Influenza vaccination uptake among Canadian adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of the Canadian Longitudinal study on Aging (CLSA)

IntroductionUnderstanding how influenza vaccine uptake changed during the 2020/2021 influenza season compared to previous pre-pandemic seasons is a key priority, as is identifying the relationship between prior influenza vaccination and COVID-19 vaccine willingness.MethodsWe analyzed data from a large, nationally representative cohort of Canadian residents aged 50 and older to assess influenza vaccination status three times between 2015 and 2020. We investigated: 1) changes in self-reported influenza vaccine uptake, 2) predictors of influenza vaccine uptake in 2020/2021, and 3) the association between influenza vaccination history and self-reported COVID-19 vaccine willingness using logistic regression models.ResultsAmong 23,385 participants analyzed for aims 1–2, influenza vaccination increased over time: 14,114 (60.4%) in 2015–2018, 15,692 (67.1%) in 2019/2020, and 19,186 (82.0%; combining those already vaccinated and those planning to get a vaccine) in 2020/2021. After controlling for socio-demographics, history of influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with influenza vaccination in 2020/2021 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 147.9 [95% CI: 120.9–180.9]); this association remained after accounting for multiple health and pandemic-related factors (aOR 140.3 [95% CI: 114.5–171.8]). To a lesser degree, those more concerned about COVID-19 were also more likely to report influenza vaccination in fall 2020, whereas those reporting a very negative impact of the pandemic were less likely to get vaccinated. Among 23,819 participants with information on COVID-19 vaccine willingness during the last quarter of 2020 (aim 3), prior influenza vaccination was most strongly associated with willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine (aOR 15.1 [95% CI: 13.5–16.8] for those who had received influenza vaccine at all previous timepoints versus none).ConclusionsOur analysis highlights the importance of previous vaccination in driving vaccination uptake and willingness. Efforts to increase vaccination coverage for influenza and COVID-19 should target individuals who do not routinely engage with immunization services regardless of demographic factors.     

Receipt of COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines in California (USA) during the 2021–2022 influenza season

BackgroundDespite lower circulation of influenza virus throughout 2020–2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic, seasonal influenza vaccination has remained a primary tool to reduce influenza-associated illness and death. The relationship between the decision to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and/or an influenza vaccine is not well understood.MethodsWe assessed predictors of receipt of 2021–2022 influenza vaccine in a secondary analysis of data from a case-control study enrolling individuals who received SARS-CoV-2 testing. We used mixed effects logistic regression to estimate factors associated with receipt of seasonal influenza vaccine. We also constructed multinomial adjusted marginal probability models of being vaccinated for COVID-19 only, seasonal influenza only, or both as compared with receipt of neither vaccination.ResultsAmong 1261 eligible participants recruited between 22 October 2021–22 June 2022, 43% (545) were vaccinated with both seasonal influenza vaccine and >1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine, 34% (426) received >1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine only, 4% (49) received seasonal influenza vaccine only, and 19% (241) received neither vaccine. Receipt of >1 COVID-19 vaccine dose was associated with seasonal influenza vaccination (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.15–6.43); this association was stronger among participants receiving >1 COVID-19 booster dose (aOR = 16.50 [10.10–26.97]). Compared with participants testing negative for SARS- CoV-2 infection, participants testing positive had lower odds of receipt of 2021-2022 seasonal influenza vaccine (aOR = 0.64 [0.50–0.82]).ConclusionsRecipients of a COVID-19 vaccine were more likely to receive seasonal influenza vaccine during the 2021–2022 season. Factors associated with individuals’ likelihood of receiving COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines will be important to account for in future studies of vaccine effectiveness against both conditions. Participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in our sample were less likely to have received seasonal influenza vaccine, suggesting an opportunity to offer influenza vaccination before or after a COVID-19 diagnosis.     

