly higher 90-149 than 14-89 days after 2nd dose (p-value = 0.003). VE estimates against calendar-period-classified infections approximated estimates against WGS-classified infections, however, calendar-period-based classification was subject to outcome misclassification (35%: Alpha-period, 4%: Delta-period).Conclusions: Both waning protection and variant-specific immune evasion contributed to the lower effectiveness. While VE estimates against calendar-period-classified infections mirrored those against WGS-classified infections, our analysis highlights the need for WGS when variants are co-circulating and misclassification is likely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Antibiotic prophylaxis for contacts of meningitis cases is not recommended during outbreaks in the African meningitis belt. We assessed the effectiveness of single-dose oral ciprofloxacin administered to household contacts and in village-wide distributions on the overall attack rate (AR) in an outbreak of meningococcal meningitis. Methods and findings In this 3-arm, open-label, cluster-randomized trial during a meningococcal meningitis outbreak in Madarounfa District, Niger, villages notifying a suspected case were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to standard care (the control arm), single-dose oral ciprofloxacin for household contacts within 24 hours of case notification, or village-wide distribution of ciprofloxacin within 72 hours of first case notification. The primary outcome was the overall AR of suspected meningitis after inclusion. A random sample of 20 participating villages was enrolled to document any changes in fecal carriage prevalence of ciprofloxacin-resistant and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae before and after the intervention. Between April 22 and May 18, 2017, 49 villages were included: 17 to the control arm, 17 to household prophylaxis, and 15 to village-wide prophylaxis. A total of 248 cases were notified in the study after the index cases. The AR was 451 per 100,000 persons in the control arm, 386 per 100,000 persons in the household prophylaxis arm (t test versus control p = 0.68), and 190 per 100,000 persons in the village-wide prophylaxis arm (t test versus control p = 0.032). The adjusted AR ratio between the household prophylaxis arm and the control arm was 0.94 (95% CI 0.52-1.73, p = 0.85), and the adjusted AR ratio between the village-wide prophylaxis arm and the control arm was 0.40 (95% CI 0.19-0.87, p = 0.022). No adverse events were notified. Baseline carriage prevalence of ciprofloxacin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae was 95% and of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae was >90%, and did not change post-intervention. One limitation of the study was the small number of cerebrospinal fluid samples sent for confirmatory testing. Conclusions Village-wide distribution of single-dose oral ciprofloxacin within 72 hours of case notification reduced overall meningitis AR. Distributions of ciprofloxacin could be an effective tool in future meningitis outbreak responses, but further studies investigating length of protection, effectiveness in urban settings, and potential impact on antimicrobial resistance patterns should be carried out. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02724046, Author(s): Matthew E. Coldiron 1,*, Bachir Assao 2, Anne-Laure Page 1, Matt D. T. Hitchings 3, Gabriel Alcoba 4, Iza Ciglenecki 4, Céline Langendorf 1, Christopher Mambula 5, Eric Adehossi [...]

Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) remain the only widely available tool for controlling the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We estimated weekly values of the effective basic reproductive number (Reff) using a mechanistic metapopulation model and associated these with county-level characteristics and NPIs in the United States (US). Interventions that included school and leisure activities closure and nursing home visiting bans were all associated with a median Reff below 1 when combined with either stay at home orders (median Reff 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58–1.39) or face masks (median Reff 0.97, 95% CI 0.58–1.39). While direct causal effects of interventions remain unclear, our results suggest that relaxation of some NPIs will need to be counterbalanced by continuation and/or implementation of others. Disentangling the impacts of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 transmission is challenging as they have been used in different combinations across time and space. This study shows that, early in the epidemic, school/daycare closures and stopping nursing home visits were associated with the biggest reduction in transmission in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Test-negative designs are increasingly used to evaluate vaccine effectiveness because of desirable properties like reduced confounding due to healthcare-seeking behaviors and lower cost compared to other study designs. An individual's decision to seek care often depends on their disease severity, with severe disease more likely to be captured than mild disease. As many vaccines likely attenuate disease severity, this phenomenon generally results in an upward-biased estimate of vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease. To address the resulting bias, analytic solutions like adjusting for or matching on severity have been suggested. In this paper, we examine the performance of the test-negative design under different vaccine effects on disease severity and the utility of adjusting or matching on severity. We further consider the implications of studies that focus only on milder disease by restricting recruitment to outpatient settings. Through an analytic framework and simulations accompanied by a real-world example, we demonstrate that, when vaccination attenuates disease severity, the magnitude of bias is influenced by the degree of under-ascertainment of mild disease relative to severe disease. When vaccination does not attenuate disease severity, bias is not present. We further show that analytic fixes negligibly impact bias and that outpatient-only studies frequently produce downward-biased estimates., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.)

