Interim Recommendations for Use of Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines for Persons Aged ≥6 Months - United States, April 2023

Safety and immunogenicity of an mRNA-1273 vaccine booster in adolescents

Safety, immunogenicity, and effectiveness of an mRNA-1273 50-μg booster were evaluated in adolescents (12-17 years), with and without pre-booster SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants who had received the 2-dose mRNA-1273 100-µg primary series in the TeenCOVE trial (NCT04649151) were offered the mRNA-1273 50-μg booster. Primary objectives included safety and inference of effectiveness by establishing noninferiority of neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses after the booster compared with the nAb post-primary series of mRNA-1273 among young adults in COVE (NCT04470427). Binding antibody (bAb) responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants of interest and COVID-19 incidence after vaccination were also evaluated. Median boosting interval was 315 days. The mRNA-1273 booster was well-tolerated, with an acceptable safety profile. Relative to pre-booster, nAb geometric mean levels increased after the booster by 17.8-fold and 4.7-fold among pre-booster SARS-CoV-2-negative and -positive participants, respectively. Effectiveness was successfully inferred based on noninferiority of nAb levels from mRNA-1273 booster dose (Day 29) compared with nAb levels after mRNA-1273 primary series (Day 57) among young adults in COVE. Further, the booster increased bAb levels relative to pre-booster baseline against SARS-CoV-2 variants (alpha [B.1.1.7], beta [B.1.351], gamma [P.1], and delta [B.1.617.2]), regardless of pre-booster SARS-CoV-2 status. COVID-19 incidence (cases per 1000 person-months) was lower among boosted (0 cases) than non-boosted (95.766 cases) participants in January 2022, a peak period during the early omicron transmission. In summary, the mRNA-1273 50-μg booster induced robust nAb responses in previously vaccinated adolescents, regardless of SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Effectiveness was successfully inferred and the booster was well-tolerated, with no new safety concerns identified.

Assessment and mitigation of bias in influenza and COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness analyses - IVY Network, September 1, 2022-March 30, 2023

BACKGROUND

In test-negative studies of vaccine effectiveness (VE), including patients with co-circulating, vaccine-preventable, respiratory pathogens in the control group for the pathogen of interest can introduce a downward bias on VE estimates.

METHODS

A multicenter sentinel surveillance network in the US prospectively enrolled adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness from September 1, 2022-March 31, 2023. We evaluated bias in estimates of VE against influenza-associated and COVID-19-associated hospitalization based on: inclusion vs exclusion of patients with a co-circulating virus among VE controls; observance of VE against the co-circulating virus (rather than the virus of interest), unadjusted and adjusted for vaccination against the virus of interest; and observance of influenza or COVID-19 against a sham outcome of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

RESULTS

Overall VE against influenza-associated hospitalizations was 6 percentage points lower when patients with COVID-19 were included in the control group, and overall VE against COVID-19-associated hospitalizations was 2 percentage points lower when patients with influenza were included in the control group. Analyses of VE against the co-circulating virus and against the sham outcome of RSV showed that downward bias was largely attributable the correlation of vaccination status across pathogens, but also potentially attributable to other sources of residual confounding in VE models.

CONCLUSION

Excluding cases of confounding respiratory pathogens from the control group in VE analysis for a pathogen of interest can reduce downward bias. This real-world analysis demonstrates that such exclusion is a helpful bias mitigation strategy, especially for measuring influenza VE, which included a high proportion of COVID-19 cases among controls.

Relative Contribution of Diagnostic Testing to the Diagnosis of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Hospitalized Adults in the United States

BACKGROUND

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of acute respiratory illness (ARI) in older adults. Optimizing diagnosis could improve understanding of RSV burden.

METHODS

We enrolled adults ≥50 years of age hospitalized with ARI and adults of any age hospitalized with congestive heart failure or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations at 2 hospitals during 2 respiratory seasons (2018-2020). We collected nasopharyngeal (NP) and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs (n = 1558), acute and convalescent sera (n = 568), and expectorated sputum (n = 153) from participants, and recorded standard-of-care (SOC) NP results (n = 805). We measured RSV antibodies by 2 immunoassays and performed BioFire testing on respiratory specimens.