Intention of nurses to accept coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination and change of intention to accept seasonal influenza vaccination during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey

BackgroundMaintaining health of healthcare workers with vaccination is a major component of pandemic preparedness and acceptance of vaccinations is essential to its success. This study aimed to examine impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on change of influenza vaccination acceptance and identify factors associated with acceptance of potential COVID-19 vaccination.MethodA cross-sectional self-administered anonymous questionnaire survey was conducted among nurses in Hong Kong, China during 26 February and 31 March 2020. Their previous acceptance of influenza vaccination and intentions to accept influenza and COVID-19 vaccination were collected. Their relationship with work-related and other factors were examined using multiple multinomial logistic regressions.ResultsResponses from 806 participants were retrieved. More nurses changed from vaccination refusal to hesitancy or acceptance than those changed from acceptance to vaccination hesitancy or refusal (15.5% vs 6.8% among all participants, P < 0.001). 40.0% participants intended to accept COVID-19 vaccination, and those in private sector (OR: 1.67, 95%CI: 1.11–2.51), with chronic conditions (OR: 1.83, 95%CI: 1.22–2.77), encountering with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients (OR: 1.63, 95%CI: 1.14–2.33), accepted influenza vaccination in 2019 (OR: 2.03, 95%CI: 1.47–2.81) had higher intentions to accept it. Reasons for refusal and hesitation for COVID-19 vaccination included “suspicion on efficacy, effectiveness and safety”, “believing it unnecessary”, and “no time to take it”.ConclusionWith a low level of COVID-19 acceptance intentions and high proportion of hesitation in both influenza and COVID-19 vaccination, evidence-based planning are needed to improve the uptake of both vaccinations in advance of their implementation. Future studies are needed to explore reasons of change of influenza vaccination acceptance, look for actual behaviour patterns of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and examine effectiveness of promotion strategies.     

Effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine in adult Japanese workers, 2017–2020

BackgroundPrevious studies have not estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against influenza in the working-age Japanese population. In this study, we determined VE in adult workers at a Japanese company.MethodsWe estimated VE based on self-reported data regarding influenza infections and vaccinations in employees of an auto parts manufacturing company during three influenza seasons from 2017 to 2020. VE was estimated as 100% × [1 ? odds ratio (the ratio of the odds of being diagnosed with influenza among enrollees with and without influenza vaccination)]. Odds ratios were estimated using logistic regression.ResultsWe included 11,347 worker records [3,592 (2017–18), 3,663 (2018–19), and 4,092 (2019–20)] from employees who had worked with the company throughout each influenza season. The adjusted VE was moderate and significant in the 2019–20 season (VE = 53%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 30% to 69%) but low or negative and non-significant during the 2017–18 (VE = 28%; 95% CI = -5% to 50%) and 2018–19 (VE = -11%; 95% CI =  - 42% to 14%) seasons.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccines were moderately effective during the 2019–20 season but showed low or negative effectiveness during the 2017–18 and 2018–19 seasons. Self-reports from worker records can successfully help determine VE against influenza.     

Factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination during June–October 2021: A multi-site prospective study

IntroductionVaccine hesitancy presents a challenge to COVID-19 control efforts. To identify beliefs associated with delayed vaccine uptake, we developed and implemented a vaccine hesitancy survey for the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership.MethodsIn June 2021, we assessed attitudes and beliefs associated with COVID-19 vaccination using an online survey. Self-reported vaccination data were requested daily through October 2021. We compared responses between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents using absolute standardized mean differences (ASMD). We assessed validity and reliability using exploratory factor analysis and identified latent factors associated with a subset of survey items. Cox proportional hazards models and mediation analyses assessed predictors of subsequent vaccination among those initially unvaccinated.ResultsIn June 2021, 29,522 vaccinated and 1,272 unvaccinated participants completed surveys. Among those unvaccinated in June 2021, 559 (43.9 %) became vaccinated by October 31, 2021. In June, unvaccinated participants were less likely to feel “very concerned” about getting COVID-19 than vaccinated participants (10.6 % vs. 43.3 %, ASMD 0.792). Among those initially unvaccinated, greater intent to become vaccinated was associated with getting vaccinated and shorter time to vaccination. However, even among participants who reported no intention to become vaccinated, 28.5 % reported vaccination before study end. Two latent factors predicted subsequent vaccination—being ‘more receptive’ was derived from motivation to protect one’s own or others’ health and resume usual activities; being ‘less receptive’ was derived from concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. In a Cox model, both factors were partially mediated by vaccination intention.ConclusionThis study characterizes vaccine hesitant individuals and identifies predictors of eventual COVID-19 vaccination through October 31, 2021. Even individuals with no intention to be vaccinated can shift to vaccine uptake. Our data suggest factors of perceived severity of COVID-19 disease, vaccine safety, and trust in the vaccine development process are predictive of vaccination and may be important opportunities for ongoing interventions.     