Background: The emergence of COVID-19 variants with immune scape and the waning of primary vaccine schemes effectiveness have prompted many countries to indicate first and second booster COVID-19 vaccine doses to prevent severe COVID-19. However, current available evidence on second booster dose effectiveness are mostly limited to high-income countries, older adults, and mRNA-based vaccination schemes scenarios. We aimed to investigate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of the fourth dose compared to three doses for severe COVID-19 outcomes in Brazil; and compare the rVE of a fourth dose with an mRNA vaccine compared to adenovirus-based product in the same settings., Methods: We performed a target emulated trial using a population-based cohort of individuals aged 40 years or older who have received a homologous primary scheme of CoronaVac, ChAdOx1, or BNT162b2, and any third dose product and were eligible for the fourth dose in Brazil. The primary outcome was COVID-19 associated hospitalization or death. We built Cohort A matching individuals vaccinated with a fourth dose to individuals who received three doses to estimate the rVE of the fourth dose. We built Cohort B, a subset of Cohort A, matching mRNA-based (mRNA) to adenovirus-based fourth dose vaccinated individuals to compare their relative hazards for severe COVID-19., Findings: 46,693,484 individuals were included in Cohort A and 6,763,016 in Cohort B. 45% of them were aged between 40 and 60 years old, and 48% between 60 and 79 years old. In Cohort A, the most common previous series was a ChAdOx1 two-dose followed by BNT162b2 (44%), and a CoronaVac two-dose followed by a BNT162b2 (36%). Among those fourth dose vaccinated, 36.9% received ChAdOx1, 32.7% Ad26.COV2.S, 25.8% BNT162b2, and 4.7% CoronaVac. In Cohort B, among those who received an adenovirus fourth dose, 53.7% received ChAdOx1 and 46.3% received Ad26.COV2.S. The estimated rVE for the primary outcome of four doses compared to three doses was 44.1% (95% CI 42.3-46.0), with some waning during follow-up (rVE 7-60 days 46.8% [95% CI 44.4-49.1], rVE after 120 days 33.8% [95% CI 18.0-46.6]). Among fourth dose vaccinated individuals, mRNA-based vaccinated individuals had lower hazards for hospitalization or death compared to adenovirus-vaccinated individuals (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.87). After 120 days, no difference in hazards between groups was observed (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.93-1.97). Similar findings were observed for hospitalization and death separately, except no evidence for differences between fourth dose brands for death in Cohort B., Interpretation: In a heterogeneous scenario of primary and first booster vaccination combinations, a fourth dose provided meaningful and durable protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes. Compared to adenovirus-based booster, a fourth dose wild-type mRNA vaccine was associated with immediate lower hazards of hospitalization or death unsustained after 120 days., Funding: None., Competing Interests: MDTH reports a contract from Merck and Dohme (to the University of Florida) for research unrelated to this manuscript. DATC reports a contract from Pfizer Inc. Paid to the University of Florida for research unrelated to this manuscript. ML received grants from the NIAID for COVID-19 prevention with correctional facilities. AIK received funding from Beatrice Kleinberg Neuwirth Family Fund, Sendas Family Fund, Regeneron, Merck, Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, Paul Hastings LLD, National Academy of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, and is on the Board of Directors (unpaid) of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. JC received funding from Sanofi, MSD, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Valneva/Butantan and payment/honoraria from Foro Latinoamericano para Asesores Médicos en Vacunas 2023 (Pfizer), Pfizer Emerging Markets Advance Speaker Training 2024 (Pfizer). Also, JC is on the Brazil advisory board for mRNA-1273 vaccine (Modern/Zodiac), RSV maternal vaccine (Pfizer) and Qdenga vaccine (Takeda). NED received funding from the NIH/NIAID R01-AI139761, Emergent Biosolutions, and Bavarian Nordic. OTR acknowledges funding from the END-VOC Project (Horizon 2021–2024), funded by the European Union under grant agreement no. 101046314. OTR acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through the Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa 2019–2023 programme (CEX2018-000806-S) and from the Generalitat de Catalunya through the Centres de Recerca de Catalunya (CERCA) programme. The remaining authors declare they have no competing interests. These institutions had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variant, Gamma, emerged in the city of Manaus in late 2020 during a large resurgence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), and has spread throughout Brazil. The effectiveness of vaccines in settings with widespread Gamma variant transmission has not been reported., Methods: We performed a matched test-negative case-control study to estimate the effectiveness of an inactivated vaccine, CoronaVac, in healthcare workers (HCWs) in Manaus, where the Gamma variant accounted for 86% of genotyped SARS-CoV-2 samples at the peak of its epidemic. We performed an early analysis of effectiveness following administration of at least one vaccine dose and an analysis of effectiveness of the two-dose schedule. The primary outcome was symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection., Findings: For the early at-least-one-dose and two-dose analyses the study population was, respectively, 53,176 and 53,153 HCWs residing in Manaus and aged 18 years or older, with complete information on age, residence, and vaccination status. Among 53,153 HCWs eligible for the two-dose analysis, 47,170 (89%) received at least one dose of CoronaVac and 2,656 individuals (5%) underwent RT-PCR testing from 19 January, 2021 to 13 April, 2021. Of 3,195 RT-PCR tests, 885 (28%) were positive. 