Background: The opioid overdose epidemic has resulted in hundreds of thousands of overdose deaths in the United States (US). One indication for opioids is herpes zoster (HZ)—a common painful condition with an estimated 1 million cases occurring annually in the US. Objective: We aimed to characterize prescription opioid claims and trends among patients with HZ who were previously opioid naive. Design: We used a cohort study involving three insurance claims databases in the US. We included all beneficiaries 18-64 years (commercial and Medicaid) and beneficiaries 65 years and older (Medicare) who were diagnosed with incident HZ during 2007-2021. We determined the proportion of opioid-naive patients with HZ who filled an opioid prescription within 30 days and 180 days following HZ diagnosis. We also examined trends over the study period, proportion receiving moderate, high dosages (50-89 morphine milligram equivalent [MME], and ≥90 MME per day), and long-term receipt. Results: Among all three insurance databases, 2,595,837 patients had an incident episode of HZ and were opioid naive during the prior 6 months. Within 30 days following HZ, 623,515 (24 percent) filled a prescription for an opioid. The percentage with an opioid claim declined during 2007-2021 for all groups; 65 percent for commercially insured patients, 51 percent for Medicaid-insured patients, and 60 percent for Medicare-insured patients. Approximately 8-15 percent of all beneficiaries received moderate and 2-6 percent received high dosage opioids. Long-term prescription opioid use of at least 6 months was found in 7-12 percent of the patients. Conclusions: Continuing trends in judicious opioid prescribing as well as use of recommended HZ vaccines may decrease opioid prescriptions for HZ. © 2024 Journal of Opioid Management, All Rights Reserved.

BACKGROUND: A 2-dose series of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) was 97% effective against herpes zoster (HZ) in a pivotal clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate real-world effectiveness of RZV against HZ. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Four health care systems in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. PARTICIPANTS: Persons aged 50 years or older. MEASUREMENTS: The outcome was incident HZ defined by a diagnosis with an antiviral prescription. Cox regression was used to estimate the hazard of HZ in vaccinated persons compared with unvaccinated persons, with adjustment for covariates. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated as 1 minus the adjusted hazard ratio and was estimated by time since the last RZV dose and by corticosteroid use. RESULTS: The study included nearly 2.0 million persons who contributed 7.6 million person-years of follow-up. After adjustment, VE of 1 dose was 64% and VE of 2 doses was 76%. After 1 dose only, VE was 70% during the first year, 45% during the second year, 48% during the third year, and 52% after the third year. After 2 doses, VE was 79% during the first year, 75% during the second year, and 73% during the third and fourth years. Vaccine effectiveness was 65% in persons who received corticosteroids before vaccination and 77% in those who did not. LIMITATION: Herpes zoster could not be identified as accurately in these observational data as in the previous clinical trials. CONCLUSION: Two doses of RZV were highly effective, although less effective than in the previous clinical trials. Two-dose effectiveness waned very little during the 4 years of follow-up. However, 1-dose effectiveness waned substantially after 1 year, underscoring the importance of the second dose. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

On June 20, 2012, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended routine use of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13; Prevnar 13, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a subsidiary of Pfizer, Inc.) for adults aged ≥19 years with immunocompromising conditions, functional or anatomic asplenia, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks, or cochlear implants. PCV13 should be administered to eligible adults in addition to the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23; Pneumovax 23, Merck & Co. Inc.), the vaccine currently recommended for these groups of adults. The evidence for the benefits and risk of PCV13 vaccination of adults with immunocompromising conditions was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework and designated as a Category A recommendation. This report outlines the new ACIP recommendations for PCV13 use; explains the recommendations for the use of PCV13 and PPSV23 among adults with immunocompromising conditions, functional or anatomic asplenia, CSF leaks, or cochlear implants; and summarizes the evidence considered by ACIP to make its recommendations.

