Maternal influenza immunization and birth outcomes of stillbirth and spontaneous abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

[Fetal death: Expert consensus from the College of French Gynecologists and Obstetricians]

Fetal death is defined as the spontaneous cessation of cardiac activity after fourteen weeks of amenorrhea. In France, the prevalence of fetal death after 22 weeks is between 3.2 and 4.4/1000 births. Regarding the prevention of fetal death in the general population, it is not recommended to counsel for rest and not to prescribe vitamin A, vitamin D nor micronutrient supplementation for the sole purpose of reducing the risk of fetal death (Weak recommendations; Low quality of evidence). It is not recommended to prescribe aspirin (Weak recommendation; Very low quality of evidence). It is recommended to offer vaccination against influenza in epidemic periods and against SARS-CoV-2 (Strong recommendations; Low quality of evidence). It is not recommended to systematically look for nuchal cord encirclements during prenatal screening ultrasounds (Strong Recommendation; Low Quality of Evidence) and not to perform systematic antepartum monitoring by cardiotocography (Weak Recommendation; Very Low Quality of Evidence). It is not recommended to ask women to perform an active fetal movement count to reduce the risk of fetal death (Strong Recommendation; High Quality of Evidence). Regarding evaluation in the event of fetal death, it is suggested that an external fetal examination be systematically offered (Expert opinion). It is recommended that a fetopathological and anatomopathological examination of the placenta be carried out to participate in cause identification (Strong Recommendation. Moderate quality of evidence). It is recommended that chromosomal analysis by microarray testing be performed rather than conventional karyotype, in order to be able to identify a potentially causal anomaly more frequently (Strong Recommendation, moderate quality of evidence); to this end, it is suggested that postnatal sampling of the placental fetal surface for genetic purposes be preferred (Expert Opinion). It is suggested to test for antiphospholipid antibodies and systematically perform a Kleihauer test and a test for irregular agglutinins (Expert opinion). It is suggested to offer a summary consultation, with the aim of assessing the physical and psychological status of the parents, reporting the results, discussing the cause and providing information on monitoring for a subsequent pregnancy (Expert opinion). Regarding announcement and support, it is suggested to announce fetal death without ambiguity, using simple words and adapting to each situation, and then to support couples with empathy in the various stages of their care (Expert opinion). Regarding management, it is suggested that, in the absence of a situation at risk of disseminated intravascular coagulation or maternal vitality, the patient's wishes should be taken into account when determining the time between the diagnosis of fetal death and induction of birth. Returning home is possible if it's the patient wish (Expert opinion). In all situations excluding maternal life-threatening emergencies, the preferred mode of delivery is vaginal delivery, regardless the history of cesarean section(s) history (Expert opinion). In the event of fetal death, it is recommended that mifepristone 200mg be prescribed at least 24hours before induction, to reduce the delay between induction and delivery (Low recommendation. Low quality of evidence). There are insufficient data in the literature to make a recommendation regarding the route of administration (vaginal or oral) of misoprostol, neither the type of prostaglandin to reduce induction-delivery time or maternal morbidity. It is suggested that perimedullary analgesia be introduced at the start of induction if the patient asks, regardless of gestational age. It is suggested to prescribe cabergoline immediately in the postpartum period in order to avoid lactation, whatever the gestational age, after discussing the side effects of the treatment with the patient (Expert opinion). The risk of recurrence of fetal death after unexplained fetal death does not appear to be increased in subsequent pregnancies, and data from the literature are insufficient to make a recommendation on the prescription of aspirin. In the event of a history of fetal death due to vascular issues, low-dose aspirin is recommended to reduce perinatal morbidity, and should not be combined with heparin therapy (Low recommendation, very low quality of evidence). It is suggested not to recommend an optimal delay before initiating another pregnancy just because of the history of fetal death. It is suggested that the woman and co-parent be informed of the possibility of psychological support. Fetal heart rate monitoring is not indicated solely because of a history of fetal death. It is suggested that delivery not be systematically induced. However, induction can be considered depending on the context and parental request. The gestational age will be discussed, taking into account the benefits and risks, especially before 39 weeks. If a cause of fetal death is identified, management will be adapted on a case-by-case basis (expert opinion). In the event of fetal death occurring in a twin pregnancy, it is suggested that the surviving twin be evaluated as soon as the diagnosis of fetal death is made. In the case of dichorionic pregnancy, it is suggested to offer ultrasound monitoring on a monthly basis. It is suggested not to deliver prematurely following fetal death of a twin. If fetal death occurs in a monochorionic twin pregnancy, it is suggested to contact the referral competence center, in order to urgently look for signs of acute fetal anemia on ultrasound in the surviving twin, and to carry out weekly ultrasound monitoring for the first month. It is suggested not to induce birth immediately.

Planning for the future of maternal immunization: Building on lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic

As the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic unfolded, the clinical and public health community raced to understand SARS-CoV-2 infection and develop life-saving vaccines. Pregnant persons were disproportionately impacted, experiencing more severe illness and adverse pregnancy outcomes. And yet, when COVID-19 vaccines became available in late 2020, safety and efficacy data were not available to inform their use during pregnancy because pregnant persons were excluded from pre-authorization clinical trials. Concerns about vaccine safety during pregnancy and misinformation linking vaccination and infertility circulated widely, creating a lack of vaccine confidence. Many pregnant people initially chose not to get vaccinated, and while vaccination rates rose after safety and effectiveness data became available, COVID-19 vaccine acceptance was suboptimal and varied across racial and ethnic distribution of the pregnant population. The COVID-19 pandemic experience provided valuable insights that can inform current and future approaches to maternal vaccination against.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2024-25 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2023-24 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;72[No. RR-2]:1-24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV3s), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), and trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV3) are expected to be available. All persons should receive an age-appropriate influenza vaccine (i.e., one approved for their age), with the exception that solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens may receive either high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3) or adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3) as acceptable options (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3). Except for vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed and recommended vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: trivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3), trivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV3), or trivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV3). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used.Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: the composition of 2024-25 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and updated recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients. First, following a period of no confirmed detections of wild-type influenza B/Yamagata lineage viruses in global surveillance since March 2020, 2024-25 U.S. influenza vaccines will not include an influenza B/Yamagata component. All influenza vaccines available in the United States during the 2024-25 season will be trivalent vaccines containing hemagglutinin derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Thailand/8/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Massachusetts/18/2022 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); and 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus. Second, recommendations for vaccination of adult solid organ transplant recipients have been updated to include HD-IIV3 and aIIV3 as acceptable options for solid organ transplant recipients aged 18 through 64 years who are receiving immunosuppressive medication regimens (without a preference over other age-appropriate IIV3s or RIV3).This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2024-25 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/acip-recs/hcp/vaccine-specific/flu.html?CDC_AAref_Val=https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

An immune window of opportunity to prevent spontaneous abortion: prepregnancy peripheral leukocytes and subsets were associated with a decreased risk of spontaneous abortion

STUDY QUESTION

Do prepregnancy peripheral leukocytes (PPLs) and their subsets influence the risk of spontaneous abortion (SAB)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

PPLs and their subsets are associated with the risk of SAB.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Compelling studies have revealed the crucial role of maternal peripheral leukocytes in embryo implantation and pregnancy maintenance. Adaptive changes are made by PPLs and their subsets after conception.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This population-based retrospective cohort study was based on data from the National Free Pre-pregnancy Check-up Project (NFPCP) in mainland China. Couples preparing for pregnancy within the next six months were provided with free prepregnancy health examinations and counseling services for reproductive health. The current study was based on 1 310 494 female NFPCP participants aged 20-49 who became pregnant in 2016. After sequentially excluding 235 456 participants lost to follow-up, with multiple births, and who failed to complete blood tests, a total of 1 075 038 participants were included in the primary analysis.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

PPLs and their subset counts and ratios were measured. The main outcome was SAB. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI of SAB associated with PPLs and their subsets, and restricted cubic spline (RCS) was used to estimate the nonlinear exposure-response relationship.

MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE

Of the included pregnant participants, a total of 35 529 SAB events (3.30%) were recorded. Compared to participants with reference values of PPLs, the ORs (95% CIs) of leukopenia and leukocytosis for SAB were 1.14 (1.09-1.20) and 0.74 (0.69-0.79), respectively. The RCS result revealed a monotonous decreasing trend (Pnonlinear < 0.05). Similar relationships were observed for the neutrophil count and ratio, monocyte count, and middle-sized cell count and ratio. The lymphocyte ratio showed a positive and nonlinear relationship with the risk of SAB (Pnonlinear < 0.05). Both eosinophils and basophils showed positive relationships with the risk of SAB (eosinophil Pnonlinear > 0.05 and basophil Pnonlinear < 0.05).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Chemical abortion events and the cause of SAB were not collected at follow-up. Whether women with abnormal PPLs had recovered during periconception was not determined.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

PPLs and their subsets are associated with the risk of SAB. Leukopenia and neutropenia screening in women preparing for pregnancy and developing a feasible PPL stimulation approach should be emphasized to utilize the immune window of opportunity to prevent SAB.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was approved by the Institutional Research Review Board of the National Health and Family Planning Commission. This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grants 2021YFC2700705 [Y.Y.] and 2016YFC100307 [X.M.]) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 82003472 [L.W.]). The funding source was not involved in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the data, writing the report, or the decision to submit this article for publication. No competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

N/A.

Safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review to evaluate associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes and maternal non-obstetric serious adverse events (SAEs), taking into consideration confounding and temporal biases.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Embase Classic+Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched to June 2021 for observational studies assessing associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and maternal non-obstetric SAEs and adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, small-for-gestational-age birth and congenital anomalies. Studies of live attenuated vaccines, single-arm cohort studies and abstract-only publications were excluded. Records were screened using a liberal accelerated approach initially, followed by a dual independent approach for full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted, where two or more studies met methodological criteria for inclusion. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence certainty.

RESULTS

Of 9443 records screened, 63 studies were included. Twenty-nine studies (24 cohort and 5 case-control) evaluated seasonal influenza vaccination (trivalent and/or quadrivalent) versus no vaccination and were the focus of our prioritised syntheses; 34 studies of pandemic vaccines (2009 A/H1N1 and others), combinations of pandemic and seasonal vaccines, and seasonal versus seasonal vaccines were also reviewed. Control for confounding and temporal biases was inconsistent across studies, limiting pooling of data. Meta-analyses for preterm birth, spontaneous abortion and small-for-gestational-age birth demonstrated no significant associations with seasonal influenza vaccination. Immortal time bias was observed in a sensitivity analysis of meta-analysing risk-based preterm birth data. In descriptive summaries for stillbirth, congenital anomalies and maternal non-obstetric SAEs, no significant association with increased risk was found in any studies. All evidence was of very low certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of very low certainty suggests that seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy is not associated with adverse birth outcomes or maternal non-obstetric SAEs. Appropriate control of confounding and temporal biases in future studies would improve the evidence base.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices — United States, 2023–24 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2022–23 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (

MMWR Recomm Rep 2022;71[No. RR-1]:1–28). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2023–24 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available.

For most persons who need only 1 dose of influenza vaccine for the season, vaccination should ideally be offered during September or October. However, vaccination should continue after October and throughout the season as long as influenza viruses are circulating and unexpired vaccine is available. Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but for most adults (particularly adults aged ≥65 years) and for pregnant persons in the first or second trimester, vaccination during July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that vaccination later in the season might not be possible. Certain children aged 6 months through 8 years need 2 doses; these children should receive the first dose as soon as possible after vaccine is available, including during July and August. Vaccination during July and August can be considered for children of any age who need only 1 dose for the season and for pregnant persons who are in the third trimester during these months if vaccine is available

ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications receive a licensed and age-appropriate seasonal influenza vaccine. With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: quadrivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV4), quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), or quadrivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV4). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used

Primary updates to this report include the following two topics: 1) the composition of 2023–24 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines and 2) updated recommendations regarding influenza vaccination of persons with egg allergy. First, the composition of 2023–24 U.S. influenza vaccines includes an update to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 component. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from 1) an influenza A/Victoria/4897/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/67/2022 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 2) an influenza A/Darwin/9/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Darwin/6/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines); 3) an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and 4) an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, ACIP recommends that all persons aged ≥6 months with egg allergy should receive influenza vaccine. Any influenza vaccine (egg based or nonegg based) that is otherwise appropriate for the recipient’s age and health status can be used. It is no longer recommended that persons who have had an allergic reaction to egg involving symptoms other than urticaria should be vaccinated in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting supervised by a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic reactions if an egg-based vaccine is used. Egg allergy alone necessitates no additional safety measures for influenza vaccination beyond those recommended for any recipient of any vaccine, regardless of severity of previous reaction to egg. All vaccines should be administered in settings in which personnel and equipment needed for rapid recognition and treatment of acute hypersensitivity reactions are available

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2023–24 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html . These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website ( https://www.cdc.gov/flu ). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Association between maternal influenza vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders in childhood: a longitudinal, population-based linked cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between in utero exposure to seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and the risk of a diagnosis of a neurodevelopmental disorder in early childhood.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Population-based birth registry linked with health administrative databases in Western Australia (WA).

PARTICIPANTS

Singleton, liveborn children born between 1 April 2012 and 1 July 2016 in WA.

EXPOSURE

Receipt of seasonal IIV during pregnancy obtained from a state-wide antenatal vaccination database.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical diagnosis of a neurodevelopmental disorder was recorded from hospital inpatient and emergency department records. We used Cox proportional hazard regression, weighted by the inverse-probability of treatment (vaccination), to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of neurodevelopmental disorders associated with in utero exposure to seasonal IIV.

RESULTS

The study included 140 514 children of whom, 15 663 (11.2%) were exposed to seasonal IIV in utero. The prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders was 5.4%, including mental or behavioural (0.4%), neurological (5.1%), seizure (2.2%) and sleep disorders (2.7%). Maternal IIV was not associated with increased risk of neurodevelopmental disorders (HR 1.00; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.08). Children exposed in the first trimester had a lower risk of seizure disorders (adjusted HR [aHR] 0.73; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.998), and preterm children exposed any time during pregnancy had a lower risk of sleep disorders (aHR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe increased risk of neurodevelopmental disorders following in utero exposure to seasonal IIV. Although we observed some evidence for lower risk of seizure and sleep disorders, additional studies are required to confirm.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Assessment of COVID-19 vaccines safety during pregnancy is urgently needed.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components and technological platforms used in other vaccines during pregnancy and animal studies to complement direct evidence. We searched literature databases from its inception to September 2021 without language restriction, COVID-19 vaccine websites, and reference lists of other systematic reviews and the included studies. Pairs of reviewers independently selected, data extracted, and assessed the risk of bias of the studies. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. (PROSPERO CRD42021234185).

RESULTS

We retrieved 8,837 records from the literature search; 71 studies were included, involving 17,719,495 pregnant persons and 389 pregnant animals. Most studies (94%) were conducted in high-income countries, were cohort studies (51%), and 15% were classified as high risk of bias. We identified nine COVID-19 vaccine studies, seven involving 309,164 pregnant persons, mostly exposed to mRNA vaccines. Among non-COVID-19 vaccines, the most frequent exposures were AS03 and aluminum-based adjuvants. A meta-analysis of studies that adjusted for potential confounders showed no association with adverse outcomes, regardless of the vaccine or the trimester of vaccination. Neither the reported rates of adverse pregnancy outcomes nor reactogenicity exceeded expected background rates, which was the case for ASO3- or aluminum-adjuvanted non-COVID-19 vaccines in the proportion meta-analyses of uncontrolled studies/arms. The only exception was postpartum hemorrhage after COVID-19 vaccination (10.40%; 95% CI: 6.49-15.10%), reported by two studies; however, the comparison with non-exposed pregnant persons, available for one study, found non-statistically significant differences (adjusted OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.56-2.12). Animal studies showed consistent results with studies in pregnant persons.

CONCLUSION

We found no safety concerns for currently administered COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Additional experimental and real-world evidence could enhance vaccination coverage. Robust safety data for non-mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines are still needed.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Women's Health

The development of vaccines is considered one of the greatest breakthroughs of modern medicine, saving millions of lives around the world each year. Despite vaccines' proven success, vaccine hesitancy remains a major issue affecting vaccine uptake. Common themes exist in patients' apprehension to receive vaccines. Women's health providers possess an important role in addressing these concerns and dispelling common misconceptions that may increase vaccine hesitancy thereby reduce vaccine uptake. This review aims to explore many of these topics as they are related to women's health and provide strategies for providers to implement which may reduce vaccine hesitancy among our patients.