Factors associated with US caregivers’ uptake of pediatric COVID-19 vaccine by race and ethnicity

ObjectivesTo assess differences in willingness to vaccinate children against COVID-19, and factors that may be associated with increased acceptance, among US caregivers of various racial and ethnic identities who presented with their child to the Emergency Department (ED) after emergency use authorization of vaccines for children ages 5–11.Study designA multicenter, cross-sectional survey of caregivers presenting to 11 pediatric EDs in the United States in November-December 2021. Caregivers were asked about their identified race and ethnicity and if they planned to vaccinate their child. We collected demographic data and inquired about caregiver concerns related to COVID-19. We compared responses by race/ethnicity. Multivariable logistic regression models served to determine factors that were independently associated with increased vaccine acceptance overall and among racial/ethnic groups.ResultsAmong 1916 caregivers responding, 54.67% planned to vaccinate their child against COVID-19. Large differences in acceptance were noted by race/ethnicity, with highest acceptance among Asian caregivers (61.1%) and those who did not specify a listed racial identity (61.1%); caregivers identifying as Black (44.7%) or Multi-racial (44.4%) had lower acceptance rates. Factors associated with intent to vaccinate differed by racial/ethnic group, and included caregiver COVID-19 vaccine receipt (all groups), caregiver concerns about COVID-19 (White caregivers), and having a trusted primary provider (Black caregivers).ConclusionsCaregiver intent to vaccinate children against COVID-19 varied by race/ethnicity, but race/ethnicity did not independently account for these differences. Caregiver COVID-19 vaccination status, concerns about COVID-19, and presence of a trusted primary provider are important in vaccination decisions.     

Evaluation of mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination,Utah 2021

IntroductionIn order to evaluate trends in death after COVID-19 vaccination we analyzed the timing of death relative to vaccination date and the causes of death in vaccinated Utahns in 2021.MethodsWe matched people in the Utah immunization registry with documented COVID-19 vaccinations between December 18, 2020 and December 31, 2021 to Utah’s 2021 vital statistics death records. Vaccinated people were categorized as having one, two, or ≥ three COVID-19 vaccine doses in a time-updated metric. We examined crude mortality rates by dosing groups in two-week intervals for all deaths, and by COVID-19 versus non-COVID-19 causes, within the 44 weeks following receipt of the most recent vaccine.ResultsWe identified 2,072,908 individuals who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine of whom 10,997 died in 2021. Only 17.5 % of the total vaccinated population was age 65+, while 80.9 % of those who died were over 65. In the four weeks following the first or second vaccination, all-cause mortality was low and then stabilized for the remainder of the evaluation period at a bi-weekly average of 33.0 and 39.0 deaths/100,000 people for one and two doses, respectively. Typical seasonal variation in death was observed among those with two doses. Small sample size precluded analysis of those with ≥ three doses, but trends were similar.ConclusionsMortality rates in the 44 weeks following the COVID-19 vaccination did not show trends suggesting an increase in mortality related to COVID-19 vaccination, reinforcing the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. This represents an accessible approach for local evaluation.     

COVID-19 vaccination coverage in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease – A cross-sectional study in Hungary