RESULTS

Of 1558 eligible participants, 92 (5.9%) tested positive for RSV by any diagnostic method. Combined NP/OP polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing yielded 58 positives, while separate NP and OP testing identified 11 additional positives (18.9% increase). Compared to study NP/OP PCR alone, the addition of paired serology increased RSV detection by 42.9% (28 vs 40) among those with both specimen types, while the addition of SOC swab PCR increased RSV detection by 25.9% (47 vs 59).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of paired serology testing, SOC swab results, and separate testing of NP and OP swabs improved RSV diagnostic yield in hospitalized adults.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 bivalent vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection among residents of US nursing homes, November 2022 - March 2023

BACKGROUND

Residents of nursing homes remain an epidemiologically important population for COVID-19 prevention efforts, including vaccination. We aim to understand effectiveness of bivalent vaccination for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections in this population.

METHODS

We used a retrospective cohort of nursing home residents from November 1, 2022, through March 31, 2023, to identify new SARS-CoV-2 infections. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate hazard ratios comparing residents with a bivalent vaccination compared with residents not up to date with vaccination recommendations. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as (1 - Hazard Ratio) * 100.

RESULTS

Among 6,916 residents residing in 76 nursing homes included in our cohort, 3,211 (46%) received a bivalent vaccine 7 or more days prior to censoring. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness against laboratory confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection comparing receipt of a bivalent vaccine versus not up to date vaccine status was 29% (95% Confidence interval 18% to 39%). Vaccine effectiveness for receipt of a bivalent vaccine against residents who were unvaccinated or vaccinated more than a year prior was 32% (95% CI: 20% to 42%,) and was 25% compared with residents who were vaccinated with a monovalent vaccine in the past 61-365 days (95% CI:10% to 37%).

CONCLUSIONS

Bivalent COVID-19 vaccines provided additional protection against SARS-CoV-2 infections in nursing home residents during our study time-period, compared to both no vaccination or vaccination more than a year ago and monovalent vaccination 60 - 365 days prior. Ensuring nursing home residents stay up to date with vaccine recommendations remains a critical tool for COVID-19 prevention efforts.

Development of COVID-19 vaccine policy - United States, 2020-2023

COVID-19 vaccines represent a great scientific and public health achievement in the face of overwhelming pressures from a global pandemic, preventing millions of hospitalizations and deaths due to COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. Over 675 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in the United States, and over 80% of the U.S. population has had at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, over one million people died from COVID-19, and over six million were hospitalized. It has been estimated that COVID-19 vaccines prevented more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths due to COVID-19 in the United States. From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 through June 2023, ACIP had 35 COVID-19 focused meetings and 24 votes for COVID-19 vaccine recommendations. ACIP had the critical task of rapidly and thoroughly reviewing emerging and evolving data on COVID-19 epidemiology and vaccines, as well as making comprehensive population-based recommendations for vaccine policy and considerations for implementation through a transparent and evidence-based framework. Safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines, recommended through transparent policy discussions with ACIP, remain the best tool we have to prevent serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19.

Interim safety and immunogenicity of COVID-19 omicron BA.1 variant-containing vaccine in children in the USA: an open-label non-randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Variant-containing mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 to broaden protection against SARS-CoV-2 variants are recommended based on findings in adults. We report interim safety and immunogenicity of an omicron BA.1 variant-containing (mRNA-1273.214) primary vaccination series and booster dose in paediatric populations.

METHODS

This open-label, two-part, non-randomised phase 3 trial enrolled participants aged 6 months to 5 years at 24 US study sites. Eligible participants were generally healthy or had stable chronic conditions, without known SARS-CoV-2 infection in the previous 90 days. Individuals who were acutely ill or febrile 1 day before or at the screening visit or those who previously received other COVID-19 vaccines (except mRNA-1273 for part 2) were excluded. In part 1, SARS-CoV-2-vaccine-naive participants received two-dose mRNA-1273.214 (25 μg; omicron BA.1 and ancestral Wuhan-Hu-1 mRNA) primary series. In part 2, participants who previously completed the two-dose mRNA-1273 (25 μg) primary series in KidCOVE (NCT04796896) received a mRNA-1273.214 (10 μg) booster dose. Primary study outcomes were safety and reactogenicity of the mRNA-1273.214 primary series (part 1) or booster dose (part 2) as well as the inferred effectiveness of mRNA-1273.214 based on immune responses against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 (D614G) and omicron BA.1 variant at 28 days post-primary series (part 1) or post-booster dose (part 2). The safety set included participants who received at least one dose of the study vaccine; the immunogenicity set included those who provided immunogenicity samples. Interim safety and immunogenicity are summarised in this analysis as of the data cutoff date (Dec 5, 2022). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05436834.

