scholarly journals Effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccines for Preventing Covid-19 Hospitalizations in the United States

Author(s):  
Mark W. Tenforde ◽  
Manish M. Patel ◽  
Adit A. Ginde ◽  
David J. Douin ◽  
H. Keipp Talbot ◽  
...  

Background: As SARS-CoV-2 vaccination coverage increases in the United States (US), there is a need to understand the real-world effectiveness against severe Covid-19 and among people at increased risk for poor outcomes. Methods: In a multicenter case-control analysis of US adults hospitalized March 11 through May 5, 2021, we evaluated vaccine effectiveness to prevent Covid-19 hospitalizations by comparing odds of prior vaccination with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) between cases hospitalized with Covid-19 and hospital-based controls who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Results: Among 1210 participants, median age was 58 years, 22.8% were Black, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 20.6% had immunosuppression. SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 was most common variant (59.7% of sequenced viruses). Full vaccination (receipt of two vaccine doses at least 14 days before illness onset) had been received by 45/590 (7.6%) cases and 215/620 (34.7%) controls. Overall vaccine effectiveness was 86.9% (95% CI: 80.4 to 91.2%). Vaccine effectiveness was similar for Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, and highest in adults aged 18-49 years (97.3%; 95% CI: 78.9 to 99.7%). Among 45 patients with vaccine-breakthrough Covid hospitalizations, 44 (97.8%) were at least 50 years old and 20 (44.4%) had immunosuppression. Vaccine effectiveness was lower among patients with immunosuppression (59.2%; 95% CI: 11.9 to 81.1%) than without immunosuppression (91.3%; 95% CI: 85.5 to 94.7%). Conclusion: During March through May 2021, SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines were highly effective for preventing Covid-19 hospitalizations among US adults. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was beneficial for patients with immunosuppression, but effectiveness was lower in the immunosuppressed population.

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 447-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Suzanne Lea ◽  
Joseph A. Scotto ◽  
Patricia A. Buffler ◽  
Judith Fine ◽  
Raymond L. Barnhill ◽  
...  

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel C. Beachler ◽  
Cynthia de Luise ◽  
Aziza Jamal-Allial ◽  
Ruihua Yin ◽  
Devon H. Taylor ◽  
...  

Abstract Background There is limited real-world safety information on palbociclib for treatment of advanced stage HR+/HER2- breast cancer. Methods We conducted a cohort study of breast cancer patients initiating palbociclib and fulvestrant from February 2015 to September 2017 using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database (HIRD), a longitudinal claims database of commercial health plan members in the United States. The historical comparator cohort comprised patients initiating fulvestrant monotherapy from January 2011 to January 2015. Propensity score matching and Cox regression were used to estimate hazard ratios for various safety events. For acute liver injury (ALI), additional analyses and medical record validation were conducted. Results There were 2445 patients who initiated palbociclib including 566 new users of palbociclib-fulvestrant, and 2316 historical new users of fulvestrant monotherapy. Compared to these historical new users of fulvestrant monotherapy, new users of palbociclib-fulvestrant had a greater than 2-fold elevated risk for neutropenia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, stomatitis and mucositis, and ALI. Incidence of anemia and QT prolongation were more weakly associated, and incidences of serious infections and pulmonary embolism were similar between groups after propensity score matching. After adjustment for additional ALI risk factors, the elevated risk of ALI in new users of palbociclib-fulvestrant persisted (e.g. primary ALI algorithm hazard ratio (HR) = 3.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1–8.4). Conclusions This real-world study found increased risks of several adverse events identified in clinical trials, including neutropenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia, but no increased risk of serious infections or pulmonary embolism when comparing new users of palbociclib-fulvestrant to fulvestrant monotherapy. We observed an increased risk of ALI, extending clinical trial findings of significant imbalances in grade 3/4 elevations of alanine aminotransferase (ALT).


Author(s):  
Suchitra Rao ◽  
Angela Moss ◽  
Molly M Lamb ◽  
Edwin J Asturias

Abstract A test-negative case-control analysis of 1478 children aged 6 months to 8 years of age seeking care at an emergency/urgent care setting with influenza like illness during the 2016-17 and 2018-19 (H3N2 predominant) influenza seasons demonstrated that influenza vaccine effectiveness did not vary significantly by the prior seasons’ vaccination status. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02979626.


2009 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
X Mariette ◽  
F Tubach ◽  
H Bagheri ◽  
M Bardet ◽  
J M Berthelot ◽  
...  