IntroductionCoronavirus infection is a particular risk for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), because they are much more likely to become severely ill due to oxygen supply problems. Primary prevention, including COVID-19 vaccination is of paramount importance in this disease group. The aim of our study was to assess COVID-19 vaccination coverage in COPD patients during the first vaccination campaign of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsA cross-sectional observational study (CHANCE) has been conducted in COPD patients in the eastern, western and central regions of Hungary from 15th November 2021. The anthropometric, respiratory function test results and vaccination status of 1,511 randomly selected patients were recorded who were aged 35 years and older.ResultsThe median age was 67 (61–72) years, for men: 67 (62–73) and for women: 66 (60–72) years, with 47.98 % men and 52.02 % women in our sample. The prevalence of vaccination coverage for the first COVID-19 vaccine dose was 88.62 %, whereas 86.57 % of the patients received the second vaccine dose. When unvaccinated (n = 172) and double vaccinated (n = 1308) patients were compared, the difference was significant both in quality of life (CAT: 17 (12–23) vs 14 (10–19); p < 0.001) and severity of dyspnea (mMRC: 2 (2–2) vs 2 (1–2); p = 0.048). The COVID-19 infection rate between double vaccinated and unvaccinated patients was 1.61 % vs 22.67 %; p < 0.001 six months after vaccination. The difference between unvaccinated and vaccinated patients was significant (8.14 % vs 0.08 %; p < 0.001) among those with acute COVID-19 infection hospitalized. In terms of post-COVID symptoms, single or double vaccinated patients had significantly fewer outpatient hospital admissions than unvaccinated patients (7.56 vs 0 %; p < 0.001).ConclusionThe COVID-19 vaccination coverage was satisfactory in our sample. The uptake of COVID-19 vaccines by patients with COPD is of utmost importance because they are much more likely to develop severe complications.     

Acute reactions after a homologous primary COVID-19 vaccination series: Analysis of Taiwan V-Watch data

IntroductionThe ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ChAd), mRNA-1273 (m1273), MVC-COV1901 (MVC), and BNT162b2 (BNT) COVID-19 vaccines received authorization for emergency use in Taiwan beginning in February 2021. We investigated acute reactions to homologous primary COVID-19 vaccination series in adults aged ≥ 18 years.MethodsIn this prospective observational study based on smartphone data (Taiwan V-Watch), we calculated the frequencies of self-reported local and systemic acute reactions within 7 days of a COVID-19 vaccination, and the health effects up to 3 weeks after each dose. Those who reported adverse reactions after both doses were assessed by the McNemar test.ResultsDuring 22 March 2021–13 December 2021, 77,468 adults were enrolled; 59.0 % were female and 77.8 % were aged 18–49 years. For both doses of all four vaccines, the local and systemic reactions were minor in severity and highest on days 1 and 2 after vaccination, and declined markedly until day 7. For 65,367 participants who provided data after the first and second doses, systemic reactions were more frequent after dose 2 of the BNT and m1273 vaccines (McNemar tests: both p < 0.001), while local reactions were more frequent after dose 2 of the m1273 and MVC vaccines (both p < 0.001), compared with dose 1 of the homologous vaccine. Among the participants aged 18–49 years, the percentage who missed work on the day after vaccination was slightly higher among women (9.3 %) than among men (7.0 %).ConclusionsAcute reactogenicity and impact of work absenteeism for the four COVID vaccines in the V-Watch survey were mild and of short duration.     

Influenza vaccination coverage among persons seeking outpatient medical care for acute respiratory illness in five states in the United States, 2011–2012 through 2018–2019

BackgroundIn the United States (U.S.), annual influenza vaccination has been recommended for all persons aged ≥6 months with the Healthy People 2020 coverage target of 70%. However, vaccination coverage has remained around 42–49% during the past eight influenza seasons. We sought to quantify influenza vaccination coverage and factors associated with vaccination in persons seeking outpatient medical care for an acute respiratory illness (ARI).MethodsWe enrolled outpatients aged ≥6 months with ARI from >50 U.S. clinics from 2011 to 2012 through 2018–2019 influenza seasons and tested for influenza with molecular assays. Vaccination status was based on documented receipt of the current season’s influenza vaccine. We estimated vaccination coverage among influenza-negative study participants by study site, age, and season, and compared to state-level influenza coverage estimates in the general population based on annual immunization surveys. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine factors independently associated with receipt of influenza vaccines.ResultsWe enrolled 45,424 study participants with ARI who tested negative for influenza during the study period. Annual vaccination coverage among influenza-negative ARI patients and the general population in the participating states averaged 55% (range: 47–62%), and 52% (range: 46–54%), respectively. Among enrollees, coverage was highest among adults aged ≥65 years (82%; range, 80–85%) and lowest among adolescents aged 13–17 years (38%; range, 35–41%). Factors significantly associated with non-vaccination included non-White race, no college degree, exposure to cigarette smoke, absence of high-risk conditions, and not receiving prior season influenza vaccine.ConclusionsInfluenza vaccination coverage over eight seasons among outpatients with non-influenza respiratory illness was slightly higher than coverage in the general population but 15% lower than national targets. Increased efforts to promote vaccination especially in groups with lower coverage are warranted to attain optimal health benefits of influenza vaccine.     