FINDINGS

Between June 21, 2022, and Dec 5, 2022, 179 participants received one or more doses of mRNA-1273.214 primary series (part 1) and 539 received a mRNA-1273.214 booster dose (part 2). The safety profile within 28 days after either dose of the mRNA-1273.214 primary series and the booster dose was consistent with that of the mRNA-1273 primary series in this age group, with no new safety concerns or vaccine-related serious adverse events observed. At 28 days after primary series dose 2 and the booster dose, both mRNA-1273.214 primary series (day 57, including all participants with or without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline) and booster (day 29, including participants without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection at baseline) elicited responses that were superior against omicron-BA.1 (geometric mean ratio part 1: 25·4 [95% CI 20·1-32·1] and part 2: 12·5 [11·0-14·3]) and non-inferior against D614G (part 1: 0·8 [0·7-1·0] and part 2: 3·1 [2·8-3·5]), compared with neutralising antibody responses induced by the mRNA-1273 primary series (in a historical comparator group).

INTERPRETATION

mRNA-1273.214 was immunogenic against BA.1 and D614G in children aged 6 months to 5 years, with a comparable safety profile to mRNA-1273, when given as a two-dose primary series or a booster dose. These results are aligned with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations for the use of variant-containing vaccines for continued protection against the emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2.

FUNDING

Moderna.

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 Vaccine for Preventing COVID-19-Related Hospitalizations: A Test-Negative Case-Control Study

It is important to understand real-world BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE), especially among racial and ethnic minority groups. We performed a test-negative case-control study to measure BNT162b2 COVID-19 VE in the prevention of COVID-19-associated acute respiratory illness (ARI) hospitalizations at two Atlanta hospitals from May 2021-January 2023 and adjusted for potential confounders by multivariate analysis. Among 5139 eligible adults with ARI, 2763 (53.8%) were enrolled, and 1571 (64.5%) were included in the BNT162b2 analysis. The median age was 58 years (IQR, 44-68), 889 (56.6%) were female, 1034 (65.8%) were African American, 359 (22.9%) were White, 56 (3.6%) were Hispanic ethnicity, 645 (41.1%) were SARS-CoV-2-positive, 412 (26.2%) were vaccinated with a primary series, and 273 (17.4%) had received ≥1 booster of BNT162b2. The overall adjusted VE of the BNT162b2 primary series was 58.5% (95% CI 46.0, 68.1), while the adjusted VE of ≥1 booster was 78.9% (95% CI 70.0, 85.1). The adjusted overall VE of primary series for African American/Black individuals was 64.0% (95% CI 49.9, 74.1) and 82.7% (95% CI 71.9, 89.4) in those who received ≥1 booster. When analysis was limited to the period of Omicron predominance, overall VE of the primary series decreased with widened confidence intervals (24.5%, 95% CI -4.5, 45.4%), while VE of ≥1 booster was maintained at 60.9% (95% CI 42.0, 73.6). BNT162b2 primary series and booster vaccination provided protection against COVID-19-associated ARI hospitalization among a predominantly African American population.

Vaccine Mandates: Weighing the Common Good vs Personal Conscience and Autonomy

COVID-19 is a serious illness with significant morbidity and mortality. Vaccines to immunize against it were developed in record time. Mandates followed. The question to be considered is when mandates are ethical. Mandates can be used to prevent spread of an infection, prevent overwhelming the healthcare system, or protect public safety, thereby protecting the vulnerable and allowing for full flourishing of the common good. At the same time, one must be careful about respecting autonomy by allowing those who consciences do not allow them to be vaccinated to refuse. Because COVID-19 knowledge is rapidly changing as more information is known and the virus mutates, the conditions under which mandates are ethical change as well. At present, since vaccines prevent severe infection and death in high-risk individuals with added benefit for those who are vaccinated and have a history of infection, mandates can be imposed on those individuals. With an estimated 95% of the US population believed to have been infected and prior history of infection shown to be as effective as vaccination, with immunity lasting at least 500 days, and ability to prevent spread unknown at present but limited at best in the past, the vaccines therefore cannot be ethically mandated for those who are low risk for the versions released September 2023 based on information as of October 2023.

Universal versus risk-based strategies for vaccinating children against COVID-19: Japan and Korea

The global impact of COVID-19 on children emphasises the need for effective vaccination. While most cases are mild, those with underlying conditions face severe risks. Public health agencies promote various paediatric vaccination approaches. Japan universally recommends vaccination, while Korea prioritises high-risk children. Despite similar healthcare systems, Japan's coverage rates (19%-72%) surpass Korea's (2%-55%). Korea's child death rates are higher, indicating increased risk. Both lack methods to address individual risks, hindering prevention. This study advocates universal vaccination to mitigate future pandemics' impact on children systematically.

Stroke Risk After COVID-19 Bivalent Vaccination Among US Older Adults

Importance

In January 2023, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Food and Drug Administration noted a safety concern for ischemic stroke among adults aged 65 years or older who received the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine.

