A Prospective Cohort Study of COVID-19 Vaccination, SARS-CoV-2 Infection, and Fertility

Is Covid-19 "vaccine uptake" in postsecondary education a "problem"? A critical policy inquiry

Since the launch of the Covid-19 global vaccination campaign, postsecondary institutions have strongly promoted vaccination, often through mandates, and the academic literature has identified "vaccine uptake" among postsecondary students as a problem deserving monitoring, research, and intervention. However, with the admission that vaccines do not stop viral spread, that older-age and co-morbidities are major determinants of poor outcomes, and that many vaccine side effects disproportionately affect the young, it cannot be assumed that a risk-benefit analysis favors vaccinating postsecondary students. Drawing from critical policy studies, I appraise the literature on Covid-19 vaccine uptake in postsecondary education. I find that this literature reflects the "scientific consensus," hardly acknowledging contradictory medical evidence, ignoring coercive elements underlying "vaccine acceptance," and neglecting ethical tensions built into the very design of vaccination policies. I discuss potential explanations for my findings, and their implications for academia's role in society in the COVID-19 era and beyond.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology: A review

It has been over 4 years since the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As an effective response to coronavirus disease 2019, the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been widely used around the world. However, couples who are planning to conceive naturally or by assisted reproductive technology (ART) are concerned about the impact of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines on pregnancy and offspring safety. Furthermore, in the initial stage of the epidemic, opinions among physicians and healthcare providers on whether ART patients should be immunized are divided due to the lack of data regarding the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on ART. This is not the first, nor will it be the last time humans confront pandemics. It is time to summarize the experience about the effect of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on the outcomes of ART, which can provide a reference for the future. This paper reviewed relevant research, and significant adverse effects of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on the outcome of ART have not been observed. Considering the increased risk of serious complications in pregnant women infected with SARS-CoV-2, timely vaccination may be a wiser choice.

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed significant risks to pregnant women and those recently pregnant, leading to heightened mortality and morbidity rates. Vaccination has emerged as a pivotal strategy in reducing COVID-19-related deaths and illnesses worldwide. However, the initial exclusion of pregnant individuals from most clinical trials raised concerns about vaccine safety in this population, contributing to vaccine hesitancy. This review aims to consolidate the existing literature to assess the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant populations and neonatal outcomes. Diverse studies were included evaluating various aspects of safety for women and their newborns, encompassing mild to severe symptoms across different vaccines. The findings indicate the overall safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccination, with minimal adverse outcomes observed, including mild side effects like pain and fever. Although most studies reported the absence of severe adverse outcomes, isolated case reports have raised concerns about potential associations between maternal COVID-19 vaccination and conditions such as fetal supraventricular tachycardia and immune-mediated diseases. Our review underscores the importance of ongoing surveillance and monitoring to ensure vaccine safety in pregnant women. Overall, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy remains a safe and effective strategy, emphasizing the need for continued research and vigilance to safeguard maternal and fetal health.

Adverse Menstrual Events Reported After and Before (or Without) COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Reports of adverse menstrual events emerged during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign in multiple countries. This raised the question whether these reports were caused by the vaccines. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate comparative studies on this topic (registered at PROSPERO [CRD42022324973]).

METHODS

We included observational studies such as cohort studies and surveys comparing the response to self-reported questionnaires between post- versus pre-vaccination data. PubMed and Cochrane Library searches were conducted on 1 September 2023. The primary outcome was the incidence of any prespecified adverse menstrual event, and the outcome measure was the risk ratio. The meta-analysis was conducted by using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the random effects model. We summarized the results on risk factors as well as key findings of the studies included.

RESULTS

We retrieved 161 references from electronic databases and additional sources such as references lists. Of those, we considered 21 comparative observational studies. The meta-analysis of any adverse menstrual adverse event reported in 12 studies resulted in a pooled estimate (risk ratio 1.13; 95% CI, 0.96-1.31) that did not favor any group. The analysis was constrained by considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Risk factors for self-reported menstrual changes included a history of COVID-19 infection, the concern about COVID-19 vaccines, smoking, previous cycle irregularities, depression, and stress, and other issues.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk ratio did not favor any group and heterogeneity was prevalent among the studies. Most studies suggested that the reported changes were temporary, minor, and nonserious.

Physiological Response to the COVID-19 Vaccine: Insights From a Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blinded, Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Rapid development and implementation of vaccines constituted a crucial step in containing the COVID-19 pandemic. A comprehensive understanding of physiological responses to these vaccines is important to build trust in medicine.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate temporal dynamics before and after COVID-19 vaccination in 4 physiological parameters as well as the duration of menstrual cycle phases.

METHODS

In a prospective trial, 17,825 adults in the Netherlands wore a medical device on their wrist for up to 9 months. The device recorded their physiological signals and synchronized with a complementary smartphone app. By means of multilevel quadratic regression, we examined changes in wearable-recorded breathing rate, wrist skin temperature, heart rate, heart rate variability, and objectively assessed the duration of menstrual cycle phases in menstruating participants to assess the effects of COVID-19 vaccination.

RESULTS

The recorded physiological signals demonstrated short-term increases in breathing rate and heart rate after COVID-19 vaccination followed by a prompt rebound to baseline levels likely reflecting biological mechanisms accompanying the immune response to vaccination. No sex differences were evident in the measured physiological responses. In menstruating participants, we found a 0.8% decrease in the duration of the menstrual phase following vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed short-term changes suggest that COVID-19 vaccines are not associated with long-term biophysical issues. Taken together, our work provides valuable insights into continuous fluctuations of physiological responses to vaccination and highlights the importance of digital solutions in health care.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1186/s13063-021-05241-5.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes: A Systematic Review

COVID-19 vaccination, especially vaccines that mimic the structure of the COVID-19 virus (mRNA vaccines), may be wrongly assumed to be disrupting factors affecting in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome. This study aims to evaluate any significant impact of COVID-19 vaccination in women undergoing IVF to improve vaccine compliance and promote COVID-19 eradication. This was a systematic review study. We searched studies published between 2020 and 2022 using databases such as PubMed, Cochrane, PMC, and CINAHL. Selected studies were carefully analyzed to review the impact of the COVID-19 vaccine on IVF outcomes. Seven retrospective and prospective cohort studies, which involved 3232 female patients undergoing IVF, who also received full doses of COVID-19 vaccinations (mRNA), were included. All studies in the present review showed that despite presenting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after vaccination, there were no significant differences in IVF outcomes, implantation rates, and pregnancy rates. Contrary to the theory that presumed cross-reactivity between anti- SARS-CoV-2 antibodies and the human syncytin-1 protein could affect syncytiotrophoblast formation and embryo implantation. The present review concluded that COVID-19 vaccination does not result in any detrimental effects on IVF outcomes and is safe for women undergoing IVF treatment. The results of our study are important to tackle misinformation regarding COVID-19 vaccination and infertility that may cause vaccine hesitancy in women of reproductive age.

Factors Affecting Parental Intent to Vaccinate Against COVID-19 in the United States

Introduction

The topic of childhood vaccinations has become increasingly contentious, sparking debate, and creating challenging decisions for parents. This study aimed to explore the factors influencing COVID-19 vaccination decisions for parents of unvaccinated children and identify the most common reasons for not vaccinating children against COVID-19 in the U.S.

Methods

Authors analyzed data from Phase 3.7, Week 53 of the United States Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey (N = 68,504), collected from January 4 to January 16, 2023. Standard descriptive statistics and adjusted odds ratio (aOR) were used to analyze the data.

Results

The top three reasons for vaccine hesitancy were concerns about side effects, lack of trust in the vaccine, and the perception that children in the household were not part of a high-risk group. Among respondents, nearly 87% (n = 59,363) reported receiving a COVID- 19 vaccination, and these individuals were more inclined to vaccinate their children across all age groups studied. Additionally, participants with higher levels of education (bachelor's degree or higher) were more likely to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 (aOR = 5.79; 95% CI, 5.43-6.17; p <0.001).