Safety and Protective Effects of Influenza Vaccination in Pregnant Women on Pregnancy and Birth Outcomes in Pune, India: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Maternal influenza vaccination provides effective protection against influenza infections in pregnant women and their newborns. In India, the influenza vaccine has not yet been offered through immunization programs, owing to the lack of sufficient safety data for pregnant Indian women.

METHODS

This cross-sectional observational study enrolled 558 women admitted to the obstetrics ward of a civic hospital in Pune. Study-related information was obtained from the participants through hospital records and interviews using structured questionnaires. Univariate and multivariable analysis was used, and the chi-square test with adjusted odds ratio was estimated to account for vaccine exposure and the temporal nature of each outcome, respectively.

RESULTS

Women not vaccinated against influenza during pregnancy had a higher risk of delivering very LBW infants, and possible protective effects were suggested (AOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 5.58, p = 0.03). No association was observed between maternal influenza vaccination for Caesarean section (LSCS) (AOR 0.97, 95% CI, 0.78, 1.85), stillbirth (AOR 1.8, 95% CI 0.18, 24.64) and NICU admission (AOR, 0.87, 0.29 to 2.85), and congenital anomaly (AOR, 0.81, 0.10 to 3.87).

INTERPRETATION

These results show that the influenza vaccine administered during pregnancy is safe and might lower the risk of negative birth outcomes.

Effectiveness of Maternal Influenza Vaccination in Peru PRIME Cohort

Background

Few studies have examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) among women during pregnancy in middle-income countries. We used data from a prospective cohort of women who were pregnant in Peru to estimate effectiveness of the 2018 Southern Hemisphere influenza vaccine.

Methods

Women at <28 weeks gestation were enrolled from 4 tertiary level hospitals in Lima, Peru at the start of the 2018 influenza season and followed until the end of their pregnancies. Participants had mid-turbinate nasal swabs collected and tested for influenza by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) with onset of ≥1 of myalgia, cough, runny nose or nasal congestion, sore throat, or difficulty breathing. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate the risk of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza infection after adjusting for inverse probability treatment weight.

Results

We followed 1896 women for a median of 127 days (interquartile range [IQR], 86-174). Participants had a median age of 29 years (IQR, 24-34). Among the 1896 women, 49% were vaccinated with the 2018 influenza vaccine and 1039 (55%) developed influenza-like illness, 76 (7%) of whom had RT-PCR-confirmed influenza. Incidence rates of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza were 36.6 and 15.3 per 100 000 person-days among women who were unvaccinated and vaccinated, respectively. Adjusted influenza VE was 22% (95% confidence interval, -64.1% to 62.9%).

Conclusions

Participants vaccinated against influenza had more than 50% lower incidence of RT-PCR-confirmed influenza illness. Although the VE estimated through propensity weight-adjusted time-varying Cox regression did not reach statistical significance, our findings provide additional evidence about the value of maternal influenza vaccination in middle-income countries.

Adverse events in pregnant women with the tetravalent influenza vaccine obtained from cell cultures

Influenza vaccination in pregnant women shows a clear benefit/risk ratio. Influenza vaccines are currently being developed using new platforms. It is essential to analyse the safety of these new vaccines in this population group, underrepresented in clinical trials. In the 2019-2020 season, a vaccine obtained in cell culture was recommended to pregnant women in two autonomous communities. Information is collected from the vaccination and pharmacovigilance centres of both communities. The reporting rate of adverse events (AEs) after vaccination in pregnant women was 4.02/100,000 doses administered, and in non-pregnant women aged 18-64 years it was 5.9/100,000 doses administered. The rate of AE reported was 8.04 and 17.74 respectively. No spontaneous abortions, prematurity or foetal malformations were reported. This analysis suggests the safety in pregnant women of the influenza vaccine obtained from cell cultures.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2022-23 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2021–22 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) concerning the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States

(MMWR Recomm Rep 2021;70[No. RR-5]:1–24). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used.With the exception of vaccination for adults aged ≥65 years, ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. All seasonal influenza vaccines expected to be available in the United States for the 2022–23 season are quadrivalent, containing hemagglutinin (HA) derived from one influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus, one influenza A(H3N2) virus, one influenza B/Victoria lineage virus, and one influenza B/Yamagata lineage virus. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Trivalent influenza vaccines are no longer available, but data that involve these vaccines are included for reference.

Influenza vaccines might be available as early as July or August, but for most persons who need only 1 dose of influenza vaccine for the season, vaccination should ideally be offered during September or October. However, vaccination should continue after October and throughout the season as long as influenza viruses are circulating and unexpired vaccine is available. For most adults (particularly adults aged ≥65 years) and for pregnant persons in the first or second trimester, vaccination during July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that vaccination later in the season might not be possible. Certain children aged 6 months through 8 years need 2 doses; these children should receive the first dose as soon as possible after vaccine is available, including during July and August. Vaccination during July and August can be considered for children of any age who need only 1 dose for the season and for pregnant persons who are in the third trimester if vaccine is available during those months

Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 20, 2021; January 12, 2022; February 23, 2022; and June 22, 2022. Primary updates to this report include the following three topics: 1) the composition of 2022–23 U.S. seasonal influenza vaccines; 2) updates to the description of influenza vaccines expected to be available for the 2022–23 season, including one influenza vaccine labeling change that occurred after the publication of the 2021–22 ACIP influenza recommendations; and 3) updates to the recommendations concerning vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years. First, the composition of 2022–23 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H3N2) and influenza B/Victoria lineage components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain HA derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture–based or recombinant vaccines); an influenza A/Darwin/9/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Darwin/6/2021 (H3N2)-like virus (for cell culture–based or recombinant vaccines); an influenza B/Austria/1359417/2021 (Victoria lineage)-like virus; and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Second, the approved age indication for the cell culture–based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), was changed in October 2021 from ≥2 years to ≥6 months. Third, recommendations for vaccination of adults aged ≥65 years have been modified. ACIP recommends that adults aged ≥65 years preferentially receive any one of the following higher dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccines: quadrivalent high-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (HD-IIV4), quadrivalent recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), or quadrivalent adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine (aIIV4). If none of these three vaccines is available at an opportunity for vaccine administration, then any other age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be used

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2022–23 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Understanding drivers of vaccine hesitancy among pregnant women in Nigeria: A longitudinal study

Vaccine-preventable-diseases are major contributors to disease burden in Sub-Saharan Africa. There is dearth of knowledge on the drivers of childhood vaccine hesitancy in Nigeria and its impact on coverage. Although understudied, pregnant women are a particularly important vulnerable group and very relevant for childhood vaccination decisions. This study’s aims are to adapt Confidence, Complacency, Constraints, Calculation, and Collective Responsibility, also known as the 5C psychological antecedence scale for the Nigerian context and to measure predictors of intention to vaccinate among pregnant women (prenatal) and subsequent vaccination behavior (postnatal). It is a longitudinal study that used multi-stage sampling procedure. One healthcare facility was selected from each district in five regional clusters, from which 255 pregnant women were randomly drawn. A standardized questionnaire was used to collect relevant data, including the 5C and some additional variables. Multiple linear regression using backward elimination analysis was performed to identify intention at prenatal and behavior at postnatal. Pregnant women’s intention to vaccinate unborn children was lower if they were Muslims, had lower confidence in public health system, if husband approval was important, and if they believed in rumor. At postnatal, vaccination behavior was more likely to follow mothers’ religious beliefs, when confidence in vaccine effectiveness was high and when mothers felt responsible for the collective. However, everyday stress (constraints) related to less vaccination behavior, and intention did not predict actual vaccination behavior. The 5C scale needs revision before being widely used in Nigeria. Yet, it is a better tool for measuring vaccination behavior than intention.