Frequency and temporal evolution of COVID-19 vaccination rate among oncological patients undergoing 18F-FDG-PET

PurposeTo evaluate the temporal evolution of vaccination against COVID-19 in a Swiss oncological cohort.MethodsHistory of complete vaccination (i.e. at least two vaccine doses) against COVID-19 of patients undergoing oncological 18F-FDG PET/CT between February and September 2021 (n = 2613) was taken. Vaccination rate was compared with age-matched national data from the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. Subgroup differences in temporal evolution of vaccination rate were analyzed by fitting a generalized linear model and determined by significant interaction between, sex, oncological diagnosis, and month of examination.ResultsRate of complete vaccination against COVID-19 steadily increased and reached 81 % in September 2021. The fraction of vaccinated patients in the oncological cohort was higher in the beginning and approached the fraction in the age-matched general Swiss population at the end of the study period. Month of exam (p < 0.001) was the only significant predictor of the vaccination rate.ConclusionVaccination rate against COVID-19 in a Swiss oncological cohort increased steadily from February to September 2021. Compared to the age-matched general population it was higher in the beginning and similar by the end of the study period.Ethics approval: Trial registration: BASEC 2021-00444, Ethikkommission Zürich (Cantonal Ethics Committee Zurich), Switzerland, registered February 24th 2021.     

Unmet need for COVID-19 vaccination coverage in Kenya

COVID-19 has impacted the health and livelihoods of billions of people since it emerged in 2019. Vaccination for COVID-19 is a critical intervention that is being rolled out globally to end the pandemic. Understanding the spatial inequalities in vaccination coverage and access to vaccination centres is important for planning this intervention nationally. Here, COVID-19 vaccination data, representing the number of people given at least one dose of vaccine, a list of the approved vaccination sites, population data and ancillary GIS data were used to assess vaccination coverage, using Kenya as an example. Firstly, physical access was modelled using travel time to estimate the proportion of population within 1 hour of a vaccination site. Secondly, a Bayesian conditional autoregressive (CAR) model was used to estimate the COVID-19 vaccination coverage and the same framework used to forecast coverage rates for the first quarter of 2022. Nationally, the average travel time to a designated COVID-19 vaccination site (n = 622) was 75.5 min (Range: 62.9 – 94.5 min) and over 87% of the population >18 years reside within 1 hour to a vaccination site. The COVID-19 vaccination coverage in December 2021 was 16.70% (95% CI: 16.66 – 16.74) – 4.4 million people and was forecasted to be 30.75% (95% CI: 25.04 – 36.96) – 8.1 million people by the end of March 2022. Approximately 21 million adults were still unvaccinated in December 2021 and, in the absence of accelerated vaccine uptake, over 17.2 million adults may not be vaccinated by end March 2022 nationally. Our results highlight geographic inequalities at sub-national level and are important in targeting and improving vaccination coverage in hard-to-reach populations. Similar mapping efforts could help other countries identify and increase vaccination coverage for such populations.     

Body mass index and vaccine responses following influenza vaccination during pregnancy