Objective

To evaluate stroke risk after administration of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, (2) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine on the same day (concomitant administration), and (3) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Self-controlled case series including 11 001 Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (among 5 397 278 vaccinated individuals). The study period was August 31, 2022, through February 4, 2023.

Exposures

Receipt of (1) either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (primary) or (2) a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine (secondary).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Stroke risk (nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, combined outcome of nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke) during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window after vaccination vs the 43- to 90-day control window.

Results

There were 5 397 278 Medicare beneficiaries who received either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (median age, 74 years [IQR, 70-80 years]; 56% were women). Among the 11 001 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there were no statistically significant associations between either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine and the outcomes of nonhemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, nonhemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic stroke during the 1- to 21-day or 22- to 42-day risk window vs the 43- to 90-day control window (incidence rate ratio [IRR] range, 0.72-1.12). Among the 4596 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after concomitant administration of either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine plus a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window for the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2; WT/OMI BA.4/BA.5 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.13 [95% CI, 0.05-6.22]) and a statistically significant association between vaccination and transient ischemic attack during the 1- to 21-day risk window for the Moderna mRNA-1273.222 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.06-1.74]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 3.33 [95% CI, 0.46-6.20]). Among the 21 345 beneficiaries who experienced stroke after administration of a high-dose or adjuvanted influenza vaccine, there was a statistically significant association between vaccination and nonhemorrhagic stroke during the 22- to 42-day risk window (IRR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.17]; risk difference/100 000 doses, 1.65 [95% CI, 0.43-2.87]).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who experienced stroke after receiving either brand of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccine, there was no evidence of a significantly elevated risk for stroke during the days immediately after vaccination.

Characteristics and Outcomes of Pregnant Women Hospitalized With Laboratory-Confirmed Respiratory Syncytial Virus Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause severe disease among infants and older adults. Less is known about RSV among pregnant women.

Methods

To analyze hospitalizations with laboratory-confirmed RSV among women aged 18 to 49 years, we used data from the RSV Hospitalization Surveillance Network (RSV-NET), a multistate population-based surveillance system. Specifically, we compared characteristics and outcomes among (1) pregnant and nonpregnant women during the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period (2014-2018), (2) pregnant women with respiratory symptoms during the prepandemic and pandemic periods (2021-2023), and (3) pregnant women with and without respiratory symptoms in the pandemic period. Using multivariable logistic regression, we examined whether pregnancy was a risk factor for severe outcomes (intensive care unit admission or in-hospital death) among women aged 18 to 49 years who were hospitalized with RSV prepandemic.

Results

Prepandemic, 387 women aged 18 to 49 years were hospitalized with RSV. Of those, 350 (90.4%) had respiratory symptoms, among whom 33 (9.4%) were pregnant. Five (15.2%) pregnant women and 74 (23.3%) nonpregnant women were admitted to the intensive care unit; no pregnant women and 5 (1.6%) nonpregnant women died. Among 279 hospitalized pregnant women, 41 were identified prepandemic and 238 during the pandemic: 80.5% and 35.3% had respiratory symptoms, respectively (P < .001). Pregnant women were more likely to deliver during their RSV-associated hospitalization during the pandemic vs the prepandemic period (73.1% vs 43.9%, P < .001).

Conclusions

Few pregnant women had severe RSV disease, and pregnancy was not a risk factor for a severe outcome. More asymptomatic pregnant women were identified during the pandemic, likely due to changes in testing practices for RSV.

Assessing the Burden and Cost of COVID-19 Across Variants in Commercially Insured Immunocompromised Populations in the United States: Updated Results and Trends from the Ongoing EPOCH-US Study

INTRODUCTION/METHODS

EPOCH-US is an ongoing, retrospective, observational cohort study among individuals identified in the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD®) with ≥ 12 months of continuous health plan enrollment. Data were collected for the HIRD population (containing immunocompetent and immunocompromised [IC] individuals), individual IC cohorts (non-mutually exclusive cohorts based on immunocompromising condition and/or immunosuppressive [IS] treatment), and the composite IC population (all unique IC individuals). This study updates previous results with addition of the general population cohort and data specifically for the year of 2022 (i.e., Omicron wave period). To provide healthcare decision-makers the most recent trends, this study reports incidence rates (IR) and severity of first SARS-CoV-2 infection; and relative risk, healthcare utilization, and costs related to first COVID-19 hospitalizations in the full year of 2022 and overall between April 2020 and December 2022.