Conclusions

Findings from the study suggest that some parents are still concerned about the COVID-19 vaccine and are hesitant to vaccinate their children against the disease. Information and insights from this study allow for a greater understanding of how parents are making this decision nearly three years after the pandemic officially began. Further studies are needed to determine how other factors, such as geographical location, also may affect parental COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy.

Host factors of SARS-CoV-2 in infection, pathogenesis, and long-term effects

SARS-CoV-2 is the causative virus of the devastating COVID-19 pandemic that results in an unparalleled global health and economic crisis. Despite unprecedented scientific efforts and therapeutic interventions, the fight against COVID-19 continues as the rapid emergence of different SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and the increasing challenge of long COVID-19, raising a vast demand to understand the pathomechanisms of COVID-19 and its long-term sequelae and develop therapeutic strategies beyond the virus per se. Notably, in addition to the virus itself, the replication cycle of SARS-CoV-2 and clinical severity of COVID-19 is also governed by host factors. In this review, we therefore comprehensively overview the replication cycle and pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 from the perspective of host factors and host-virus interactions. We sequentially outline the pathological implications of molecular interactions between host factors and SARS-CoV-2 in multi-organ and multi-system long COVID-19, and summarize current therapeutic strategies and agents targeting host factors for treating these diseases. This knowledge would be key for the identification of new pathophysiological aspects and mechanisms, and the development of actionable therapeutic targets and strategies for tackling COVID-19 and its sequelae.

A propensity score matched analysis of COVID-19 ongoing symptoms in primary medical staff members with different levels of stress in Jiangsu Province, China

Objective

Ongoing symptoms which originated from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infections threaten the health of a broad population of patients. With recent changes in COVID-19 control measures in China, medical staff members are currently experiencing a high level of stress. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of ongoing symptomatic COVID-19 and explore the potential association between stress and ongoing COVID symptoms.

Methods

From January 17th to February 2, 2023, primary medical staff members in Jiangsu Province were surveyed using a self-designed questionnaire. Univariate multinomial logistic analysis was used to illustrate the relationship between stress and ongoing symptoms after matching the low- and high-stress groups in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores.

Results

Analysis revealed that 14.83 % (3785/25,516) of primary medical staff members infected with COVID-19 experienced ongoing symptoms, the most common of which included cough (9.51 %), dyspnea (9.51 %), sleep problems (4.40 %), anxiety (2.29 %), and reproductive system symptoms (1.89 %). In matched patients, higher stress levels were associated with a greater risk of ongoing symptoms than in patients without ongoing symptoms for 14 of the 15 reported symptoms in this study (odds ratios [ORs] > 1 and P < 0.05). Moreover, higher levels of stress were associated with a greater risk of more ongoing symptoms, and the overall ORs increased with the number of symptoms (ORs >1 and P < 0.05).

Conclusion

To mitigate the possibility of experiencing ongoing symptoms, healthcare organizations and local authority agencies should institute helpful measures to decrease stress levels such as medical staff augmentation and enabling all staff to have a reasonable work-life balance.

Mapping the vast landscape of multisystem complications of COVID-19: Bibliometric analysis

Background

With the rapid global spread of COVID-19, it has become evident that the virus can lead to multisystem complications, leading to a significant increase in related publications. Bibliometrics serves as a valuable tool for identifying highly cited literature and research hotspots within specific areas.

Objective

The aim of this study is to identify current research hotspots and future trends in COVID-19 complications.

Methods

The dataset was obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection, covering COVID-19 complications from December 8, 2019, to October 31, 2022. Various aspects, including publication general information, authors, journals, co-cited authors, co-cited references, research hotspots, and future trends, were subjected to analysis. Visual analysis was conducted using VOSviewer, The Online Analysis Platform of Literature Metrology, and Charticulator.

Results

There were 4597 articles in the study. The top three countries with the most published articles are the USA (n = 1350, 29.4 %), China (n = 765, 16.6 %), and Italy (n = 623, 13.6 %). USA and China have the closest collaborative relationship. The institute with the largest number of publications is Huazhong University of Science and Technology, followed by Harvard Medical School. Nevertheless, half of the top 10 institutes belong to the USA. "Rezaei, Nima" published 13 articles and ranked first, followed by "Yaghi, Shadi" with 12 articles and "Frontera, Jennifer" with 12 articles. The journal with the largest number of publications is "Journal of Clinical Medicine". The top 3 co-cited authors are "Zhou, Fei", "Guan, Wei-Jie", "Huang, Chaolin". The top 3 co-cited references addressed COVID-19's clinical features in China and noticed that COVID-19 patients had a wide range of complications. We also list four research hotspots.

Conclusions

This study conducted a bibliometric visual analysis of the literature on COVID-19 complications and summarized the current research hotspots. This study may provide valuable insights into the complications of COVID-19.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination on live birth rates after in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To investigate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination on the live birth rates in patients who underwent in vitro fertilization.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic fertility practice.

PATIENT(S)

Patients who underwent fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles at an academic center between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021.

INTERVENTION(S)

Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, defined as completing a 2-dose regimen (Pfizer or Moderna) or 1-dose regimen (Johnson & Johnson/Janssen) before cycle initiation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The primary outcome was the live birth rate per embryo transfer. The secondary outcomes included positive human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer. The outcomes from cycles among vaccinated and unvaccinated patients were compared. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze demographic and cycle characteristics using the Student t test and Wilcoxon rank sum, Pearson chi-square, and Fisher exact tests as appropriate for univariate analysis. Generalized estimating equation models were used to examine the strength of the relationship between vaccination status and pregnancy outcomes.

RESULT(S)

Among 709 unvaccinated and 648 vaccinated fresh cycles, no statistically significant differences were observed between the number of oocytes retrieved, oocyte maturity, fertilization, and blastocyst utilization rates. In the adjusted multivariate analysis, no statistically significant differences were noted between fresh cycles among vaccinated patients compared with those among unvaccinated patients with the rates of positive hCG (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-2.25), clinical pregnancy (aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.73-2.03), or live birth (aOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.79-2.25) per embryo transfer. Among 264 unvaccinated and 423 vaccinated frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles, vaccinated patients had higher odds of positive hCG (aOR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.08-2.20), clinical pregnancy (aOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.27-2.56), and live birth (aOR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.60-3.32) per embryo transfer than unvaccinated patients.

CONCLUSION(S)

Patients who were COVID-19 vaccinated before FET had higher rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and live birth. Vaccination was not associated with the pregnancy or live birth rates after fresh cycles. This study contributes to evidence supporting COVID-19 vaccination for patients attempting pregnancy.

Prolongation of the Menstrual Cycle After Receipt of the Primary Series and Booster Doses of mRNA Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccination

OBJECTIVE

To quantitatively evaluate the effect of a booster vaccination dose against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on menstrual cycle in a large-scale retrospective cohort study using a menstrual cycle tracking smartphone application (app).

METHODS

Prospectively or retrospectively recorded data, including the start and finish dates of menstrual cycles, were collected with the app. Detailed data on vaccinations, side effects, and participants' characteristics were retrospectively collected from a questionnaire on the app. For each COVID-19 vaccination shot (first, second, and third), within-individual changes in menstrual cycle length up to the fourth postvaccination cycle were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the 7,376 and 6,873 participants who had the first and second COVID-19 vaccine doses in different menstrual cycles, respectively, menstrual cycles immediately after the vaccination (first postvaccination cycles) were an average of 0.22 days (95% CI, 0.06-0.39) and 0.37 days (95% CI, 0.20-0.54) longer than the prevaccination cycle. In contrast, among the 1,672 participants who received the first and second doses in the same cycle, the first postvaccination cycle was an average of 4.21 days (95% CI, 3.69-4.72) longer. The second to fourth postvaccination cycles returned to the level of the prevaccination cycle. However, among the 4,768 participants who had the third COVID-19 vaccine dose, the menstrual cycle immediately after the vaccination was an average of 1.20 days (95% CI, 1.00-1.40) longer, with prolongation of cycles of 0.27 days (95% CI, 0.10-0.44) to 0.41 days (95% CI, 0.22-0.59) persisting from the second to the fourth postvaccination cycle.

CONCLUSION

The booster shot against COVID-19 may have a greater and longer-lasting effect on menstrual cycles than the primary-series shots. Although the effect size was small, evidence on the side effects of immunization on menstruation should be accumulated.