Knowledge, Perceptions, Attitudes and Practices of Midwives Regarding Maternal Influenza and Pertussis Vaccination: A Qualitative Study

The coverage of maternal vaccination against pertussis and, particularly, influenza is lower than expected. The lack of recommendation from healthcare providers conditions non-vaccination in pregnant women. The purpose was to determine the knowledge, perceptions, attitudes and practices of midwives regarding maternal influenza and pertussis vaccination. A qualitative descriptive study based on semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with seventeen midwives was conducted, including purposive sampling and thematic analyses. Midwives had disparate knowledge and perceptions about the severity of influenza and pertussis in pregnant women, and influenza was not considered very serious. The vaccines were generally considered safe. However, because midwives did not have enough information about the safety of the influenza vaccine, there was a tendency not to recommend it. While most midwives had a positive attitude toward vaccination, their advocation for vaccination against influenza was not as clear as it was for pertussis. Not wanting to influence the decision and assuming an informative–facilitating role also led providers to recommend the influenza vaccine less frequently. Midwives are among the main sources of professional advice for pregnant women. Addressing their understanding and professional practices regarding maternal vaccination is key to change the attitude of pregnant women and thus increase vaccine uptake among them, particularly for influenza.

Prenatal influenza vaccination and allergic and autoimmune diseases in childhood: A longitudinal, population-based linked cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated the effect of maternal influenza vaccination on the development of allergic and autoimmune diseases in children beyond 6 months of age. We aimed to investigate the association between in utero exposure to seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and subsequent diagnosis of allergic and autoimmune diseases.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This longitudinal, population-based linked cohort study included 124,760 singleton, live-born children from 106,206 mothers in Western Australia (WA) born between April 2012 and July 2016, with up to 5 years of follow-up from birth. In our study cohort, 64,169 (51.4%) were male, 6,566 (5.3%) were Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander children, and the mean age at the end of follow-up was 3.0 (standard deviation, 1.3) years. The exposure was receipt of seasonal IIV during pregnancy. The outcomes were diagnosis of an allergic or autoimmune disease, including asthma and anaphylaxis, identified from hospital and/or emergency department (ED) records. Inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) accounted for baseline probability of vaccination by maternal age, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander status, socioeconomic status, body mass index, parity, medical conditions, pregnancy complications, prenatal smoking, and prenatal care. The models additionally adjusted for the Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander status of the child. There were 14,396 (11.5%) maternally vaccinated children; 913 (6.3%) maternally vaccinated and 7,655 (6.9%) maternally unvaccinated children had a diagnosis of allergic or autoimmune disease, respectively. Overall, maternal influenza vaccination was not associated with diagnosis of an allergic or autoimmune disease (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.09). In trimester-specific analyses, we identified a negative association between third trimester influenza vaccination and the diagnosis of asthma (n = 40; aHR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.97) and anaphylaxis (n = 36; aHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.95).We did not capture outcomes diagnosed in a primary care setting; therefore, our findings are only generalizable to more severe events requiring hospitalization or presentation to the ED. Due to small cell sizes (i.e., <5), estimates could not be determined for all outcomes after stratification.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed no association between in utero exposure to influenza vaccine and diagnosis of allergic or autoimmune diseases. Although we identified a negative association of asthma and anaphylaxis diagnosis when seasonal IIV was administered later in pregnancy, additional studies are needed to confirm this. Overall, our findings support the safety of seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine during pregnancy in relation to allergic and autoimmune diseases in early childhood and support the continuation of current global maternal vaccine programs and policies.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Hospitalized Pregnant Women With Influenza, 2010 to 2019 : A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women may be at increased risk for severe influenza-associated outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To describe characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized pregnant women with influenza.

DESIGN

Repeated cross-sectional study.

SETTING

The population-based U.S. Influenza Hospitalization Surveillance Network during the 2010-2011 through 2018-2019 influenza seasons.

PATIENTS

Pregnant women (aged 15 to 44 years) hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed influenza identified through provider-initiated or facility-based testing practices.

MEASUREMENTS

Clinical characteristics, interventions, and in-hospital maternal and fetal outcomes were obtained through medical chart abstraction. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between influenza A subtype and severe maternal influenza-associated outcomes, including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or in-hospital death.

RESULTS

Of 9652 women aged 15 to 44 years and hospitalized with influenza, 2690 (27.9%) were pregnant. Among the 2690 pregnant women, the median age was 28 years, 62% were in their third trimester, and 42% had at least 1 underlying condition. Overall, 32% were vaccinated against influenza and 88% received antiviral treatment. Five percent required ICU admission, 2% required mechanical ventilation, and 0.3% (n = 8) died. Pregnant women with influenza A H1N1 were more likely to have severe outcomes than those with influenza A H3N2 (adjusted risk ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.3 to 2.8]). Most women (71%) were still pregnant at hospital discharge. Among 754 women who were no longer pregnant at discharge, 96% had a pregnancy resulting in live birth, and 3% experienced fetal loss.

LIMITATION

Maternal and fetal outcomes that occurred after hospital discharge were not captured.

CONCLUSION

Over 9 influenza seasons, one third of reproductive-aged women hospitalized with influenza were pregnant. Influenza A H1N1 was associated with more severe maternal outcomes. Pregnant women remain a high-priority target group for vaccination.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Does Influenza Vaccination during Pregnancy Have Effects on Non-Influenza Infectious Morbidity? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

The recommendation to provide inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) to pregnant women is based on observed protection against influenza-related morbidity in mother and infant. Non-live vaccines may have non-specific effects (NSEs), increasing the risk of non-targeted infections in females. We reviewed the evidence from available randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of IIV to pregnant women, to assess whether IIV may have NSEs. Four RCTs, all conducted in low- and middle-income settings, were identified. We extracted information on all-cause and infectious mortality and adverse events in women and their infants. We conducted meta-analyses providing risk ratios (RR). The meta-analysis for maternal all-cause mortality provided a RR of 1.48 (95% CI = 0.52–4.16). The estimates for miscarriage/stillbirth and infant all-cause mortality up to 6 months of age were 1.06 (0.78–1.44) and 1.11 (0.87–1.41), respectively. IIV was associated with a higher risk of non-influenza infectious adverse events, with meta-estimates of 2.01 (1.15–3.50) in women and 1.36 (1.12–1.67) in infants up to 6 months of age. Thus, following a pattern seen for other non-live vaccines, IIV was associated with a higher risk of non-influenza infectious adverse events. To ensure that scarce resources are used well, and no harm is inflicted, further RCTs are warranted.

Seasonal Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy and the Risk of Major Congenital Malformations in Live-born Infants: A 2010-2016 Historical Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Available evidence indicates that seasonal inactivated influenza vaccination during pregnancy protects both the mother and her newborn and is safe. Nevertheless, ongoing safety assessments are important in sustaining vaccine uptake. Few studies have explored safety in relation to major congenital malformations (MCMs), particularly in the first trimester when most organogenesis occurs.

METHODS

Anonymized UK primary care data (the Clinical Practice Research Datalink), including a recently developed Pregnancy Register, were used to identify live-born singletons delivered between 2010 and 2016. Maternal influenza vaccination was determined using primary care records and stratified by trimester. Ascertainment of MCMs from infant primary care records was maximized by linkage to hospitalization data and death certificates. The relationship between vaccination and MCMs recorded in the year after delivery and in early childhood was then assessed using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

A total of 78 150 live-birth pregnancies were identified: 6872 (8.8%) were vaccinated in the first trimester, 11 678 (14.9%) in the second, and 12 931 (16.5%) in the third. Overall, 5707 live births resulted in an infant with an MCM recorded in the year after delivery and the adjusted hazard ratio when comparing first-trimester vaccination to no vaccination was 1.06 (99% CI, .94-1.19; P = .2). Results were similar for second- and third-trimester vaccination and for analyses considering MCMs recorded beyond the first birthday.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, population-based historical cohort study there was no evidence to suggest that seasonal influenza vaccine was associated with MCMs when given in the first trimester or subsequently in pregnancy.

Comprehensive Overview of Vaccination during Pregnancy in Europe

Vaccinations during pregnancy can protect the mother from several infections, thus blocking vertical transmission. Furthermore, through passive antibody transfer, the newborn can be protected against some infections in the first months of life until their own vaccination regimen is initiated and completed at the appropriate age. Pregnancy can be considered a high-risk condition that increases vulnerability to infectious diseases with potentially unfavorable evolution. We present the current knowledge on vaccination during pregnancy in Europe as a useful information source for different health workers involved in prenatal care. Many European countries implement vaccination policies specifically designed for pregnant women, but there is great heterogeneity among programs. Recommendations on vaccination during pregnancy must be based on current high-quality scientific data. The decisions must be made for each individual case, depending on the associated conditions or special circumstances, with a concomitant assessment of the potential benefits and risks to both the pregnant patient and the fetus. Many vaccines are well-tolerated in pregnant women, with no clinically meaningful injection site reactions, systemic symptoms, or vaccine-related serious adverse events.