Background and AimsInfluenza vaccination is recommended by the World Health Organisation for pregnant women, offering the dual benefit of protecting pregnant women and their newborn infants against influenza infection. Various factors can influence vaccine immunogenicity, with obesity being one factor implicated in varied responses. This study aimed to investigate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on vaccine responses following influenza vaccination during pregnancy.MethodsPregnant women attending the Women’s and Children’s Hospital in South Australia during 2014–2016 were invited to participate. Participant’s clinical and demographic factors were recorded prior to administration of licensed seasonal influenza vaccination. Blood samples were collected before and one month post-vaccination to measure antibody responses by haemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. Seroprotection was defined as a post-vaccination HI titre ≥ 1:40. Regression models assessed associations with failure to achieve seroprotective antibodies to H1, H3, and B influenza strains.ResultsA total of 96 women were enrolled in the study at a median gestation of 22 weeks with a BMI range of 18–49 kg/m². Paired sera samples were available for 90/96 (94%). Most pregnant women (72/90, 80%) demonstrated seroprotective antibody titres to all three influenza vaccine antigens (A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2), B/Yamagata) following vaccination. Compared with women with BMI < 30 kg/m², those with high BMI were less likely to fail to achieve seroprotective antibodies, however this was not statistically significant (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.11–1.68; p = 0.22). A greater proportion of women vaccinated during their second (47/53, 93%) or third trimester (18/25, 72%) demonstrated seroprotection to all three vaccine antigens following vaccination compared with women vaccinated during their first trimester (7/12, 58%).ConclusionHigh BMI did not impair seroprotection levels following influenza vaccination in pregnant women. Gestation at vaccination may be an important consideration for optimising vaccine protection for pregnant women and their newborns. Further assessment of first trimester influenza vaccine responses is warranted.     

Where are children ages 5–17 years receiving their COVID-19 vaccinations? Variations over time and by sociodemographic characteristics,United States

BackgroundKnowing the settings where children ages 5–17 years received COVID-19 vaccination in the United States, and how settings changed over time and varied by socio-demographics, is of interest for planning and implementing vaccination programs.MethodsData from the National Immunization Survey-Child COVID-19 Module (NIS-CCM) were analyzed to assess place of COVID-19 vaccination among vaccinated children ages 5–17 years. Interviews from July 2021 thru May 2022 were included in the analyses for a total of n = 39,286 vaccinated children. The percentage of children receiving their COVID-19 vaccine at each type of setting was calculated overall, by sociodemographic characteristics, and by month of receipt of COVID-19 vaccine.ResultsAmong vaccinated children ages 5–11 years, 46.9 % were vaccinated at a medical place, 37.1 % at a pharmacy, 8.1 % at a school, 4.7 % at a mass vaccination site, and 3.2 % at some other non-medical place. Among vaccinated children ages 12–17 years, 35.1 % were vaccinated at a medical place, 47.9 % at a pharmacy, 8.3 % at a mass vaccination site, 4.8 % at a school, and 4.0 % at some other non-medical place. The place varied by time among children ages 12–17 years but minimally for children ages 5–11 years. There was variability in the place of COVID-19 vaccination by age, race/ethnicity, health insurance, urbanicity, and region.ConclusionChildren ages 5–17 years predominantly received their COVID-19 vaccinations at pharmacies and medical places. The large proportion of vaccinated children receiving vaccination at pharmacies is indicative of the success in the United States of expanding the available settings where children could be vaccinated. Medical places continue to play a large role in vaccinating children, especially younger children, and should continue to stock COVID-19 vaccine to keep it available for those who are not yet vaccinated, including the newly recommended group of children < 5 years.     

Methodological changes implemented over time to support accurate and timely COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates: Ontario,Canada

AbstractThe COVID-19 vaccination program implementation in Ontario, Canada has spanned multiple years and is ongoing. To meet the challenges of the program, Ontario developed and implemented a new electronic COVID-19 immunization registry, COVaxON, which captures individual-level data on all doses administered in the province enabling comprehensive coverage assessment. However, the need for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine coverage assessments over a multi-year vaccination program posed challenges necessitating methodological changes. This paper describes Ontario’s COVID-19 immunization registry, the methods implemented over time to allow for the ongoing assessment of vaccine coverage by age, and the impact of those methodological changes.Throughout the course of the vaccination program, four different methodological approaches were used to calculate age-specific coverage estimates using vaccination data (numerator) obtained from COVaxON. Age-specific numerators were initially calculated using age at time of first dose (method A), but were updated to the age at coverage assessment (method B). Database enhancements allowed for the exclusion of deceased individuals from the numerator (method C). Population data (denominator) was updated to 2022 projections from the 2021 national census following their availability (method D). The impact was most evident in older age groups where vaccine uptake was high. For example, coverage estimates for individuals aged 70–79 years of age for at least one dose decreased from 104.9 % (method B) to 95.0 % (method D). Thus, methodological changes improved estimates such that none exceeded 100 %.Ontario’s COVID-19 immunization registry has been transformational for vaccine program surveillance. The implementation of a single registry for COVID-19 vaccines was essential for comprehensive near real-time coverage assessment, and enabled new uses of the data to support additional components of vaccine program surveillance. The province is well positioned to build on what has been achieved as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and expand the registry to other routine vaccination programs.     