Discovery and development of COVID-19 vaccine from laboratory to clinic

The world has recently experienced one of the biggest and most severe public health disasters with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) which is one of the most widespread and powerful infections affecting human lungs. Current figures show that the epidemic had reached 216 nations, where it had killed about 6,438,926 individuals and infected 590,405,710. WHO proclaimed the outbreak of the Ebola virus disease (EVD), in 2014 that killed hundreds of people in West Africa. The development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 becomes more difficult due to the viral mutation in its non-structural proteins (NSPs) especially NSP2 and NSP3, S protein, and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp). Continuous monitoring of SARS-CoV-2, dynamics of the genomic sequence, and spike protein mutations are very important for the successful development of vaccines with good efficacy. Hence, the vaccine development for SARS-CoV-2 faces specific challenges starting from viral mutation. The requirement of long-term immunity development, safety, efficacy, stability, vaccine allocation, distribution, and finally, its cost is discussed in detail. Currently, 169 vaccines are in the clinical development stage, while 198 vaccines are in the preclinical development stage. The majority of these vaccines belong to the Ps-Protein subunit type which has 54, and the minor BacAg-SPV (Bacterial antigen-spore expression vector) type, at least 1 vaccination. The use of computational methods and models for vaccine development has revolutionized the traditional methods of vaccine development. Further, this updated review highlights the upcoming vaccine development strategies in response to the current pandemic and post-pandemic era, in the field of vaccine development.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines on Sperm Quality: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by SARS-CoV-2, has triggered a global public health crisis of unprecedented proportions. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is a highly effective strategy for preventing infections and severe COVID-19 outcomes. Although several studies have concluded that COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to affect fertility, concerns have arisen regarding adverse events, including the potential impact on fertility; these concerns are plagued by limited and inconsistent evidence.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide a recent assessment of the literature on the impact of COVID-19 vaccines on male sperm quality. The possible impact of COVID-19 vaccines on fertility potential was also examined to draw a clearer picture and to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 on male reproductive health.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from their inception to October 2023. Eligible studies included articles reporting SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and human semen quality and fertility, as well as the impact of vaccination on assisted reproductive technology treatment outcomes. The quality of cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the quality of cross-sectional studies was assessed using the quality evaluation criteria recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The systematic review followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

RESULTS

The initial literature search yielded 4691 records by searching 5 peer-reviewed databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane). Finally, 24 relevant studies were selected for our study. There were evident research inequalities at the regional level, with the United States and Western European countries contributing 38% (9/24) of the studies, Middle Eastern countries contributing 38% (9/24), China accounting for 21% (5/24), and Africa and South America accounting for none. Nonetheless, the overall quality of the included studies was generally good. Our results demonstrated that serious side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine are extremely rare, and men experience few problems with sperm parameters or reproductive potential after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the studies published so far, the COVID-19 vaccine is safe for male reproductive health. Obviously, vaccination is a wise option rather than experience serious adverse symptoms of viral infections. These instances of evidence may help reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccination coverage, particularly among reproductive-age couples. As new controlled trials and prospective cohort studies with larger sample sizes emerge, the possibility of a negative effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on sperm quality must be further clarified.

A prospective cohort study of preconception COVID-19 vaccination and miscarriage

STUDY QUESTION

To what extent is preconception maternal or paternal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination associated with miscarriage incidence?

SUMMARY ANSWER

COVID-19 vaccination in either partner at any time before conception is not associated with an increased rate of miscarriage.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Several observational studies have evaluated the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy and found no association with miscarriage, though no study prospectively evaluated the risk of early miscarriage (gestational weeks [GW] <8) in relation to COVID-19 vaccination. Moreover, no study has evaluated the role of preconception vaccination in both male and female partners.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

An Internet-based, prospective preconception cohort study of couples residing in the USA and Canada. We analyzed data from 1815 female participants who conceived during December 2020-November 2022, including 1570 couples with data on male partner vaccination.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Eligible female participants were aged 21-45 years and were trying to conceive without use of fertility treatment at enrollment. Female participants completed questionnaires at baseline, every 8 weeks until pregnancy, and during early and late pregnancy; they could also invite their male partners to complete a baseline questionnaire. We collected data on COVID-19 vaccination (brand and date of doses), history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (yes/no and date of positive test), potential confounders (demographic, reproductive, and lifestyle characteristics), and pregnancy status on all questionnaires. Vaccination status was categorized as never (0 doses before conception), ever (≥1 dose before conception), having a full primary sequence before conception, and completing the full primary sequence ≤3 months before conception. These categories were not mutually exclusive. Participants were followed up from their first positive pregnancy test until miscarriage or a censoring event (induced abortion, ectopic pregnancy, loss to follow-up, 20 weeks' gestation), whichever occurred first. We estimated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for miscarriage and corresponding 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazards models with GW as the time scale. We used propensity score fine stratification weights to adjust for confounding.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Among 1815 eligible female participants, 75% had received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine by the time of conception. Almost one-quarter of pregnancies resulted in miscarriage, and 75% of miscarriages occurred <8 weeks' gestation. The propensity score-weighted IRR comparing female participants who received at least one dose any time before conception versus those who had not been vaccinated was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.63, 1.14). COVID-19 vaccination was not associated with increased risk of either early miscarriage (GW: <8) or late miscarriage (GW: 8-19). There was no indication of an increased risk of miscarriage associated with male partner vaccination (IRR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.56, 1.44).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The present study relied on self-reported vaccination status and infection history. Thus, there may be some non-differential misclassification of exposure status. While misclassification of miscarriage is also possible, the preconception cohort design and high prevalence of home pregnancy testing in this cohort reduced the potential for under-ascertainment of miscarriage. As in all observational studies, residual or unmeasured confounding is possible.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This is the first study to evaluate prospectively the relation between preconception COVID-19 vaccination in both partners and miscarriage, with more complete ascertainment of early miscarriages than earlier studies of vaccination. The findings are informative for individuals planning a pregnancy and their healthcare providers.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute of Health [R01-HD086742 (PI: L.A.W.); R01-HD105863S1 (PI: L.A.W. and M.L.E.)], the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R03-AI154544; PI: A.K.R.), and the National Science Foundation (NSF-1914792; PI: L.A.W.). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. L.A.W. is a fibroid consultant for AbbVie, Inc. She also receives in-kind donations from Swiss Precision Diagnostics (Clearblue home pregnancy tests) and Kindara.com (fertility apps). M.L.E. received consulting fees from Ro, Hannah, Dadi, VSeat, and Underdog, holds stock in Ro, Hannah, Dadi, and Underdog, is a past president of SSMR, and is a board member of SMRU. K.F.H. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from UCB and Takeda, unrelated to this study. S.H.-D. reports being an investigator on grants to her institution from Takeda, unrelated to this study, and a methods consultant for UCB and Roche for unrelated drugs. The authors report no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Strategies to Address COVID-19 Vaccine and Pregnancy Myths

ABSTRACT

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) poses risks to pregnant women and their infants. The spread of misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination is a barrier to optimizing vaccination rates among women of childbearing age. We conducted an environmental scan to identify misinformation about COVID-19 vaccination, pregnancy, and fertility, and a review to identify evidence to refute misinformation and strategies to correct and prevent the spread of misinformation. Seven identified themes of misinformation are: the vaccine causes female infertility; can cause miscarriage; and can decrease male fertility; mRNA vaccines attack the placenta; pregnant and breastfeeding persons should not get the vaccine; the vaccine can change menstrual cycles; and vaccinated people can spread infertility symptoms to unvaccinated people. Strategies that can be implemented by social media platforms to help prevent misinformation spread and correct existing health misinformation include improving information regulation by modifying community standards, implementing surveillance algorithms, and applying warning labels to potentially misleading posts. Health services organizations and clinicians can implement health misinformation policies, directly recommend vaccinations, provide credible explanations and resources to debunk misinformation, educate patients and populations on spotting misinformation, and apply effective communication strategies. More research is needed to assess longer-term effects of vaccination among women of childbearing age to strengthen the defense against misinformation and to evaluate strategies that aim to prevent and correct misinformation spread about COVID-19 vaccinations.

COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual cycle characteristics: A prospective cohort study

We prospectively examined the association between COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual cycle characteristics in an internet-based prospective cohort study. We included a sample of 1,137 participants who enrolled in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a preconception cohort study of couples trying to conceive, during January 2021-August 2022. Eligible participants were aged 21-45 years, United States or Canadian residents, and trying to conceive without fertility treatment. At baseline and every 8 weeks for up to 12 months, participants completed questionnaires on which they provided information on COVID-19 vaccination and menstrual cycle characteristics, including cycle regularity, cycle length, bleed length, heaviness of bleed, and menstrual pain. We fit generalized estimating equation (GEE) models with a log link function and Poisson distribution to estimate the adjusted risk ratio (RR) for irregular cycles associated with COVID-19 vaccination. We used linear regression with GEE to estimate adjusted mean differences in menstrual cycle length associated with COVID-19 vaccination. We adjusted for sociodemographic, lifestyle, medical and reproductive factors. Participants had 1.1 day longer menstrual cycles after receiving the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine (95 % CI: 0.4, 1.9) and 1.3 day longer cycles after receiving the second dose (95 % CI: 0.2, 2.5). Associations were attenuated at the second cycle post-vaccination. We did not observe strong associations between COVID-19 vaccination and cycle regularity, bleed length, heaviness of bleed, or menstrual pain. In conclusion, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a ∼1 day temporary increase in menstrual cycle length, but was not appreciably associated with other menstrual cycle characteristics.

Accuracy of Self-Reported COVID-19 Vaccination Status Compared With a Public Health Vaccination Registry in Québec: Observational Diagnostic Study

BACKGROUND

The accuracy of self-reported vaccination status is important to guide real-world vaccine effectiveness studies and policy making in jurisdictions where access to electronic vaccine registries is restricted.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the accuracy of self-reported vaccination status and reliability of the self-reported number of doses, brand, and time of vaccine administration.

METHODS

This diagnostic accuracy study was completed by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network. We enrolled consecutive patients presenting to 4 emergency departments (EDs) in Québec between March 24, 2020, and December 25, 2021. We included adult patients who were able to consent, could speak English or French, and had a proven COVID-19 infection. We compared the self-reported vaccination status of the patients with their vaccination status in the electronic Québec Vaccination Registry. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status (index test) ascertained during telephone follow-up compared with the Québec Vaccination Registry (reference standard). The accuracy was calculated by dividing all correctly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants by the sum of all correctly and incorrectly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. We also reported interrater agreement with the reference standard as measured by unweighted Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at telephone follow-up and at the time of their index ED visit, number of vaccine doses, and brand.

RESULTS

During the study period, we included 1361 participants. At the time of the follow-up interview, 932 participants reported at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status was 96% (95% CI 95%-97%). Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at phone follow-up was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89-0.93) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) at the time of their index ED visit. Cohen κ was 0.89 (95% CI 0.87-0.91) for the number of doses, 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.84) for the brand of the first dose, 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.83) for the brand of the second dose, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.34-0.83) for the brand of the third dose.

CONCLUSIONS

We reported a high accuracy of self-reported vaccination status for adult patients without cognitive disorders who can express themselves in English or French. Researchers can use self-reported COVID-19 vaccination data on the number of doses received, vaccine brand name, and timing of vaccination to guide future research with patients who are capable of self-reporting their vaccination data. However, access to official electronic vaccine registries is still needed to determine the vaccination status in certain susceptible populations where self-reported vaccination data remain missing or impossible to obtain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04702945; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04702945.

Evaluation and management of male genital tract infections in the setting of male infertility: an updated review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Male infertility may be secondary to male genital tract infection (MGTI) in an estimated 15% of cases. In the absence of overt clinical signs, evaluation for MGTI beyond semen analysis is not well established. Therefore, we review the literature on the evaluation and management of MGTI in the setting of male infertility.

RECENT FINDINGS

A set of international guidelines recommends semen culture and PCR testing, but the significance of positive results remains unclear. Clinical trials evaluating anti-inflammatory or antibiotic treatment report improvements in sperm parameters and leukocytospermia, but data on the effect on conception rates are lacking. Human papillomavirus (HPV) and the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) have been associated with poor semen parameters and decreased conception rates.

SUMMARY

The finding of leukocytospermia on semen analysis prompts further evaluation for MGTI, including focused physical examination. The role of routine semen culture is controversial. Treatment options include anti-inflammatories; frequent ejaculation; and antibiotics, which should not be used in the absence of symptoms or microbiological infection. SARS-CoV-2 represents a subacute threat to fertility that should be screened for in the reproductive history along with HPV and other viruses.

The impact of COVID-19 on select considerations in patients of reproductive age: Brief talking points for pharmacists

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has elicited many health concerns, including the impact of the infection and vaccine on reproductive health. Although robust evidence demonstrates the safety of all available COVID-19 vaccines, misinformation and disinformation related to the vaccine continue to circulate. As accessible and essential health care workers, it is crucial that pharmacists are informed of the evidence related to effects of the COVID-19 infection and vaccinations on reproductive health care. Menstrual cycle changes have been noted owing to COVID-19 infection, pandemic stress, and COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 infection and vaccination have not been shown to influence female fertility, pregnancy rates, and lactation. The use of exogenous estrogen may further contribute to an increased risk of thromboembolism with COVID-19 infection, and differences in the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis appear to exist between the types of vaccines. The benefits of COVID-19 vaccination outweigh any risks. Shared decision-making is necessary when discussing vaccination with patients. Pharmacists play a vital role in dispelling misinformation and disinformation related to the impact of COVID-19 illness and vaccination on reproductive health care.

Localizing COVID-19 Misinformation: A Case Study of Tracking Twitter Pandemic Narratives in Pennsylvania Using Computational Network Science

The recent COVID-19 outbreak has highlighted the importance of effective communication strategies to control the spread of the virus and debunk misinformation. By using accurate narratives, both online and offline, we can motivate communities to follow preventive measures and shape attitudes toward them. However, the abundance of misinformation stories can lead to vaccine hesitancy, obstructing the timely implementation of preventive measures, such as vaccination. Therefore, it is crucial to create appropriate and community-centered solutions based on regional data analysis to address mis/disinformation narratives and implement effective countermeasures specific to the particular geographic area.In this case study, we have attempted to create a research pipeline to analyze local narratives on social media, particularly Twitter, to identify misinformation spread locally, using the state of Pennsylvania as an example. Our proposed methodology pipeline identifies main communication trends and misinformation stories for the major cities and counties in southwestern PA, aiming to assist local health officials and public health specialists in instantly addressing pandemic communication issues, including misinformation narratives. Additionally, we investigated anti-vax actors' strategies in promoting harmful narratives. Our pipeline includes data collection, Twitter influencer analysis, Louvain clustering, BEND maneuver analysis, bot identification, and vaccine stance detection. Public health organizations and community-centered entities can implement this data-driven approach to health communication to inform their pandemic strategies.

Factors associated with receipt of COVID-19 vaccination and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among healthcare workers in Albania (February 2021-June 2022): secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study

Background

Healthcare workers (HCWs) have been disproportionally affected by COVID-19. We investigated factors associated with two- and three-dose COVID-19 vaccine uptake and SARS-CoV-2 seropositivity among 1504 HCWs enrolled (19 February-7 May 2021) in a prospective COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness cohort in Albania through a secondary analysis.

Methods

We collected sociodemographic, occupational, health, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, and COVID-19 vaccination data from all HCWs at enrollment. Vaccination status was assessed weekly through June 2022. A serum sample was collected from all participants at enrollment and tested for anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We analyzed HCWs characteristics and outcomes using multivariable logistic regression.