Objective:To describe cases of lymphoma associated with anti-TNF therapy, identify risk factors, estimate the incidence and compare the risks for different anti-TNF agents.Methods:A national prospective registry was designed (Research Axed on Tolerance of bIOtherapies; RATIO) to collect all cases of lymphoma in French patients receiving anti-TNF therapy from 2004 to 2006, whatever the indication. A case–control analysis was conducted including two controls treated with anti-TNF per case and an incidence study of lymphoma with the French population was used as the reference.Results:38 cases of lymphoma, 31 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) (26 B cell and five T cell), five Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) and two Hodgkin’s-like lymphoma were collected. Epstein–Barr virus was detected in both of two Hodgkin’s-like lymphoma, three of five HL and one NHL. Patients receiving adalimumab or infliximab had a higher risk than those treated with etanercept: standardised incidence ratio (SIR) 4.1 (2.3–7.1) and 3.6 (2.3–5.6) versus 0.9 (0.4–1.8). The exposure to adalimumab or infliximab versus etanercept was an independent risk factor for lymphoma in the case–control study: odds ratio 4.7 (1.3–17.7) and 4.1 (1.4–12.5), respectively. The sex and age-adjusted incidence rate of lymphoma was 42.1 per 100 000 patient-years. The SIR was 2.4 (95% CI 1.7 to 3.2).Conclusion:The two to threefold increased risk of lymphoma in patients receiving anti-TNF therapy is similar to that expected for such patients with severe inflammatory diseases. Some lymphomas associated with immunosuppression may occur, and the risk of lymphoma is higher with monoclonal-antibody therapy than with soluble-receptor therapy.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2129-2129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana E Rollison ◽  
Rami Komrokji ◽  
Ji-Hyun Lee ◽  
Shalaka S Hampras ◽  
William Fulp ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The incidence of subsequent primary malignancies (SPM) associated with lenalidomide treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) outside the context of maintenance therapy post-melphalan is unknown. Three clinical trials reported modest, statistically significant increased risks of SPM associated with lenalidomide treatment in MM patients (Palumbo et al, N Engl J Med, 2012; Attal et al, N Engl J Med, 2012; McCarthy et al, N Engl J Med, 2012). Although these randomized trials are well controlled for potential confounders, they represent a unique population of patients and a specific juxtaposition of lenalidomide use with melphalan; as such, their results are not necessarily generalizable to the broader MM patient population. To investigate whether lenalidomide is associated with an increased risk of SPM in MM patients within a clinical setting in the United States, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,653 MM patients treated with or without lenalidomide at the Moffitt Cancer Center (“MCC”) in Tampa, FL. Methods: Patients treated for MM at MCC from 2004-2012 were identified through Moffitt's enterprise wide data warehouse combining clinical information from several sources, including the Cancer Registry, electronic medical records and disease-specific databases. Among 1,653 MM patients, ages 18 and older, 51 cases of SPM were verified by two hematologists for confirmation of MM and SPM diagnoses. Incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for SPM were estimated using a Poisson distribution. Cox proportional hazards ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were calculated to estimate the age-adjusted association between lenalidomide treatment and SPM in the overall cohort, and stratified by ISS. Additional details on lenalidomide treatment and potential confounders were obtained through medical chart abstraction for SPM cases and a subset of MM patients from the baseline cohort who had not developed SPM; these controls were matched to cases 2:1 on age at MM diagnosis (+/- 5 years), gender, follow-up time (+/- 6 months), and date of diagnosis (+/- 1 year). Associations between lenalidomide and SPM in the nested case-control analysis were estimated using odds ratios (OR) and 95% CIs adjusted for age at MM diagnosis, bone marrow transplantation, creatinine levels and personal history of cancer. Results: Overall, 1,653 MM patients were followed for an average of 40 months, including patients treated with (n=846) or without (n=807) lenalidomide. Incident SPMs were observed for 15 patients treated with lenalidomide (0.55 per 100 person-years) and 36 patients treated without lenalidomide (1.27 per 100 person-years), corresponding to an HR of 0.44 (95% CI=0.24-0.80) (Figure 1). Of the 51 SPMs observed, 37 were solid tumors comprising 14 different types, including 9 and 28 in the lenalidomide and no lenalidomide groups, respectively (HR=0.55, 95% CI=0.15-0.69). Of the 14 hematological SPMs observed, 8 were in the lenalidomide group versus 6 in the no lenalidomide group (HR=0.90, 95%CI = 0.31-2.63). Similar associations between lenalidomide and SPM were observed for MM patients with ISS = 1 (HR=0.26, 95% CI=0.06-1.21) and for MM patients with ISS = 2 or 3 (HR=0.20, 95% CI=0.02-1.62). Of the 51 SPM cases and 102 matched controls included in the nested case-control analysis, 33.3% and 74.5% were treated with lenalidomide, respectively (adjusted OR=0.03, 95% CI=0.002-0.34). Similar associations were observed for lenalidomide given as part of first line treatment versus subsequent treatment, and for lenalidomide given alone or in combination with other drugs. (8 cases and 46 controls received melphalan in addition to lenalidomide.) There was no association between lenalidomide and SPM among those treated for >9.1 months (OR=0.05, 95% CI=0.01-0.43), the median treatment duration among controls. Conclusion: Lenalidomide treatment was not associated with an increased risk of SPM among a large cohort of MM patients. It is important to note that in this clinical setting (in 2004-2012) the use of lenalidomide in combination with melphalan and in the maintenance setting was a rare event. This may be a critical factor in the contrast between the results of this study and in the increase in SPMs reported in randomized clinical trials. Figure 1: Incidence of SPM among patients treated for MM with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Figure 1:. Incidence of SPM among patients treated for MM with or without lenalidomide, Moffitt Cancer Center, 2004-2012 Disclosures Rollison: Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide given as treatment for non-del(5q) MDS and/or multiple myeloma . Komrokji:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lee:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Hampras:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Fulp:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding. Fisher:Celgene, Inc: Research Funding. Baz:Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Olesnyckyj:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Kenvin:Celgene: Employment, stock options Other. Knight:Celgene, Inc: Employment, stock options Other. Dalton:Celgene, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shain:L&M Healthcare/Onyx/Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Envision/Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (10) ◽  
pp. 1103-1114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Alfelali ◽  
Osamah Barasheed ◽  
Parvaiz Koul ◽  
Al-Mamoon Badahdah ◽  
Hamid Bokhary ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document