RESULTS

These updated results showed a 2.9% prevalence of immune compromise in the population. From April 2020 through December 2022, the overall IR of COVID-19 was 115.7 per 1000 patient-years in the composite IC cohort and 77.8 per 1000 patient-years in the HIRD cohort. The composite IC cohort had a 15.4% hospitalization rate with an average cost of $42,719 for first COVID-19 hospitalization. Comparatively, the HIRD cohort had a 3.7% hospitalization rate with an average cost of $28,848 for first COVID-19 hospitalization. Compared to the general population, IC individuals had 4.3 to 23 times greater risk of hospitalization with first diagnosis of COVID-19. Between January and December 2022, hospitalizations associated with first COVID-19 diagnosis cost over $1 billion, with IC individuals (~ 3% of the population) generating $310 million (31%) of these costs.

CONCLUSION

While only 2.9% of the population, IC individuals had a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization and incurred higher healthcare costs across variants. They also disproportionately accounted for over 30% of total costs for first COVID-19 hospitalization in 2022, amounting to ~ $310 million. These data highlight the need for additional preventive measures to decrease the risk of developing severe COVID-19 outcomes in vulnerable IC populations.

Reported effectiveness of COVID-19 monovalent booster vaccines and hybrid immunity against mild and severe Omicron disease in adults: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis

Background

Waning of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) has been observed across settings and epidemiological contexts. We conducted a systematic review of COVID-19 VE studies and performed a meta-regression analysis to improve understanding of determinants of waning.

Methods

Systematic review of PubMed, medRxiv and the WHO-International Vaccine Access Center database summarizing VE studies on 31 December 2022. Studies were those presenting primary adult VE data from hybrid immunity or third/fourth mRNA COVID-19 monovalent vaccine doses [due to limited data with other vaccines] against Omicron, compared with unvaccinated individuals or individuals eligible for corresponding booster doses but who did not receive them. We used meta-regression models, adjusting for confounders, with weeks since vaccination as a restricted cubic spline, to estimate VE over time since vaccination.

Results

We identified 55 eligible studies reporting 269 VE estimates. Most estimates (180/269; 67 %) described effectiveness of third dose vaccination; with 48 (18 %) and 41 (15 %) describing hybrid immunity and fourth dose effectiveness, respectively, mostly (200; 74 %) derived from test-negative design studies. Most estimates (176/269; 65 %) reported VE compared with unvaccinated comparison groups. Estimated VE against mild outcomes declined following third dose vaccination from 62 % (95 % CI: 58 % - 66 %) after 4 weeks to 48 % (41 % - 55 %) after 20 weeks. Fourth dose VE against mild COVID-19 declined from 48 % (41 % - 56 %) after 4 weeks to 47 % (19 % - 65 %) after 20 weeks. VE for severe outcomes was higher and declined in the three-dose group from 90 % (87 % - 92 %) after 4 weeks to 70 % (65 - 74 %) after 20 weeks.

Conclusions

Time-since vaccination is an important determinant of booster dose VE, a finding which may support seasonal COVID-19 booster doses. Integration of VE and immunological parameters - and longer-term data including from other vaccine types - are needed to better-understand determinants of clinical protection.

Overview of COVID-19 Infection, Treatment, and Prevention in Children

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the novel respiratory virus-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-was declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization on 11 March 2020. Since then, substantial gains have been made in our understanding of COVID-19 epidemiology, disease presentation, and management. While children tend to have less severe disease courses compared to adults, children can still develop severe COVID-19 infections, particularly in those with underlying medical conditions such as obesity, chronic lung disease, or prematurity. In addition, children are at risk of severe complications of COVID-19 infection, such as multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) or long COVID. The case definitions of MIS-C and long COVID have continued to evolve with the increased understanding of these new entities; however, improved methods of diagnosis and determination of the optimal management are still needed. Furthermore, with the continued circulation of SARS-CoV-2 variants, there remains a need for clinicians to remain up-to-date on the latest treatment and prevention options. The purpose of this review is to provide an evidence-based review of what we have learned about COVID-19 in children since the start of the pandemic and how best to counsel children and their families on the best methods of prevention.

Pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron Periods of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic and Health Outcomes During Delivery Hospitalization

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis at delivery and adverse maternal health and pregnancy outcomes during pre-Delta, Delta, and Omicron variant predominance, with a focus on the time period of Omicron variant predominance.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional observational study with data from delivery hospitalizations in the Premier Healthcare Database from February 2020 to August 2023. The pre-Delta (February 2020-June 2021), Delta (July 2021-December 2021), and Omicron (January 2022-August 2023) periods of variant predominance were examined. Exposure to COVID-19 was identified by having a diagnostic code for COVID-19 during the delivery hospitalization. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were calculated to compare the risks of adverse maternal and pregnancy outcomes for women with and without COVID-19 diagnoses at the time of delivery for each variant period.