Rural,urban, and suburban differences in influenza vaccination coverage among children

Influenza vaccination is the primary way to prevent influenza, yet influenza vaccination coverage remains low in the United States. Previous studies have shown that children residing in rural areas have less access to healthcare and lower vaccination coverage for some vaccines. Influenza vaccination coverage among children 6 months–17 years by rural/urban residence during the 2011–12 through 2018–19 influenza seasons was examined using National Immunization Survey-Flu data. The Council of American Survey Research Organizations response rates for National Immunization Survey-Flu ranged from 48% to 65% (2011–12 through the 2017–18 seasons) for the landline sample and 20%–39% (2011–12 through the 2018–19 seasons) for the cellular telephone sample. Children residing in rural areas had influenza vaccination coverage that ranged from 7.9 (2012–13 season) to 12.6 (2016–17 season) percentage points lower than children residing in urban areas, and ranged from 4.5 (2012–13 season) to 7.4 (2016–17 season) percentage points lower than children residing in suburban areas. The differences in influenza vaccination coverage among rural, suburban, and urban children were consistent over the eight seasons studied. Lower influenza vaccination coverage was observed among rural children regardless of child’s age, mother’s education, household income, or number of children under 18 years of age in the household. Rural versus urban and suburban differences in influenza vaccination coverage remained statistically significant while adjusting for selected sociodemographic characteristics. A better understanding of the reasons for lower childhood influenza vaccination coverage for children in rural and suburban areas is needed.     

Efficacy and safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in participants with a history of cancer: subgroup analysis of a global phase 3 randomized clinical trial

IntroductionIndividuals with an underlying malignancy have high risk of poor COVID-19 outcomes. In clinical trials, COVID-19 vaccines were safe and efficacious against infection, hospitalization, and death, but most trials excluded participants with cancer. We report results from participants with a history of past or active neoplasm (malignant or benign/unknown) and up to 6 months’ follow-up post-dose 2 from the placebo-controlled, observer-blinded trial of the 2-dose BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.Patients and methodsBetween July 2020–January 2021, 46,429 participants aged ≥ 12 years were randomized at 152 sites in 6 countries. Healthy participants with pre-existing stable neoplasm could participate; those receiving immunosuppressive therapy were excluded. Data are reported for participants, aged ≥ 16 years for safety and ≥ 12 years for efficacy, who had any history of neoplasm at baseline (data cut-off: March 13, 2021). Adverse-event (AE) data are controlled for follow-up time before unblinding and reported as incidence rates (IRs) per 100 person-years follow-up.ResultsAt baseline, 3813 participants had a history of neoplasm; most common malignancies were breast (n = 460), prostate (n = 362), and melanoma (n = 223). Four BNT162b2 and 71 placebo recipients developed COVID-19 from 7 days post-dose 2; vaccine efficacy was 94.4% (95% CI: 85.2, 98.5) after up to 6 months’ follow-up post-dose 2. This compares favorably with vaccine efficacy of 91.1% in the overall trial population after the same follow-up. AEs were reported at IRs of 95.4 (BNT162b2) and 48.3 (placebo) per 100 person-years. Most common AEs were reactogenicity events (injection-site pain, fatigue, pyrexia). Three BNT162b2 and 1 placebo recipients withdrew because of vaccine-related AEs. No vaccine-related deaths were reported.ConclusionIn participants with past or active neoplasms, BNT162b2 vaccine has a similar efficacy and safety profile as in the overall trial population. These results can inform BNT162b2 use during the COVID-19 pandemic and future trials in participants with cancer.Clinical trial number: NCT04368728.