Findings

By 11 June 2022, 1337 (88.9%) HCWs had received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of whom 255 (19.1%) received a booster. Factors significantly associated with receiving three doses (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 95% CIs) were being ≥35 years (35-44 years: 1.76 (1.05-2.97); 45-54 years: 3.11 (1.92-5.05); ≥55 years: 3.38 (2.04-5.59)) and vaccinated against influenza (1.78; 1.20-2.64). Booster dose receipt was lower among females (0.58; 0.41-0.81), previously infected (0.67; 0.48-0.93), nurses and midwives (0.31; 0.22-0.45), and support staff (0.19; 0.11-0.32). Overall 1076 (72%) were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at enrollment. Nurses and midwifes (1.45; 1.05-2.02), support staff (1.57; 1.03-2.41), and HCWs performing aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) (1.40; 1.01-1.94) had higher odds of being seropositive, while smokers had reduced odds (0.55; 0.40-0.75).

Interpretation

In a large cohort of Albanian HCWs, COVID-19 vaccine booster dose uptake was very low, particularly among younger, female, and non-physician HCWs, despite evidence demonstrating the added benefit of boosters in preventing infection and severe disease. Reasons behind these disparities should be explored to develop targeted strategies in order to promote uptake in this critical population. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence was higher among non-physicians and HCWs performing APGs. A better understanding of the factors contributing to these differences is needed to inform interventions that could reduce infections in the future.

Funding

This study was funded by the Task Force for Global Health (US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) cooperative agreement # NU51IP000873) and the World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe.

COVID-19 Pharmacotherapy in Pregnancy: A Literature Review of Current Therapeutic Choices

The clinical management of COVID-19 in pregnant women, who are considered a vulnerable population, remains uncertain even as the pandemic subsides. SARS-CoV-2 affects pregnant individuals in multiple ways and has been associated with severe maternal morbidity and mortality, as well as neonatal complications. The unique anatomy and physiology of gestation make managing COVID-19 in this population a complex and challenging task, emphasizing the importance of spreading knowledge and expertise in this area. Therapeutic interventions require distinct clinical consideration, taking into account differences in pharmacokinetics, vertical transmission, drug toxicities, and postnatal care. Currently, there is limited data on antiviral and immunomodulating COVID-19 pharmacotherapy in pregnancy. Some medication has been shown to be safe and well tolerated among pregnant women with COVID-19; however, the lack of randomized clinical trials and studies in this patient population is evident. Available vaccines are considered safe and effective, with no evidence of harm to the fetus, embryo development, or short-term postnatal development. Pregnant women should be counseled about the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection and informed of available ways to protect themselves and their families. Effective treatments for COVID-19 should not be withheld from pregnant individuals, and more research is needed to ensure the best outcomes.

Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in follicular fluids and their association with assisted reproduction

Introduction

Every second woman suffering from infertility asks for medical help. There is public concern that vaccination-induced antibodies (Ab) are negatively associated with fertility. A recent study has demonstrated an association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and a lower pregnancy rate in the subsequent 60 days. Consequently, Ab could affect fertility success in assisted reproduction.

Methods

To address this question, we compared fertilization outcomes of vaccinated (n=35) and nonvaccinated (n=34) women. Paired serum samples and multiple follicular fluids (FF) (up to 10 from the same donor) were collected during the course of assisted reproduction and characterized for oocyte quality, the presence of Ab and trace element concentrations.

Results

The results showed a positive correlation of vaccination-induced neutralizing activity of SARS-CoV-2-Ab in serum and FF. On average, Ab concentrations in serum were higher than in the corresponding FF. However, wide variations in SARS-CoV-2 Ab titers were observed between different FF, correlating to trace element levels, even when retrieved from the same donor.

Discussion

Overall, FF contents are highly variable, but no negative association was observed between Ab in serum or FF and fertilization success and oocyte development, supporting the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination during assisted reproduction.

COVID-19 vaccination and changes in the menstrual cycle among vaccinated persons

OBJECTIVE

To describe the characteristics of people who experience changes to their menstrual cycle after COVID-19 vaccination.

DESIGN

Longitudinal study.

PATIENT(S)

We recruited a volunteer sample with and without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection who enrolled in the Arizona COVID-19 Cohort (CoVHORT) study and participated in a reproductive sub-cohort who were pre-menopausal, not pregnant, and had received a COVID-19 vaccine in 2021 (n = 545).

EXPOSURE(S)

Demographic and reproductive characteristics were collected via self-reports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Information on self-reported changes in the menstrual cycle after COVID-19 vaccination was collected from May 2021 to December 2021. We looked at demographic and reproductive characteristics as predictors of menstrual cycle change.

RESULT(S)

The majority of our vaccinated sample received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (58%), and were 26-35 years old (51%), non-Hispanic (84%), and White (88%). Approximately 25% of vaccinated participants reported a change in their menstrual cycle after vaccination; the majority reported changes after their second dose (56%) as compared with their first (18%) and third (14%) doses. The most commonly reported changes were irregular menstruation (43%), increased premenstrual symptoms (34%), increased menstrual pain or cramps (30%), and abnormally heavy or prolonged bleeding (31%). High self-reported perceived stress levels compared with low perceived stress (OR, 2.22; 95% CI 1.12-4.37) and greater body mass index (OR, 1.04; 95% CI 1.00-1.07) were associated with greater odds of experiencing the menstrual cycle changes after the vaccination. Participants having a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were less likely to report changes in their menstrual cycle after vaccination compared with the participants with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR, 0.58; 95% CI 0.32-1.04).

CONCLUSION(S)

Among vaccinated participants, approximately 25% of them reported predominantly temporary changes in the menstrual cycle, however, we are unable to determine whether these changes are due to normal cycle variability. The COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective for everyone, including pregnant people and people trying to conceive; hence, these findings should not discourage vaccination.

SARS-CoV-2, fertility and assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic had a huge impact on the access to and provision of ART treatments. Gradually, knowledge of the virus and its transmission has become available, allowing ART activities to resume. Still, questions on the impact of the virus on human gametes and fertility remain.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This article summarizes published data, aiming to clarify the impact of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 disease on human fertility and assisted reproduction, as well as the impact of vaccination, and from this, provide answers to questions that are relevant for people contemplating pregnancy and for health care professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

PUBMED/MEDLINE and the WHO COVID-19 database were searched from inception to 5 October 2022 with search terms focusing on 'SARS-CoV-2' and gametes, embryos, reproductive function, fertility and ART. Non-English studies and papers published prior to 2020 were excluded, as well as reviews and non-peer reviewed publications. Full papers were assessed for relevance and quality, where feasible.

OUTCOMES

From the 148 papers included, the following observations were made. The SARS-CoV-2-binding proteins, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) and type II transmembrane serine protease (TMPRSS2), are expressed in the testis, but co-expression remains to be proven. There is some evidence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in the ejaculate of COVID-19 patients with severe disease, but not in those with mild/moderate disease. SARS-CoV-2 infection can impair spermatogenesis, but this seems to resolve after one spermatogenic cycle. Testosterone levels seem to be lower during and after COVID-19, but long-term data are lacking; disease severity may be associated with testosterone levels. COVID-19 cannot be considered a sexually transmitted disease. There is no co-expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 in the myometrium, uterus, ovaries or fallopian tubes. Oocytes seem to have the receptors and protease machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, viral RNA in oocytes has not been detected so far. Women contemplating pregnancy following COVID-19 may benefit from screening for thyroid dysfunction. There is a possible (transient) impact of COVID-19 on menstrual patterns. Embryos, and particularly late blastocysts, seem to have the machinery to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Most studies have not reported a significant impact of COVID-19 on ovarian reserve, ovarian function or follicular fluid parameters. Previous asymptomatic or mild SARS-CoV-2 infection in females does not seem to negatively affect laboratory and clinical outcomes of ART. There are no data on the minimum required interval, if any, between COVID-19 recovery and ART. There is no evidence of a negative effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on semen parameters or spermatogenesis, ovarian function, ovarian reserve or folliculogenesis. A transient effect on the menstrual cycle has been documented. Despite concerns, cross reactivity between anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies and Syncytin-1, an essential protein in human implantation, is absent. There is no influence of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on patients' performance during their immediate subsequent ART cycle. Pregnancy rates post-vaccination are similar to those in unvaccinated patients.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This review highlights existing knowledge on the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 on fertility and assisted reproduction, but also identifies gaps and offers suggestions for future research. The knowledge presented should help to provide evidence-based advice for practitioners and couples contemplating pregnancy alike, facilitating informed decision-making in an environment of significant emotional turmoil.