RESULTS

Among 2,990,973 women with delivery hospitalizations, 1.9% (n=56,618) had COVID-19 diagnoses noted at delivery admission discharge, including 26,053 during the Omicron period. Across all variant time periods, the prevalence of many adverse maternal and pregnancy outcomes during the delivery hospitalization was significantly higher for pregnant women with COVID-19 compared with pregnant women without COVID-19. In adjusted models, COVID-19 during the Omicron period was associated with significant increased risks for maternal sepsis (COVID-19: 0.4% vs no COVID-19: 0.1%; aPR 3.32, 95% CI, 2.70-4.08), acute respiratory distress syndrome (0.6% vs 0.1%; aPR 6.19, 95% CI, 5.26-7.29), shock (0.2% vs 0.1%; aPR 2.14, 95% CI, 1.62-2.84), renal failure (0.5% vs 0.2%; aPR 2.08, 95% CI, 1.73-2.49), intensive care unit admission (2.7% vs 1.7%; aPR 1.64, 95% CI, 1.52-1.77), mechanical ventilation (0.3% vs 0.1%; aPR 3.15, 95% CI, 2.52-3.93), in-hospital death (0.03% vs 0.01%; aPR 5.00, 95% CI, 2.30-10.90), stillbirth (0.7% vs 0.6%; aPR 1.17, 95% CI, 1.01-1.36), and preterm delivery (12.3% vs 9.6%; aPR 1.28, 95% CI, 1.24-1.33).

CONCLUSION

Despite the possibility of some level of immunity due to previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, vaccination, or testing differences, risks of adverse outcomes associated with COVID-19 diagnosis at delivery remained elevated during the Omicron variant time period.

COVID-19 Vaccines in Children

The COVID-19 pandemic has left an indelible mark on global health, affecting individuals of all ages across diverse communities. While the virus has predominantly been associated with severe outcomes in adults, its impact on children has garnered increasing attention. Today, three COVID-19 vaccines are available for use in the U.S. and recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). As of September 2023, ongoing genomic surveillance identified SARS-CoV-2 XBB sublineages as the most common circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants, constituting over 99% of sequenced SARS-CoV-2 specimens in the US. Recently, recommendations for COVID-19 vaccination were updated accordingly to the 2023-2024 Omicron-XBB.1.5-adapted monovalent COVID-19 vaccine to provide heightened protection against currently circulating SARS-CoV-2 XBB-sublineage variants. COVID-19 vaccines have proven to be safe, efficacious, and effective at protecting against COVID-19 and preventing severe illness in children and adolescents.

Factors associated with uptake of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in a large US health care system

BACKGROUND

Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were developed to provide protection against the original SARS-CoV-2 strain and Omicron BA.4/BA.5 variants, but uptake in the United States has been low. Sociodemographic disparities in COVID-19 vaccine uptake have been documented, but it is unclear if similar disparities persist among individuals who previously completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) including youth aged 5-17 years and adults aged ≥18 years who were KPSC members and had completed a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. Individuals were followed from index date (date of eligibility for bivalent vaccine) to 03/31/2023 to ascertain receipt of any dose of bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine or until disenrollment from KPSC or death. Multivariable robust Poisson regression was conducted to assess the adjusted relative risk and 95 % confidence intervals of factors associated with receipt of bivalent vaccine.

RESULTS

The final cohorts included 305,339 youth and 2,534,619 adults, of whom 19.5 % and 30.7 %, respectively, had received bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. Factors associated with being more likely to receive bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included older age, Asian race, more prior year outpatient and virtual visits, Charlson score ≥1, and immunocompromised status. Factors associated with being less likely to receive a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine included age 12-17 vs 5-11 years, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black race/ethnicity, ≥1 prior year inpatient or emergency department visits, prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adults only), Medicaid insurance, and higher neighborhood deprivation index.

CONCLUSION

Even among youth and adults who had previously received a primary series of monovalent COVID-19 vaccine, sociodemographic and clinical disparities were observed in receipt of bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. These findings are critical to inform equitable strategies for the implementation of the updated monovalent COVID-19 vaccine targeting the Omicron XBB strain.