Influenza

Seasonal influenza epidemics of variable severity pose challenges to public health. Annual vaccination is the primary way to prevent influenza, and a wide range of vaccines are available, including inactivated or live attenuated standard-dose, recombinant vaccines, as well as adjuvanted or high-dose vaccines for persons aged 65 years or older. Persons at increased risk for influenza complications include young children, persons with underlying medical conditions, and older adults. Prompt diagnosis of influenza can facilitate early initiation of antiviral treatment that provides the greatest clinical benefit. This article summarizes recommendations for providers on influenza vaccination, diagnostic testing, and antiviral treatment.

Lessons learned from the A (H1N1) influenza pandemic

Influenza in pregnancy is a common condition that is associated with an increased risk of hospital admission. Women with comorbidities are at a greater risk of severe outcomes. There are substantial gaps in our knowledge of the impact of severe influenza on perinatal outcomes, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, but preterm birth, fetal death, infant respiratory infection and hospital admission may be increased. Thus, influenza is a major burden on health services. Immunisation is cost-effective, safe and effective in preventing influenza in pregnant women and their infants but policies and uptake vary worldwide. Operational challenges and concern over the safety, efficacy and necessity of immunisation are common, and there is a lack of evidence on how to overcome these barriers. This review identifies learning points that are relevant to the current coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic through describing the epidemiology and impact of seasonal and A(H1N1)pdm09 influenza in pregnancy, alongside the effectiveness and use of immunisation.

Safety of components and platforms of COVID-19 vaccines considered for use in pregnancy: A rapid review

BACKGROUND

Rapid assessment of COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy is urgently needed.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines selected by the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access-Maternal Immunization Working Group in August 2020, including their components and their technological platforms used in other vaccines for pregnant persons. We searched literature databases, COVID-19 vaccine pregnancy registries, and explored reference lists from the inception date to February 2021 without language restriction. Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through COVIDENCE, and performed the data extraction and the risk of bias assessment. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021234185).

RESULTS

We retrieved 6757 records and 12 COVID-19 pregnancy registries from the search strategy; 38 clinical and non-clinical studies (involving 2,398,855 pregnant persons and 56 pregnant animals) were included. Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries and were cohort studies (57%). Most studies (76%) compared vaccine exposures with no exposure during the three trimesters of pregnancy. The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant, in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines, (n = 24) and aluminum-based adjuvants (n = 11). Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA in lipid nanoparticles COVID-19 vaccines. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03), corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

This rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted, given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant persons may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, United States, 2021-22 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2020-21 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2020;69[No. RR-8]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. ACIP makes no preferential recommendation for a specific vaccine when more than one licensed, recommended, and age-appropriate vaccine is available. During the 2021-22 influenza season, the following types of vaccines are expected to be available: inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4s), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4).The 2021-22 influenza season is expected to coincide with continued circulation of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html. Recommendations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19.html, and additional clinical guidance is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/clinical-considerations/covid-19-vaccines-us.html.Updates described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP that were held on October 28, 2020; February 25, 2021; and June 24, 2021. Primary updates to this report include the following six items. First, all seasonal influenza vaccines available in the United States for the 2021-22 season are expected to be quadrivalent. Second, the composition of 2021-22 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and influenza A(H3N2) components. U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines will contain hemagglutinin derived from an influenza A/Victoria/2570/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for egg-based vaccines) or an influenza A/Wisconsin/588/2019 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus (for cell culture-based and recombinant vaccines), an influenza A/Cambodia/e0826360/2020 (H3N2)-like virus, an influenza B/Washington/02/2019 (Victoria lineage)-like virus, and an influenza B/Phuket/3073/2013 (Yamagata lineage)-like virus. Third, the approved age indication for the cell culture-based inactivated influenza vaccine, Flucelvax Quadrivalent (ccIIV4), has been expanded from ages ≥4 years to ages ≥2 years. Fourth, discussion of administration of influenza vaccines with other vaccines includes considerations for coadministration of influenza vaccines and COVID-19 vaccines. Providers should also consult current ACIP COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and CDC guidance concerning coadministration of these vaccines with influenza vaccines. Vaccines that are given at the same time should be administered in separate anatomic sites. Fifth, guidance concerning timing of influenza vaccination now states that vaccination soon after vaccine becomes available can be considered for pregnant women in the third trimester. As previously recommended, children who need 2 doses (children aged 6 months through 8 years who have never received influenza vaccine or who have not previously received a lifetime total of ≥2 doses) should receive their first dose as soon as possible after vaccine becomes available to allow the second dose (which must be administered ≥4 weeks later) to be received by the end of October. For nonpregnant adults, vaccination in July and August should be avoided unless there is concern that later vaccination might not be possible. Sixth, contraindications and precautions to the use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 have been modified, specifically with regard to persons with a history of severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to an influenza vaccine. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, LAIV, or RIV of any valency is a precaution to use of ccIIV4. A history of a severe allergic reaction to a previous dose of any egg-based IIV, ccIIV, or LAIV of any valency is a precaution to use of RIV4. Use of ccIIV4 and RIV4 in such instances should occur in an inpatient or outpatient medical setting under supervision of a provider who can recognize and manage a severe allergic reaction; providers can also consider consulting with an allergist to help identify the vaccine component responsible for the reaction. For ccIIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any ccIIV of any valency or any component of ccIIV4 is a contraindication to future use of ccIIV4. For RIV4, history of a severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to any RIV of any valency or any component of RIV4 is a contraindication to future use of RIV4. This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2021-22 influenza season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used according to Food and Drug Administration-licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC's influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu); vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Understanding factors that influence the decision to be vaccinated against influenza and pertussis in pregnancy: A qualitative study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To identify how pregnant women perceive pertussis and influenza and the factors that influence their decision to be vaccinated.

BACKGROUND

Suffering from influenza during pregnancy increases complications in the pregnant woman, foetus and newborn. Pertussis in children under six months of age causes severe complications. Maternal vaccination against influenza and pertussis is effective and safe. However, vaccination rates are insufficient.

DESIGN

We conducted a qualitative descriptive study, using semi-structured interviews. This research adheres to the COREQ guidelines and checklist.

METHODS

We carried out 18 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with pregnant women, using intentional sampling and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

We identified an overarching theme, 'factors that influenced participants' decision to be vaccinated or not', which was composed of four subthemes that were in turn made up of 12 categories. The factors that influenced participants' decision to be vaccinated against influenza and pertussis were related to their knowledge of and their perception of risk for these diseases. Participants perceived the risk of pertussis to be greater, and they focused their concern on the newborn. The recommendations and convictions of nurse-midwives were the most important factors encouraging vaccination. Participants trusted their nurse-midwives and most reported that they would have been vaccinated if their midwife had recommended it. Other factors were linked to lack of information, fear and concerns about economic interests.

CONCLUSIONS

The convictions and actions of the nurse-midwife in recommending vaccination to pregnant women are decisive. Strategies to improve vaccination rates should be directed to helping health professionals understand how their practice affects the final decision of pregnant women.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Understanding the factors that limit vaccination rates among pregnant women provides valuable information to nurse-midwives that can help to improve vaccination strategies and practices. Increased maternal vaccination rates would reduce morbidity and mortality among pregnant women and newborns.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines, their components or their platforms for pregnant women: A rapid review

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women with COVID-19 are at an increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness as well as adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Many countries are vaccinating or considering vaccinating pregnant women with limited available data about the safety of this strategy. Early identification of safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components, or their technological platforms is therefore urgently needed.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid systematic review, as the first phase of an ongoing full systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women, including their components, and their technological platforms (whole virus, protein, viral vector or nucleic acid) used in other vaccines, following the Cochrane methods and the PRISMA statement for reporting (PROSPERO-CRD42021234185).We searched literature databases, COVID-19 and pregnancy registries from inception February 2021 without time or language restriction and explored the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews retrieved. We selected studies of any methodological design that included at least 50 pregnant women or pregnant animals exposed to the vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG in August 2020 or their components or platforms included in the COVID-19 vaccines, and evaluated adverse events during pregnancy and the neonatal period.Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through the COVIDENCE web software and performed the data extraction through a previously piloted online extraction form. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

We identified 6768 records, 256 potentially eligible studies were assessed by full-text, and 37 clinical and non-clinical studies (38 reports, involving 2,397,715 pregnant women and 56 pregnant animals) and 12 pregnancy registries were included.Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries. The most frequent study design was cohort studies (n=21), followed by surveillance studies, randomized controlled trials, and registry analyses. Most studies (76%) allowed comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women (n=25) or animals (n=3) and reported exposures during the three trimesters of pregnancy.The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines (n=24), followed by aluminum-based adjuvants (n=11). Aluminum phosphate was used in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Fusion candidate vaccines (n=3) and Tdap vaccines (n=3). Different aluminum-based adjuvants were used in hepatitis vaccines. The replication-deficient simian adenovirus ChAdOx1 was used for a Rift Valley fever vaccine. Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines that also used lipid nanoparticles. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03) - corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

This rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant women may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.