A mixed methods study investigating sources of fertility and reproductive health information in the UK

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the different sources used by individuals when seeking fertility information in order to understand what's working, what isn't, and opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

A mixed-method study was conducted via UK-wide cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews. 1082 survey-participants were recruited nationwide via online-newspaper and social-media adverts. Of those who agreed to follow-up interview, 35 were purposively sampled to reflect the diversity of gender, age-range, ethnicity and education. Tableau software was used for surveys and NVIVO for interviews. Interview data was transcribed and analysed via thematic framework analysis.

RESULTS

Sources of information identified included: school-education; healthcare-professionals; internet, social-media, smartphone-apps, online-forums and blogs; family, friends, and communities; books, magazines, newspapers; fertility-products; workplace, communities and sexual-health clinics/centres, charities, and third-party organisations. Participants reported varying levels of access, reliability, and trust, in relation to these sources. Interview themes around veracity showed that healthcare-professionals were highly trusted but not easily accessible. The internet was very popular due to accessibility and perceived anonymity but untrusted, and "the plethora of information can be overwhelming." There were recurring themes around discomfort. A respondent recalled that her first discussion of sex with her mother was on her wedding night stating, "…Mum, I'm 28! And you're just discussing this with me now?"

CONCLUSIONS

School education remains a consistent but sometimes inadequate source of fertility information. In addition to online-platforms and products based on robust scientific evidence, opportunities for improvement include using underexploited sources, such as workplace and community settings, with training for providers.

The influence of COVID-19 infection-associated immune response on the female reproductive system†

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a multi-system disease that has led to a pandemic with unprecedented ramifications. The pandemic has challenged scientists for the past 2 years and brought back previously abandoned research topics. COVID-19 infection causes a myriad of symptoms ranging from mild flu-like symptoms to severe illness requiring hospitalization. Case reports showed multiple systemic effects of COVID-19 infection, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, fibrosis, colitis, thyroiditis, demyelinating syndromes, and mania, indicating that COVID-19 can affect most human body systems. Unsurprisingly, a major concern for women all over the globe is whether a COVID-19 infection has any long-term effects on their menstrual cycle, fertility, or pregnancy. Published data have suggested an effect on the reproductive health, and we hypothesize that the reported reproductive adverse effects are due to the robust immune reaction against COVID-19 and the associated cytokine storm. While the COVID-19 receptor (angiotensin converting enzyme, ACE2) is expressed in the ovaries, uterus, vagina, and placenta, we hypothesize that it plays a less important role in the adverse effects on the reproductive system. Cytokines and glucocorticoids act on the hypothalamo-pituitary gonadal axis, arachidonic acid pathways, and the uterus, which leads to menstrual disturbances and pregnancy-related adverse events such as preterm labor and miscarriages. This hypothesis is further supported by the apparent lack of long-term effects on the reproductive health in females, indicating that when the cytokine storm and its effects are dampened, the reproductive health of women is no longer affected.

The Impact of COVID-19 Vaccines on Male Semen Parameters: A Retrospective Cohort Study

The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 and the subsequent COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the development of adequate vaccines. Despite vaccines being demonstrated to be safe and effective for preventing severe disease and death, vaccine hesitancy remains. Reasons include concerns over adverse effects on male fertility, which have not been widely investigated. Therefore, this study is aimed at determining the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on semen parameters in a retrospective cohort study of South African males undergoing fertility assessment. The patients for this study were adult men who have previously undergone routine semen analysis for fertility assessment at Androcryos Andrology Laboratory (Johannesburg, South Africa) between March 2021 and March 2022. They also received vaccination within 3 months following a semen analysis and underwent a second semen analysis any time post-COVID-19 vaccination. From 277 records analysed, 46 patients met the inclusion criteria, receiving the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b1) (63%), Johnson and Johnson (JNJ-78436735/Ad26.COV2S) (34.8%), and the AstraZeneca (AZD1222) (2.2%) vaccines. Sperm concentration significantly increased postvaccination ( $P=0.0001$ ), with no significant changes in semen pH, volume, total sperm count, progressive motility, normal sperm morphology, or chromatin condensation. Results were not influenced by age, type of vaccine received, and the number of days following vaccination, as depicted by multiple regression analysis. In conclusion, there is no evidence of a negative impact of COVID-19 vaccination on male semen parameters, which is consistent with the emerging literature on COVID-19 vaccination and male fertility. COVID-19 vaccinations should not be dismissed based on fear of adverse effects on male fertility parameters.

COVID-19 vaccine concerns of health care providers and ancillary staff

A web-based survey was widely distributed between November 1^st-December 27^th, 2021, to health care providers and ancillary staff to assess reported COVID-19 vaccination of their children as well as their vaccine concerns. Fewer nurses and laboratory / radiology technicians reported COVID-19 vaccination of their adolescent children and intent to vaccinate their younger children compared to physicians and pharmacists, along with more frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility. Focused efforts to update ancillary staff as well as all health care providers on emerging COVID-19 vaccine safety information for children is crucial to promote strong COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. IMPACT: Nurses, laboratory technicians and radiology technicians frequently reported concern about anaphylaxis and infertility after COVID-19 vaccination despite reassuring safety data. Education of ancillary staff with emerging safety data is important to strengthen health care provider vaccine recommendations.

COVID-19 and Pregnancy: Risks and Outcomes

The normal physiologic changes of pregnancy are known to increase susceptibility to respiratory illness. Individuals who are pregnant are more likely to acquire a SARS-CoV-2 infection and develop COVID-19 than the general population; they are at increased risk for hospitalization; ventilator-assisted breathing; and other subsequent maternal, fetal, and neonatal health issues. Although the incidence of infection and subsequent morbidity is increased in pregnancy, mortality does not seem to be increased. Individuals who are vaccinated against COVID-19 before childbirth can pass antibodies to their fetuses via the placenta during pregnancy and to their infants during breastfeeding. It is important for health care providers to be cognizant of the potential impacts of COVID-19 on pregnant individuals and their offspring.

[Long COVID-A New Challenge in Medicine: Focus on Pregnancy and Breastfeeding]

Long COVID (coronavirus disease) has been described as a new multi-organ disease, which appears to be more prevalent in women than in men. Pregnant and breastfeeding women are a special subgroup of patients to consider with long COVID, as only scarce data have been collected to date. Menstrual changes are commonly observed during or after COVID-19; some studies also attribute slight changes of cycle length to previous inoculation against the virus. Pregnant women who have a symptomatic infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are at a higher risk for adverse outcomes and pregnancy-associated complications. Moreover, more and robust data are required to evaluate vertical transmission. COVID vaccines are the most effective tool against the pandemic, as they prevent infection, but also appear to be able to ease long COVID symptoms. Vaccines have been proven safe and effective in both pregnant and breastfeeding women. This article aims to present current data on long COVID in pregnant and breastfeeding women and elucidate risk factors and possible treatment options.

The type of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine does not affect ovarian function in assisted reproduction cycle

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether vaccination or the type of vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 affects ovarian function in an assisted reproduction treatment.

DESIGN

A retrospective and observational study.

SETTING

University-affiliated private in vitro fertilization (IVF) center.

PATIENT(S)

Five hundred one patients who had received the complete vaccination schedule.

INTERVENTION(S)

Treatment before and after vaccination.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Parameters for both reproductive outcomes and IVF results in patients vaccinated RESULT(S): We included 510 patients, distributed as follows: 13.5% (n = 69) received a viral vector vaccine, either the adenovirus serotype 26 vector vaccine (Ad26.CoV2.S; Janssen; n = 31) or the chimpanzee adenovirus vector vaccine (ChAdOx; AstraZeneca; n = 38). The remaining 86.5% (n = 441) received an messenger RNA vaccine from either Pfizer-BioNTech (n = 336) or Moderna (n = 105). Sample size for the unexposed women was n = 1190. No differences were found in any of the evaluated parameters for both reproductive outcomes and IVF results in patients vaccinated with any adenovirus or messenger RNA vaccine. When we compared the results after vaccination with different types of vaccines between the exposed and unexposed groups, and similar results were obtained in the days of stimulation or the doses of administered follicle stimulating hormone. Finally, the numbers of oocytes were as follows: Johnson & Johnson (9.2 ± 2.6), AstraZeneca (7.7 ± 1.2), Moderna (11.3 ± 1.8), Pfizer (12.6 ± 1.0), and the unvaccinated group (10.2 ± 1.5), P=0.057.