Comparative Effectiveness of Bivalent (Original/Omicron BA.4/BA.5) COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults

The emergence of Omicron variants coincided with declining vaccine-induced protection against SARS-CoV-2. Two bivalent mRNA vaccines, mRNA-1273.222 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 Bivalent (Pfizer-BioNTech), were developed to provide greater protection against the predominate circulating variants by including mRNA that encodes both the ancestral (original) strain and BA.4/BA.5. We estimated their relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) in preventing COVID-19-related outcomes in the US using a nationwide dataset linking primary care electronic health records and pharmacy/medical claims data. The study population (aged ≥18 years) received either vaccine between 31 August 2022 and 28 February 2023. We used propensity score weighting to adjust for baseline differences between groups. We estimated the rVE against COVID-19-related hospitalizations (primary outcome) and outpatient visits (secondary) for 1,034,538 mRNA-1273.222 and 1,670,666 BNT162b2 Bivalent vaccine recipients, with an adjusted rVE of 9.8% (95% confidence interval: 2.6-16.4%) and 5.1% (95% CI: 3.2-6.9%), respectively, for mRNA-1273.222 versus BNT162b2 Bivalent. The incremental relative effectiveness was greater among adults ≥ 65; the rVE against COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient visits in these patients was 13.5% (95% CI: 5.5-20.8%) and 10.7% (8.2-13.1%), respectively. Overall, we found greater effectiveness of mRNA-1273.222 compared with the BNT162b2 Bivalent vaccine in preventing COVID-19-related hospitalizations and outpatient visits, with increased benefits in older adults.

SARS-CoV-2 infection and effects of age, sex, comorbidity, and vaccination among older individuals: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND

We investigated the contribution of age, coexisting medical conditions, sex, and vaccination to incidence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and of severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 in older adults since pandemic onset.

METHODS

A national retrospective cohort study was conducted in the population of Qatar aged ≥50 years between February 5, 2020 and June 15, 2023. Adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) for infection and for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes were estimated through Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Cumulative incidence was 25.01% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.86-25.15%) for infection and 1.59% (95% CI: 1.55-1.64%) for severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 after a follow-up duration of 40.9 months. Risk of infection varied minimally by age and sex but increased significantly with coexisting conditions. Risk of infection was reduced with primary-series vaccination (AHR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.90-0.93) and further with first booster vaccination (AHR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.74-0.77). Risk of severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 increased exponentially with age and linearly with coexisting conditions. AHRs for severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19 were 0.86 (95% CI: 0.7-0.97) for one dose, 0.15 (95% CI: 0.13-0.17) for primary-series vaccination, and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08-0.14) for first booster vaccination. Sensitivity analysis restricted to only Qataris yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

Incidence of severe COVID-19 in older adults followed a dynamic pattern shaped by infection incidence, variant severity, and population immunity. Age, sex, and coexisting conditions were strong determinants of infection severity. Vaccine protection against severe outcomes showed a dose-response relationship, highlighting the importance of booster vaccination for older adults.

Non-Pharmacological Strategies and Interventions for Effective COVID-19 Control: A Narrative Review

The COVID-19 pandemic had a devastating impact on the world, causing widespread illness and death. Focusing on prevention strategies to limit the spread of the disease remains essential. Despite the advent of vaccines, maintaining a vigilant approach to prevention remains paramount. We reviewed effective strategies to prevent COVID-19 transmission, including various prevention measures and interventions and both established practices and unresolved issues that have been addressed in meta-analyses, literature reviews, or in the health care context. Standard precautions are the cornerstone of infection control, with hand hygiene and mask use as key components. The use of surgical masks is recommended to prevent droplet transmission, while eye protection is recommended in combination with masks. In terms of room occupancy, ventilation is critical in reducing the risk of transmission in poorly ventilated environments. Chemical disinfection of indoor air with Triethylene glycol-based products can provide safe additional protection. Since viral RNA detection on surfaces does not necessarily indicate infectivity, the risk of transmission by surface contact remains low if surfaces are properly maintained and hand hygiene is practiced regularly. Thus, prevention of SARS-CoV-2 transmission requires a multifaceted approach, including reducing particle emissions from infected persons by wearing masks, eliminating aerosols by ventilation and air treatment, ensuring physical separation, and protecting exposed persons with masks and eye protection.