Efficacy and safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy: realizing the potential of maternal influenza immunization

Introduction: Pregnant women are at higher risk of severe complications following influenza infection compared to the general population. Influenza vaccination during pregnancy can offer direct protection to pregnant women and passive immunity to infants up to 6 months of age via maternal antibodies. Pregnant women are a high priority group for influenza immunization.Areas covered: This review provides an overview of the basis for recommending influenza vaccine to pregnant women, current immunization policies, the evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of maternal vaccination, and future research needed. We conducted a search of PubMed for articles describing the safety or efficacy of influenza vaccines administered during pregnancy. Published articles from inception to 17 November 2020 were reviewed.Expert opinion: Experimental and observational evidence support the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of influenza immunization during pregnancy. These data support the continued provision of inactivated influenza vaccine to pregnant women, as recommended by global immunization policies. To achieve success with maternal influenza immunization programs, further work is needed to inform policy development in low- and middle-income settings and implementation and promotion in high-income settings.

Enhancement of Vaccination Attitude and Flu Vaccination Coverage among Pregnant Women Attending Birthing Preparation Course

Most vaccinations are recommended within the 15th month of life, in order to reduce risks and to protect children from the initial stages of their lives. A vaccination training session was carried out during the birthing preparation course, aimed at increasing the attitude toward vaccination in maternal-child age. A questionnaire on vaccination awareness was administered before and after the training session and on-site flu vaccination was offered to women and their companions. The percentage of participants who consider the preparatory course a useful tool to obtain information about vaccines increases significantly from 30.34% at pre-intervention to 64.56% at post-intervention (p < 0.001). There is a significant increase in the mean number of vaccinations that the participants want their children to get. The number of participants believing that there is no relationship between vaccination and autism rose from 41.05 to 72.97% (p < 0.001). In total, 48 out of 119 (40.34%) pregnant women participating in the course and 39 companions were vaccinated for influenza. Vaccination knowledge and attitude significantly increased after a training session dedicated to vaccination as a part of the pregnant pre-birth course, whose aim can be therefore extended to the management of the health of the child, well beyond the period of pregnancy, according to the life-course approach to health.

A Retrospective observational cohort study of the effect of antenatal influenza vaccination on birth outcomes in Cape Town, South Africa, 2015-2016

Background

There are conflicting data concerning the impact of antenatal influenza vaccination on birth outcomes including low birthweight (LBW), preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), and stillbirth.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of infants born to women residing in Mitchells Plain, Cape Town. Infants were born at 4 health facilities during May 28 – December 31, 2015 and April 15 – December 31, 2016. We performed crude and multivariable logistic regression, propensity score (PS) matching logistic regression, and inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) regression to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against LBW, preterm birth, SGA, and stillbirth adjusting for measured confounders.

Results

Maternal vaccination status, antenatal history, and ≥1 birth outcome(s) were available for 4084/5333 (76.6%) pregnancies, 2109 (51.6%) vaccinated, and 1975 (48.4%) unvaccinated. The proportion LBW was lower in vaccinated (6.9%) vs. unvaccinated (12.5%) in multivariable [VE 0.27 (95% CI 0.07‐0.42)], PS [VE 0.30 (95% CI 0.09‐0.51)], and IPTW [VE 0.24 (95% CI 0.04‐0.45)]. Preterm birth was less frequent in vaccinated (8.6%) than unvaccinated (16.4%) in multivariable [VE 0.26 (0.09‐0.40)], PS [VE 0.25 (95% CI 0.09‐0.41)], and IPTW [VE 0.34 (95% CI 0.18‐0.51)]. The proportion SGA was lower in vaccinated (6.0%) than unvaccinated (8.8%) but not in adjusted models. There were few stillbirths in our study population, 30/4084 (0.7%).

Conclusions

Using multiple analytic approaches, we found that influenza vaccination was associated with lower prevalence of LBW (24‐30%) and preterm birth (25‐34%) in Cape Town during 2015‐2016.

Incidence, risk factors and impact of seasonal influenza in pregnancy: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable to severe infection from influenza resulting in poor neonatal outcomes. The majority of evidence relates to pandemic 2009 A/H1N1 influenza. The objective of this study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of pregnant women hospitalised with seasonal influenza.

METHODS

This national, prospective, observational cohort study used the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS) to identify all pregnant women admitted to hospital between 01/11/2016 and 31/10/2018 with laboratory confirmed influenza at any gestation and up to two days after giving birth. These were compared to women admitted to give birth that did not have influenza. Baseline characteristics, immunization status, maternal and perinatal outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

There were 405 women admitted to hospital with laboratory confirmed influenza in pregnancy: 2.7 per 10,000 maternities. Compared to 694 comparison women, women with influenza were less likely to be professionally employed (aOR 0.59, 95%CI 0.39-0.89) or immunised in the relevant season (aOR 0·59, 0·39-0·89) and more likely to have asthma (aOR 2.42, 1.30-4.49) or have had a previous pregnancy complication (aOR 2·47, 1·33-4·61). They were more likely to be admitted to intensive care (aOR 21.3, 2.78-163.1) and to have a cesarean birth (aOR 1·42, 1·02-1.98). Their babies were more likely to be admitted to neonatal intensive care (aOR 1.86, 1·01-3·42).

CONCLUSIONS

Immunization reduces the risk of hospitalisation with influenza in pregnancy which is associated with increased risk of morbidity for both the mother and baby. There is a continued need to increase awareness of safety and effectiveness of immunization in pregnancy and provision within antenatal care settings, especially for high-risk groups.

Adverse events associated with the use of recommended vaccines during pregnancy: An overview of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Maternal immunization is aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality in pregnant women and their newborns. Updated evidence synthesis of maternal-fetal outcomes is constantly needed to ensure that the risk-benefit of vaccination during pregnancy remains positive.

METHODS

An overview of systematic reviews (OoSRs) was performed. We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE for SRs including recommended vaccines for maternal immunization reporting the following: abortion, stillbirth, chorioamnionitis, congenital anomalies, microcephaly, neonatal death, neonatal infection, preterm birth (PTB), low birth weight (LBW), maternal death and small for gestational age (SGA) from 2010 to April 2019. Quality and overlap of SRs was assessed.

RESULTS

Seventeen SRs were identified, eight of them included meta-analysis; quality was high in three SRs, moderate in six SRs, low in two SRs, and critically low in six SRs. Stillbirth and PTB were the most frequently reported outcomes by 15 and 13 SRs, respectively, followed by abortion (9 SRs), congenital anomalies (9 SRs), SGA (8 SRs), neonatal death (8 SRs), LBW (4 SRs), chorioamnionitis (3 SRs), maternal death (1 SR). SRs included mainly observational evidence for influenza and Tdap vaccines (11 SRs and 4 SRs, respectively); limited evidence was found for hepatitis (1 SR), yellow fever (1 SR), and meningococcal (1 SR) vaccines. Most of the SRs found no effect. Eight SRs found benefit/protection of influenza vaccine (for stillbirth, neonatal death, preterm birth, LBW), or Tdap vaccine (for preterm birth and SGA); one found a probable risk (chorioamnionitis/Tdap). The SRs for Hepatitis B, meningococcal and yellow fever vaccines were inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Definite risks were not identified for any vaccine and outcome; however better evidence is needed for all outcomes and vaccines. The available evidence in the SRs to support vaccine safety was based mainly on observational data. More RCTs with adequate reporting of maternal-fetal outcomes and larger high-quality observational studies are needed.

Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices - United States, 2020-21 Influenza Season

This report updates the 2019–20 recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines in the United States (MMWR Recomm Rep 2019;68[No. RR-3]). Routine annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months who do not have contraindications. For each recipient, a licensed and age-appropriate vaccine should be used. Inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs), recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV4), and live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV4) are expected to be available. Most influenza vaccines available for the 2020–21 season will be quadrivalent, with the exception of MF59-adjuvanted IIV, which is expected to be available in both quadrivalent and trivalent formulations.

Updates to the recommendations described in this report reflect discussions during public meetings of ACIP held on October 23, 2019; February 26, 2020; and June 24, 2020. Primary updates to this report include the following two items. First, the composition of 2020–21 U.S. influenza vaccines includes updates to the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, influenza A(H3N2), and influenza B/Victoria lineage components. Second, recent licensures of two new influenza vaccines, Fluzone High-Dose Quadrivalent and Fluad Quadrivalent, are discussed. Both new vaccines are licensed for persons aged ≥65 years. Additional changes include updated discussion of contraindications and precautions to influenza vaccination and the accompanying Table, updated discussion concerning use of LAIV4 in the setting of influenza antiviral medication use, and updated recommendations concerning vaccination of persons with egg allergy who receive either cell culture–based IIV4 (ccIIV4) or RIV4.

The 2020–21 influenza season will coincide with the continued or recurrent circulation of SARS-CoV-2 (the novel coronavirus associated with coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]). Influenza vaccination of persons aged ≥6 months to reduce prevalence of illness caused by influenza will reduce symptoms that might be confused with those of COVID-19. Prevention of and reduction in the severity of influenza illness and reduction of outpatient illnesses, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions through influenza vaccination also could alleviate stress on the U.S. health care system. Guidance for vaccine planning during the pandemic is available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pandemic-guidance/index.html.

This report focuses on recommendations for the use of vaccines for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza during the 2020–21 season in the United States. A brief summary of the recommendations and a link to the most recent Background Document containing additional information are available at https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/flu.html. These recommendations apply to U.S.-licensed influenza vaccines used within Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–licensed indications. Updates and other information are available from CDC’s influenza website (https://www.cdc.gov/flu). Vaccination and health care providers should check this site periodically for additional information.

Early Childhood Health Outcomes Following In Utero Exposure to Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Vaccination during pregnancy is an effective strategy for preventing infant disease; however, little is known about early childhood health after maternal vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature on early childhood health associated with exposure to influenza vaccines in utero.

DATA SOURCES

We searched CINAHL Plus, Embase, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for relevant articles published from inception to July 24, 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies published in English reporting original data with measurement of in utero exposure to influenza vaccines and health outcomes among children <5 years of age.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data on study design, setting, population, vaccines, outcomes, and results.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3647 records, of which 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies examined infectious, atopic, autoimmune, and neurodevelopmental outcomes, and all-cause morbidity and mortality. Authors of 2 studies reported an inverse association between pandemic influenza vaccination and upper respiratory tract infections, gastrointestinal infections, and all-cause hospitalizations; and authors of 2 studies reported modest increased association between several childhood disorders and pandemic or seasonal influenza vaccination, which, after adjusting for confounding and multiple comparisons, were not statistically significant.

LIMITATIONS

Given the small number of studies addressing similarly defined outcomes, meta-analyses were deemed not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from the few studies in which researchers have examined outcomes in children older than 6 months of age did not identify an association between exposure to influenza vaccines in utero and adverse childhood health outcomes.

Paradoxical long-term impact of maternal influenza infection on neonates and infants

Background

Pregnant women are at high risk of influenza-related morbidity and mortality. In addition, maternal influenza infection may lead to adverse birth outcomes. However, there is insufficient data on long-term impact of maternal influenza infection.

Methods

This study was conducted to assess the impact of maternal influenza infection on birth outcomes and long-term influence on infants by merging the Korea National Health Insurance (KNHI) claims database and National Health Screening Program for Infants and Children (NHSP-IC). Mother-offspring pairs were categorized by maternal influenza infection based on the ICD-10 code.

Results

Multivariate analysis revealed that maternal influenza infection significantly increased the risk of preterm birth (OR 1.408) and low birth weight (OR 1.198) irrespective of gestational age. The proportion of low birth weight neonates was significantly higher in influenza-infected women compared to those without influenza. However, since the fourth health screening (30–80 months after birth), the fraction of underweight was no longer different between children from influenza-infected and non-infected mothers, whereas the rates of overweight increased paradoxically in those born to mothers with influenza infection.

Conclusions

Maternal influenza infection might have long-term effects on the health of children and adolescents even after infancy.

Global Perspectives on Immunization During Pregnancy and Priorities for Future Research and Development: An International Consensus Statement

Immunization during pregnancy has been recommended in an increasing number of countries. The aim of this strategy is to protect pregnant women and infants from severe infectious disease, morbidity and mortality and is currently limited to tetanus, inactivated influenza, and pertussis-containing vaccines. There have been recent advancements in the development of vaccines designed primarily for use in pregnant women (respiratory syncytial virus and group B Streptococcus vaccines). Although there is increasing evidence to support vaccination in pregnancy, important gaps in knowledge still exist and need to be addressed by future studies. This collaborative consensus paper provides a review of the current literature on immunization during pregnancy and highlights the gaps in knowledge and a consensus of priorities for future research initiatives, in order to optimize protection for both the mother and the infant.

An international cohort study of birth outcomes associated with hospitalized acute respiratory infection during pregnancy

OBJECTIVES

Findings during the 2009 pandemic suggest severe maternal infection with pandemic influenza had adverse perinatal health consequences. Limited data exist evaluating the perinatal health effects of severe seasonal influenza and non-influenza infections during pregnancy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of pregnant women from Australia, Canada, Israel, and the United States was established using birth records to identify pregnancies and birth outcomes and hospital and laboratory testing records to identify influenza and non-influenza associated acute respiratory or febrile illness (ARFI) hospitalizations. ARFI hospitalized women were matched to non-hospitalized women (1:4) by country and season of conception. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate the relative risk (aRR) of preterm birth (PTB), small-for-gestational-age (SGA), and low birthweight (LBW) birth, adjusting for pre-existing medical conditions, maternal age, and parity.

RESULTS

950 pregnant women hospitalized with an ARFI were matched with 3,800 non-hospitalized pregnant women. Compared to non-hospitalized women, risk of PTB was greater among women hospitalized with influenza-associated ARFI (aRR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.15-2.15) and non-influenza ARFI (aRR: 2.78; 95% CI: 2.12-3.65). Similar results were observed for LBW; there were no associations with SGA birth.

CONCLUSIONS

ARFI hospitalization during pregnancy was associated with increased risk of PTB and LBW.

Pregnancy has a minimal impact on the acute transcriptional signature to vaccination

Vaccination in pregnancy is an effective tool to protect both the mother and infant; vaccines against influenza, pertussis and tetanus are currently recommended. A number of vaccines with a specific indication for use in pregnancy are in development, with the specific aim of providing passive humoral immunity to the newborn child against pathogens responsible for morbidity and mortality in young infants. However, the current understanding about the immune response to vaccination in pregnancy is incomplete. We analysed the effect of pregnancy on early transcriptional responses to vaccination. This type of systems vaccinology approach identifies genes and pathways that are altered in response to vaccination and can be used to understand both the acute inflammation in response to the vaccine and to predict immunogenicity. Pregnant women and mice were immunised with Boostrix-IPV, a multivalent vaccine, which contains three pertussis antigens. Blood was collected from women before and after vaccination and RNA extracted for analysis by microarray. While there were baseline differences between pregnant and non-pregnant women, vaccination induced characteristic patterns of gene expression, with upregulation in interferon response and innate immunity gene modules, independent of pregnancy. We saw similar patterns of responses in both women and mice, supporting the use of mice for preclinical screening of novel maternal vaccines. Using a systems vaccinology approach in pregnancy demonstrated that pregnancy does not affect the initial response to vaccination and that studies in non-pregnant women can provide information about vaccine immunogenicity and potentially safety.