CONCLUSION(S)

These early results suggest no measurable detrimental effect on reproductive outcomes, regardless of the type of vaccine received.

Effect of COVID-19 vaccination on the menstrual cycle

Numerous anecdotal accounts and qualitative research studies have reported on post-vaccination menstrual irregularities in women of reproductive age. However, none have quantified the impact. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify and characterize the menstrual irregularities associated with vaccination for women of reproductive age. A search on July 20, 2022, retrieved articles published between December 1, 2019, and July 1, 2022, from MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. The included articles were studies with full texts written in English that reported on menstrual irregularities for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated women of reproductive age. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Study Quality Assessment Tool for Observation Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Four observational studies were included. Review Manager was used to generating a forest plot with odds ratios (ORs) at the 95% confidence interval (CI), finding statistically significant associations between vaccination and menstrual irregularities for 25,054 women of reproductive age (OR = 1.91, CI: 1.76-2.07) with a significant overall effect of the mean (Z = 16.01, p < 0.0001). The studies were heterogeneous with significant dispersion of values (χ2 = 195.10 at df = 3, p < 0.00001, I 2 = 98%). The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis are limited by the availability of quantitative data. The results have implications for treating women of reproductive age with menstrual irregularities and informing them about the potential side effects of vaccinations.

Examining drivers of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers

OBJECTIVE

To assess characteristics and perceptions associated with vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers to increase coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine uptake in this population.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional quantitative survey.

SETTING

A not-for-profit healthcare system in southwestern Virginia.

PARTICIPANTS

A convenience sample of 2,720 employees of a not-for-profit healthcare system.

METHODS

Between March 15 and 29, 2021, we conducted an Internet-based survey. Our questionnaire assessed sociodemographic and work-related characteristics, vaccine experience and intentions, agreement with vaccine-related perceptions, the most important reasons for getting or not getting vaccinated, and trusted sources of information about COVID-19. We used χ2 analyses to assess the relationship between vaccine hesitancy and both HCW characteristics and vaccine-related perceptions.

RESULTS

Overall, 18% of respondents were classified as vaccine hesitant. Characteristics significantly associated with hesitancy included Black race, younger age, not having a high-risk household member, and prior personal experience with COVID-19 illness. Vaccine hesitancy was also significantly associated with many vaccine-related perceptions, including concerns about short-term and long-term side effects and a belief that the vaccines are not effective. Among vaccine-acceptant participants, wanting to protect others and wanting to help end the pandemic were the most common reasons for getting vaccinated. Personal physicians were cited most frequently as trusted sources of information about COVID-19 among both vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-acceptant respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Educational interventions to decrease vaccine hesitancy among healthcare workers should focus on alleviating safety concerns, emphasizing vaccine efficacy, and appealing to a sense of duty. Such interventions should target younger adult audiences. Personal physicians may also be an effective avenue for reducing hesitancy among their patients through patient-centered discussions.

[German S1 Guideline Long-/Post-COVID]

The German Society of Pneumology initiated 2021 the AWMF S1 guideline Long COVID/Post-COVID. In a broad interdisciplinary approach, this S1 guideline was designed based on the current state of knowledge.The clinical recommendations describe current Long COVID/Post-COVID symptoms, diagnostic approaches, and therapies.In addition to the general and consensus introduction, a subject-specific approach was taken to summarize the current state of knowledge.The guideline has an explicit practical claim and will be developed and adapted by the author team based on the current increase in knowledge.

The Effect of Long COVID-19 Infection and Vaccination on Male Fertility; A Narrative Review

Earlier research has suggested that the male reproductive system could be particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection, and infections involving this novel disease not only pose serious health threats but could also cause male infertility. Data from multi-organ research during the recent outbreak indicate that male infertility might not be diagnosed as a possible consequence of COVID-19 infection. Several review papers have summarized the etiology factors on male fertility, but to date no review paper has been published defining the effect of COVID-19 infection on male fertility. Therefore, the aim of this study is to review the published scientific evidence regarding male fertility potential, the risk of infertility during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of COVID-19 vaccination on the male reproductive system. The effects of COVID-19 infection and the subsequent vaccination on seminal fluid, sperm count, sperm motility, sperm morphology, sperm viability, testes and sex hormones are particularly reviewed.

The Willingness of Parents to Vaccinate Their Children Aged from Five to under Twelve Years with COVID-19 Vaccines between February and March 2022 in Vietnam

The current study used data surveyed with 5357 parents/guardians (parents would be used to represent both 'parents' and 'guardians' hereafter) between February and March 2022 in Vietnam to examine their willingness to vaccinate their children with current COVID-19 vaccines. It applied the multinomial logistic regression model to examine the association between the willingness of parents and selected influential factors. In addition, the reasons that made parent hesitant or unwilling to vaccinate their children were investigated. Moreover, it identified parents' preferences for vaccine origins. Approximately, 75.4% of the parents were willing, 21.3% were hesitant and 3.3% were unwilling to vaccinate their children. The most common reasons that made the parents hesitant or unwilling to vaccinate their children were their concerns about the vaccine safety, efficacy and immunity. The most and the second most preferred vaccines were those developed/originated in the US and EU, respectively. Parents who were more likely to vaccinate their children included those whose children were insured, who regularly vaccinated their children, who belonged to the vaccine priority groups, who possessed sufficient knowledge about the ways to prevent the virus or about the herd immunity, and who perceived that their children might be infected with the virus and whose children were afraid of needles. Parents who were less likely to vaccinate their children included those who were the family main income source, who had savings, and who had tertiary education or higher.

The impact of COVID-19 vaccines on fertility-A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite literature's evidence about COVID-19 vaccines' safety, concerns have arisen regarding adverse events, including the possible impact on fertility, accentuated by misinformation and anti-vaccine campaigns. The present study aims to answer the question: Is there any impact of COVID-19 vaccines on the fertility of men and women of reproductive age?

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies until June 8th, 2022. The search was restricted to articles regarding humans, published in any languages, without additional restrictions. Studies' quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa and the Before and After Quality Assessment scales for cohort and pre-post studies, respectively. Random-effect meta-analyses were performed for parameters considered in ≥ 2 studies, calculating means, p-values and 95 % Confidence Intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Out of 1406 studies screened, 29 were included in the systematic review. These studies, conducted in Israel (34.5 %), USA (24.1 %), Russia (20.7 %) China (10.3 %), Italy (3.5 %), North America (3.5%) and Turkey (3.5 %) were of poor (34.5 %), moderate (58.6 %) and good (6.9 %) quality. Meta-analyses were performed for pre- and post-vaccination sperm progressive motility (44 %, 95 % CI 42 %-62 % vs 43 %, 95 % CI 31 %-59 % p = 0.07) and concentration (50.6 mln/ml, 95 % CI 35.1-72.8 vs 55.4 mln/ml, 95 % CI 37.4-82.2p = 0.12). Biochemical (0.51, 95 % CI 0.40-0.66 vs 0.60, 95 % CI 0.53-0.68p = 0.45) and clinical (0.45, 95 % CI 0.37-0.54 vs 0.47, 95 % CI 0.40-0.55 p = 0.31) pregnancy rate did not differ among vaccinated and not vaccinated groups. Subgroup meta-analyses based on the type of vaccine showed no significant difference: between vaccinated with mRNA vaccines and non-vaccinated regarding biochemical pregnancy rates; pre- and post-vaccination with Gam-COVID-Vac regarding testosterone, FSH and LH levels; pre- and post-vaccination with BNT162b2 vaccines regarding sperm volumes.

CONCLUSION

Based on the studies published so far, there is no scientific proof of any association between COVID-19 vaccines and fertility impairment in men or women.