COVID-19-Associated Hospitalizations Among U.S. Adults Aged ≥65 Years - COVID-NET, 13 States, January-August 2023

Adults aged ≥65 years remain at elevated risk for severe COVID-19 disease and have higher COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates compared with those in younger age groups. Data from the COVID-19-Associated Hospitalization Surveillance Network (COVID-NET) were analyzed to estimate COVID-19-associated hospitalization rates during January-August 2023 and identify demographic and clinical characteristics of hospitalized patients aged ≥65 years during January-June 2023. Among adults aged ≥65 years, hospitalization rates more than doubled, from 6.8 per 100,000 during the week ending July 15 to 16.4 per 100,000 during the week ending August 26, 2023. Across all age groups, adults aged ≥65 years accounted for 62.9% (95% CI = 60.1%-65.7%) of COVID-19-associated hospitalizations, 61.3% (95% CI = 54.7%-67.6%) of intensive care unit admissions, and 87.9% (95% CI = 80.5%-93.2%) of in-hospital deaths associated with COVID-19 hospitalizations. Most hospitalized adults aged ≥65 years (90.3%; 95% CI = 87.2%-92.8%) had multiple underlying conditions, and fewer than one quarter (23.5%; 95% CI = 19.5%-27.7%) had received the recommended COVID-19 bivalent vaccine. Because adults aged ≥65 years remain at increased risk for COVID-19-associated hospitalization and severe outcomes, guidance for this age group should continue to focus on measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, encourage vaccination, and promote early treatment for persons who receive a positive SARS-CoV-2 test result to reduce their risk for severe COVID-19-associated outcomes.

Disparities in COVID-19 Vaccination Status Among Long-Term Care Facility Residents - United States, October 31, 2022-May 7, 2023

Residents of long-term care (LTC) facilities constitute a population that is vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection; COVID-19 vaccination effectively reduces severe COVID-19 in these settings. To examine demographic differences in primary and up-to-date vaccination status against COVID-19 among LTC facility residents, a descriptive analysis of COVID-19 vaccination data from the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) COVID-19 vaccination data from October 31, 2022, to May 7, 2023, were analyzed. Being up to date was defined as having received a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose or having completed a primary vaccination series <2 months earlier. Geographic disparities in vaccination coverage were identified, with substantially lower prevalences of up-to-date status among LTC facility residents in the South (Region 6) (37.7%) and Southeast (Region 4) (36.5%) than among those in the Pacific Northwest (Region 10) (53.3%) and Mountain West (Region 8) (59.6%) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services regions. Up-to-date status was lowest among Black or African American (39.9%) and multiracial (42.2%) LTC facility residents. Strategies to increase up-to-date COVID-19 vaccination among LTC facility residents could include and address these geographic and racial differences.

Acute COVID-19 in unvaccinated children without a history of previous infection during the delta and omicron periods

BACKGROUND

The Omicron variant has been the predominant severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variant circulating in Korea since January 2022. This study evaluated and compared the clinical characteristics of children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between the Delta and Omicron periods.

METHODS

The medical records of children aged < 12 years diagnosed with acute COVID-19 (<2 weeks of symptom onset) at seven university-affiliated hospitals were retrospectively reviewed. Children with a previous history of COVID-19 or vaccination were excluded. The clinical characteristics of the included children during the Delta (1 August 2021 to 15 January 2022) and Omicron (16 January to 30 June 2022) periods were compared.

RESULTS

Among the 515 children included in the study, 36 (7.0%) and 479 (93.0%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the Delta and Omicron periods, respectively. A total of 142 (27.6%) were hospitalized, and the hospitalization rate was higher during the Delta period than the Omicron period (91.7% vs. 22.8%, p < 0.001). The incidence of fever (p = 0.009), vomiting (p = 0.031), and seizures (p = 0.007) was higher during the Omicron period, whereas the incidence of rhinorrhea (p = 0.027) was higher during the Delta period. Clinical severity and outcomes were comparable between the two periods. During the Omicron period, 6.4% of the hospitalized children received oxygen therapy and 1.8% received intensive care.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of fever and seizures was higher during the Omicron period in pediatric patients without a history of vaccination or previous COVID-19. However, the clinical severity was similar during both periods.

Modelling the Interplay between Responsive Individual Vaccination Decisions and the Spread of SARS-CoV-2

The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines remains low despite their high effectiveness. Epidemic models that represent decision-making psychology can provide insight into the potential impact of vaccine promotion interventions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We coupled a network-based mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in Georgia, USA with a social-psychological vaccination decision-making model in which vaccine side effects, post-vaccination infections, and other unidentified community-level factors could "nudge" individuals towards vaccine resistance while hospitalization spikes could nudge them towards willingness. Combining an increased probability of hospitalization-prompted resistant-to-willing switches with a decreased probability of willing-to-resistant switches prompted by unidentified community-level factors increased vaccine uptake and decreased SARS-CoV-2 incidence by as much as 30.7% and 24.0%, respectively. The latter probability had a greater impact than the former. This illustrates the disease prevention potential of vaccine promotion interventions that address community-level factors influencing decision-making and anticipate the case curve instead of reacting to it.