The Safety of Influenza and Pertussis Vaccination in Pregnancy in a Cohort of Australian Mother-Infant Pairs, 2012-2015: The FluMum Study

Background

Inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and pertussis vaccination are recommended in pregnancy. Limited safety data exist for women who received IIV vaccine during the first trimester of pregnancy or received both vaccines in pregnancy. We assessed adverse birth outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnancies.

Methods

Among prospectively enrolled Australian "FluMum" participants (2012-2015), primary exposure was receipt and timing of IIV during pregnancy. Primary outcomes included preterm birth, low birthweight at term (LBWT), and small for gestational age (SGA). We compared birth outcomes for IIV in pregnancy with women unvaccinated in pregnancy using Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Adjusted HRs (aHRs) controlled for potential confounding variables. Sensitivity analyses were conducted in a subgroup of women who received pertussis vaccination during pregnancy to assess whether associations between IIV and adverse outcomes were maintained after adjusting for pertussis vaccination.

Results

Among 8827 participants in our study, women who received IIV in pregnancy did not have an elevated risk of an adverse birth outcome compared with unvaccinated pregnant women: preterm births (HR, 1.10 [95% CI, .92-1.31]; P = .28); LBWT (HR, 1.05 [95% CI, .76-1.44]; P = .77); or SGA (HR, 0.99 [95% CI, .86-1.15]; P = .94). Adjustment for pertussis vaccination during pregnancy yielded similar results: preterm births (aHR, 1.05 [95% CI, .82-1.34]; P = .69); LBWT (aHR, 0.81 [95% CI, .50-1.29]; P = .37); SGA (aHR, 0.92 [95% CI, .74-1.14]; P = .43). There was no evidence of elevated risk by trimester of IIV.

Conclusions

No significant associations were found between maternal IIV or pertussis vaccination in pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes, regardless of the trimester of pregnancy a vaccination was given compared to unvaccinated pregnancies.

Review of the status and challenges associated with increasing influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in China

Influenza vaccination coverage in pregnant women in China remains low. In this review, we first provide an overview of the evidence for the use of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Second, we discuss influenza vaccination policy and barriers to increased seasonal influenza vaccination coverage in pregnant women in China. Third, we provide case studies of successes and challenges of programs for increasing seasonal influenza vaccination in pregnant women from other parts of Asia with lessons learned for China. Finally, we assess opportunities and challenges for increasing influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women in China.

Clinical practice guidelines 2019: Indian consensus-based recommendations on influenza vaccination in adults

Influenza, a common cause of acute respiratory infections, is an important health problem worldwide, including in India. Influenza is associated with several complications; people with comorbidities and the elderly are at a higher risk for such complications. Moreover, the influenza virus constantly changes genetically, thereby worsening therapeutic outcomes. Vaccination is an effective measure for the prevention of influenza. Despite the availability of global guidelines on influenza vaccination in adults, country-specific guidelines based on regional variation in disease burden are required for better disease management in India. With this aim, the Indian Chest Society and National College of Chest Physicians of India jointly conducted an expert meeting in January 2019. The discussion was aimed at delineating evidence-based recommendations on adult influenza vaccination in India. The present article discusses expert recommendations on clinical practice guidelines to be followed in India for adult influenza vaccination, for better management of the disease burden.

Vaccinating pregnant women against influenza needs to be a priority for all countries: An expert commentary

BACKGROUND

In 2012, the World Health Organization recommended influenza vaccination for all pregnant women worldwide and the prioritisation of pregnant women in national influenza vaccination programmes. Nevertheless, vaccination rates in pregnant women often remain much lower than national targets.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks associated with influenza infection and vaccination during pregnancy, and to consider obstacles that work against influenza vaccine uptake during pregnancy.

RESULTS

There is strong evidence that maternal and foetal outcomes can be compromised if women develop influenza infections during pregnancy. Influenza vaccines have been administered to millions of pregnant women and have demonstrated benefits in terms of disease prevention in mothers and their infants. There is a consensus amongst several recommending authorities that influenza vaccines may be safely administered during all stages of pregnancy. Healthcare professionals are recognised as the most important influencers of vaccine uptake, being well placed to recommend vaccination and directly address safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite data supporting the value of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, vaccine uptake remains low globally. Low uptake appears to be largely due to ineffective communication with pregnant women about the risks and benefits of influenza vaccination. A graphical abstract is available online.

Interventions to improve birth outcomes of pregnant women living in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background: Improving the health of pregnant women is important to prevent adverse birth outcomes, such as preterm birth and low birthweight. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of interventions under the domains of micronutrient, balanced energy protein, deworming, maternal education, and water sanitation and hygiene (WASH) for their effects on these adverse birth outcomes. Methods: For this network meta-analysis, we searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of interventions provided to pregnant women in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). We searched for reports published until September 17, 2019 and hand-searched bibliographies of existing reviews. We extracted data from eligible studies for study characteristics, interventions, participants' characteristics at baseline, and birth outcomes. We compared effects on preterm birth (<37 gestational week), low birthweight (LBW; <2500 g), and birthweight (continuous) using studies conducted in LMICs. Results: Our network meta-analyses were based on 101 RCTs (132 papers) pertaining to 206,531 participants. Several micronutrients and balanced energy food supplement interventions demonstrated effectiveness over standard-of-care. For instance, versus standard-of-care, micronutrient supplements for pregnant women, such as iron and calcium, decreased risks of preterm birth (iron: RR=0.70, 95% credible interval [Crl] 0.47, 1.01; calcium: RR=0.76, 95%Crl 0.56, 0.99). Daily intake of 1500kcal of local food decreased the risks of preterm birth (RR=0.36, 95%Crl 0.16, 0.77) and LBW (RR=0.17, 95%Crl 0.09, 0.29), respectively when compared to standard-of-care. Educational and deworming interventions did not show improvements in birth outcomes, and no WASH intervention trials reported on these adverse birth outcomes. Conclusion: We found several pregnancy interventions that improve birth outcomes. However, most clinical trials have only evaluated interventions under a single domain (e.g. micronutrients) even though the causes of adverse birth outcomes are multi-faceted. There is a need to combine interventions that of different domains as packages and test for their effectiveness. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42018110446; registered on 17 October 2018.

Vaccine innovations for emerging infectious diseases-a symposium report

Vaccines have been incredibly successful at stemming the morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases worldwide. However, there are still no effective vaccines for many serious and potentially preventable infectious diseases. Advances in vaccine technology, including new delivery methods and adjuvants, as well as progress in systems biology and an increased understanding of the human immune system, hold the potential to address these issues. In addition, maternal immunization has opened an avenue to address infectious diseases in neonates and very young infants. This report summarizes the presentations from a 1-day symposium at the New York Academy of Sciences entitled "Innovative Vaccines against Resistant Infectious Diseases and Emerging Threats," held on May 20, 2019.

Inactivated influenza vaccine and spontaneous abortion in the Vaccine Safety Datalink in 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15

Introduction:

A recent study reported an association between inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and spontaneous abortion (SAB), but only among women who had also been vaccinated in the previous influenza season. We sought to estimate the association between IIV administered in three recent influenza seasons and SAB among women who were and were not vaccinated in the previous influenza season.

Methods:

We conducted a case-control study over three influenza seasons (2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15) in the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Cases (women with SAB) and controls (women with live births) were matched on VSD site, date of last menstrual period, age group, and influenza vaccination status in the previous influenza season. Of 1908 presumptive cases identified from the electronic record, 1236 were included in the main analysis. Administration of IIV was documented in several risk windows, including 1–28, 29–56, and >56 days before the SAB date.

Results:

Among 627 matched pairs vaccinated in the previous season, no association was found between vaccination in the 1–28 day risk window and SAB (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6–1.5). The season-specific aOR ranged from 0.5 to 1.7 with all CIs including the null value of 1.0. Similarly, no association was found among women who were not vaccinated in the previous season; the season-specific aOR in the 1–28 day risk window ranged from 0.6 to 0.7 and the 95% CI included 1.0 in each season. There was no association found between SAB and influenza vaccination in the other risk windows, or when vaccine receipt was analyzed relative to date of conception.

Conclusion:

During these seasons we found no association between IIV and SAB, including among women vaccinated in the previous season. These findings lend support to current recommendations for influenza vaccination at any time during pregnancy, including the first trimester.