The effect of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination on AMH concentrations in infertile women

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination affect the ovarian reserve of infertile women undergoing IVF?

DESIGN

This was a prospective observational study at a single university-affiliated IVF unit that included infertile women aged 18-44 years who were undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection between November 2020 and September 2021, had received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination and had undergone measurement of baseline anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) concentration within the 12 months preceding their recruitment. AMH concentrations before and after vaccination were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 31 women were included in the study. The median AMH concentrations before and after COVID-19 vaccine were comparable (1.7 versus 1.6 g/ml, respectively, P = 0.96). No correlation was found between the participant's anti-COVID-19 antibody titre and the change in AMH concentration.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination does not adversely affect ovarian reserve, as shown by comparing serum AMH concentrations before and after vaccination. These findings may serve as a counselling tool for clinicians to reassure women undergoing fertility treatment that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is safe.

Menstrual irregularities and vaginal bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination reported to v-safe active surveillance, USA in December, 2020-January, 2022: an observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Anecdotal reports of menstrual irregularities after receiving COVID-19 vaccines have been observed in post-authorisation and post-licensure monitoring. We aimed to identify and classify reports of menstrual irregularities and vaginal bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination submitted to a voluntary active surveillance system.

METHODS

This observational cohort study included recipients of a COVID-19 vaccine who were aged 18 years and older and reported their health experiences to v-safe, a voluntary smartphone-based active surveillance system for monitoring COVID-19 vaccine safety in the USA, from Dec 14, 2020, to Jan 9, 2022. Responses to survey questions on reactions after vaccination were extracted, and a pre-trained natural language inference model was used to identify and classify free-text comments related to menstruation and vaginal bleeding in response to an open-ended prompt about any symptoms at intervals after vaccination. Related responses were further categorised into themes of timing, severity, perimenopausal and postmenopausal bleeding, resumption of menses, and other responses. We examined associations between symptom theme and respondent characteristics, including vaccine type and dose number received, solicited local and systemic reactions reported, and health care sought.

FINDINGS

63 815 respondents reported on menstrual irregularities or vaginal bleeding, which included 62 679 female respondents (1·0% of 5 975 363 female respondents aged ≥18 years). Common themes identified included timing of menstruation (70 981 [83·6%] responses) and severity of menstrual symptoms (56 890 [67·0%] responses). Other themes included menopausal bleeding (3439 [4·0%] responses) and resumption of menses (2378 [2·8%] responses). Respondents submitting reports related to menopausal bleeding were more likely to seek health care than were those submitting reports related to other menstruation and vaginal bleeding themes.

INTERPRETATION

Reports of heterogeneous symptoms related to menstruation or vaginal bleeding after COVID-19 vaccination are being submitted to v-safe, although this study is unable to characterise the relationship of these symptoms to COVID-19 vaccination. Methods that leverage pretrained models to interpret and classify unsolicited signs and symptoms in free-text reports offer promise in the initial evaluation of unexpected adverse events potentially associated with use of newly authorised or licensed vaccines.

FUNDING

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

COVID-19 and vaccination: myths vs science

INTRODUCTION

Several vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed since the inception of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, at unprecedented speed. However, these rapidly developed vaccines raised many questions related to the efficacy and safety of vaccines in different communities across the globe. Various hypotheses regarding COVID-19 and its vaccines were generated, and many of them have also been answered with scientific evidence. Still, there are many myths/misinformation related to COVID-19 and its vaccines, which create hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccination, and must be addressed critically to achieve success in the battle against the pandemic.

AREA COVERED

The development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against COVID-19, their safety and efficacy, and myths/misinformation relating to COVID-19 and vaccines are presented.

EXPERT OPINION

In this pandemic we have seen a global collaborative effort of researchers, governments, and industry, supported by billions of dollars in funding, have allowed the development of vaccines far more quickly than in the past. Vaccines go through rigorous testing, analysis, and evaluations in clinical settings prior to their approval, even if they are approved for emergency use. Despite the myths, vaccination represents an important strategy to get back to normality.

Invited Commentary: Vaccines and Fertility-Why Worry?

In a recent issue of the Journal, Wesselink et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2022;191(8):1383-1395) presented findings that indicate that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine does not cause any reduction in fertility in either men or women, while COVID-19 infection may reduce fertility temporarily among men. These are reassuring findings for those seeking pregnancy, as well as for clinicians and the public. There was no scientific reason to be concerned about effects of the COVID-19 vaccine on fertility, so some of the psychological, ethical, and historical reasons for concern are discussed. These include perceptions of risk around "unnatural," unusual, or dreaded outcomes; vaccine resistance as part of a social and political identity; and the tendency for moral panics to occur around women's reproductive capacity. On this and other topics, there is a broad need for reproductive health to be better incorporated into clinical trials, and for fertility research to advance in measurement and include a more diverse and global population.

Data-driven commentary on SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccination, and fertility

A recent study by Wesselink et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2022 Jan 20;kwac011. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwac011. Online ahead of print) adds to the growing body of research finding that vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is safe for individuals either seeking pregnancy or who are pregnant. The study's authors found no effect of COVID-19 vaccination on fecundity in a population of individuals with no known infertility who were attempting conception. The finding reinforces the messaging of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine COVID-19 Task Force, the aim of which is to provide data-driven recommendations to individuals contemplating pregnancy in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. As safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines became available, and with an increasing number of studies showing a heightened risk of severe disease during pregnancy, an important role of the Task Force is to encourage vaccination during the preconceptual window and in early pregnancy. The Task Force supports ongoing research to address gaps in knowledge about safe and effective therapies and preventive measures for individuals contemplating pregnancy and during pregnancy. Such research will help optimize care for reproductive-age individuals in the face of current and future health crises.

COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy

Despite a recent endorsement from official and professional bodies unequivocally recommending COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant people remains high. The accumulated evidence demonstrates that pregnant people are a special risk group for COVID-19, with an increased risk of intensive care unit admission, extracorporeal membranous oxygenation requirement, preterm birth, and perinatal death. These risks are further increased with some variants of concern, and vaccination of pregnant people reduces the COVID-19-related increase in maternal or fetal morbidity. Data from more than 180,000 vaccinated persons show that immunization against COVID-19 with an mRNA vaccine is safe for pregnant people. Many observational studies comparing perinatal outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant people have had reassuring findings and did not demonstrate harmful effects on pregnancy or the newborn. Immunization with mRNA vaccines does not increase the risk of miscarriage, preterm delivery, low birthweight, maternal or neonatal intensive care unit admission, fetal death, fetal abnormality, or pulmonary embolism. Moreover, observational data corroborate the findings of randomized trials that mRNA vaccination is highly effective at preventing severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant people, emphasizing that the potential maternal and fetal benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the potential risks of vaccination. Ensuring pregnant people have unrestricted access to COVID-19 vaccination should be a priority in every country worldwide.

Effect of COVID-19 vaccination on the timing and flow of menstrual periods in two cohorts

COVID-19 vaccination protects against the potentially serious consequences of SARS-CoV-2 infection, but some people have been hesitant to receive the vaccine because of reports that it could affect menstrual bleeding. To determine whether this occurs we prospectively recruited a cohort of 79 individuals, each of whom recorded details of at least three consecutive menstrual cycles, during which time they each received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. In spontaneously cycling participants, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a delay to the next period, but this change reversed in subsequent unvaccinated cycles. No delay was detected in those taking hormonal contraception. To explore hypotheses about the mechanism by which these menstrual changes occur, we retrospectively recruited a larger cohort, of 1,273 people who had kept a record of their menstrual cycle and vaccination dates. In this cohort, we found a trend toward use of combined hormonal contraception being protective against reporting a delayed period, suggesting that menstrual changes following vaccination may be mediated by perturbations to ovarian hormones. However, we were unable to detect a clear association between the timing of vaccination within the menstrual cycle and reports of menstrual changes. Our findings suggest that COVID-19 vaccination can lengthen the menstrual cycle and that this effect may be mediated by ovarian hormones. Importantly, we find that the menstrual cycle returns to its pre-vaccination length in unvaccinated cycles.