393 and 418 case-control pairs were selected for the early and two-dose analyses, respectively, matched on calendar time, age, and neighbourhood. Among those who had received both vaccine doses before the RT-PCR sample collection date, the average time from second dose to sample collection date was 14 days (IQR 7-24). In the early analysis, vaccination with at least one dose was associated with a 0.50-fold reduction (adjusted vaccine effectiveness (VE), 49.6%, 95% CI 11.3 to 71.4) in the odds of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the first dose. However, we estimated low effectiveness (adjusted VE 36.8%, 95% CI -54.9 to 74.2) of the two-dose schedule against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection during the period 14 days or more after receiving the second dose. A finding that vaccinated individuals were much more likely to be infected than unvaccinated individuals in the period 0-13 days after first dose (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.36-3.27) suggests that unmeasured confounding led to downward bias in the vaccine effectiveness estimate., Interpretation: Evidence from this test-negative study of the effectiveness of CoronaVac was mixed, and likely affected by bias in this setting. Administration of at least one vaccine dose showed effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of epidemic Gamma variant transmission. However, the low estimated effectiveness of the two-dose schedule underscores the need to maintain non-pharmaceutical interventions while vaccination campaigns with CoronaVac are being implemented., Funding: Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (Fiocruz); Municipal Health Secretary of Manaus; Fundação de Vigilância em Saúde do Amazonas., Competing Interests: We declare no competing interests., (© 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Analysis of immunogenicity data is a critical component of vaccine development, providing a biological basis to support any observed protection from vaccination. Conventional methods for analyzing immunogenicity data use either post-vaccination titer or change in titer, often defined as a binary variable using a threshold. These methods are simple to implement but can be limited especially in populations experiencing natural exposure to the pathogen. A mixture model can overcome the limitations of the conventional approaches by jointly modeling the probability of an immune response and the level of the immune marker among those who respond. We apply a mixture model to analyze the immunogenicity of an oral, pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in a cohort of children enrolled into a placebo-controlled vaccine efficacy trial in Niger. Among children with undetectable immunoglobulin A (IgA) at baseline, vaccinated children had 5.2-fold (95% credible interval (CrI) 3.7, 8.3) higher odds of having an IgA response than placebo children, but the mean log IgA among vaccinated responders was 0.9-log lower (95% CrI 0.6, 1.3) than among placebo responders. This result implies that the IgA response generated by vaccination is weaker than that generated by natural infection. Multivariate logistic regression of seroconversion defined by ≥ 3-fold rise in IgA similarly found increased seroconversion among vaccinated children, but could not demonstrate lower IgA among those who seroresponded. In addition, we found that the vaccine was less immunogenic among children with detectable IgA pre-vaccination, and that pre-vaccination infant serum IgG and mother's breast milk IgA modified the vaccine immunogenicity. Increased maternal antibodies were associated with weaker IgA response in placebo and vaccinated children, with the association being stronger among vaccinated children. The mixture model is a powerful and flexible method for analyzing immunogenicity data and identifying modifiers of vaccine response and independent predictors of immune response., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Efforts to reduce the impact of stunting have been largely independent of interventions to reduce the impact of wasting, despite the observation that the conditions can coexist in the same child and increase risk of death. To optimize the management of malnourished children-who can be wasted, stunted, or both-the relationship between stunting and wasting should be elaborated. We aimed to describe the relationship between concurrent weight and height gain during and after rehabilitation from severe wasting. We conducted a secondary analysis of a randomized trial for the outpatient treatment of severe wasting, including 1,542 children who recovered and were followed for 12 weeks. We described the overlap of stunting and severe wasting and the change in stunting over time. We showed the relationship between concurrent weight and height gain using adjusted generalized estimating equations and calculated the mean rate of change in weight-for-height z score (WHZ) and height-for-age z score (HAZ) during and after rehabilitation. At baseline, 79% (n = 1,223/1,542) and 49% (n = 757/1,542) of children were stunted and severely stunted, respectively. Prevalence increased over time among children <24 months. During rehabilitation when weight was not yet fully recovered, we found rapid WHZ gain but limited HAZ gain. Following successful rehabilitation, WHZ gain slowed. The rate of HAZ gain was negative after rehabilitation but increased relative to the period during treatment. The potential relationship between weight and height gain calls for increased coverage of wasting treatment to not only prevent child mortality but also reduce linear growth faltering., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)