To inform Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) COVID-19 vaccine policy decisions, we developed a benefit-risk assessment framework that directly compared the estimated benefits of COVID-19 vaccination to individuals (e.g., prevention of COVID-19-associated hospitalization) with risks associated with COVID-19 vaccines. This assessment framework originated following the identification of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Janssen COVID-19 vaccination in April 2021. We adapted the benefit-risk assessment framework for use in subsequent policy decisions, including the adverse events of myocarditis and Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) following mRNA and Janssen COVID-19 vaccination respectively, expansion of COVID-19 vaccine approvals or authorizations to new age groups, and use of booster doses. Over the first year of COVID-19 vaccine administration in the United States (December 2020-December 2021), we used the benefit-risk assessment framework to inform seven different ACIP policy decisions. This framework allowed for rapid and direct comparison of the benefits and potential harms of vaccination, which may be helpful in informing other vaccine policy decisions. The assessments were a useful tool for decision-making but required reliable and granular data to stratify analyses and appropriately focus on populations most at risk for a specific adverse event. Additionally, careful decision-making was needed on parameters for data inputs. Sensitivity analyses were used where data were limited or uncertain; adjustments in the methodology were made over time to ensure the assessments remained relevant and applicable to the policy questions under consideration.

Objective: U.S. healthcare utilization declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially leading to spurious drops in disease incidence recorded in administrative healthcare datasets used for public health surveillance. We used time series modeling to characterize the magnitude and duration of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on claims-based monthly incidence of 12 symptomatic conditions among Medicare beneficiaries aged >=65 years. Method(s): Time series of observed monthly incidence of each condition were generated using Medicare claims data from January 2016-May 2021. Incidence time series were decomposed through seasonal and trend decomposition using Loess, resulting in seasonal, trend, and remainder components. We fit a non-linear mixed effects model to remainder time series components and used it to estimate underlying incidence and number of unrecorded cases of each condition during the pandemic period. Result(s): Observed incidence of all 12 conditions declined steeply in March 2020 with nadirs in April 2020, generally followed by return to pre-pandemic trends. The relative magnitude of the decrease varied by condition, but month of onset and duration did not. Estimated unrecorded cases during March 2020-May 2021 ranged from 9,543 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 854-15,703) for herpes zoster to 236,244 (95% CI: 188,583-292,369) for cataracts. Conclusion(s): Due to reduced healthcare utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic, claims-based data underestimate incidence of non-COVID-19 conditions. Time series modeling can be used to quantify this underestimation, facilitating longitudinal analyses of disease incidence pre- and post-pandemic. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. This article is a US Government work. It is not subject to copyright under 17 USC 105 and is also made available for use under a CC0 license.

Nursing homes (NH) were among the first settings to receive COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, but staff vaccination coverage remains low at an average of 64%. Using an agent-based model, we examined the impact of community prevalence, the Delta variant, staff vaccination coverage, and boosters for residents on outbreak dynamics in nursing homes. We found that increased staff primary series coverage and high booster vaccine effectiveness (VE) in residents leads to fewer infections and that the cumulative incidence is highly dependent on community transmission. Despite high VE, high community transmission resulted in continued symptomatic infections in NHs.

PURPOSE: Acute flaccid myelitis (AFM), an uncommon but serious neurologic condition, primarily affects children, and can progress quickly to paralysis and respiratory failure. Data on long-term outcomes of patients with AFM are limited. This study reports on functional status through 12 months for AFM patients who became ill in 2018 in the United States. METHODS: Health departments collected information on outcomes at 6 and 12 months after onset of AFM using a standardized form that asked patients or their parents/guardians about functional status. Analyses were restricted to confirmed cases. RESULTS: Of the 238 confirmed AFM cases reported to CDC in 2018, 90 (38%) had assessments at 6 months, 82 (34%) at 12 months, and 49 (21%) at both 6 and 12 months. Among the 49 patients with data at both time points, the proportion of patients reporting significant or severe impairment at 6 months ranged from 2% to 59% depending on the outcome. Although proportions decreased by 12 months and ranged from 2% to 51%, most patients had some impairment at 12 months. No deaths were reported. CONCLUSION: Six- and 12-month outcomes in patients with onset of AFM in 2018 span a wide range of functionality, particularly of upper and lower extremities. Importantly, improvement appears to occur over time in some patients.

To reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its associated impacts on health and society, COVID-19 vaccines are essential. The U.S. government is working to produce and deliver safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines for the entire U.S. population. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)1 has broadly outlined its approach for developing recommendations for the use of each COVID-19 vaccine authorized or approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization or licensure.1 ACIP’s recommendation process includes an explicit and transparent evidence-based method for assessing a vaccine’s safety and efficacy as well as consideration of other factors, including implementation.2 Because the initial supply of vaccine will likely be limited, ACIP will also recommend which groups should receive the earliest allocations of vaccine. The ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group and consultants with expertise in ethics and health equity considered external expert committee reports and published literature and deliberated the ethical issues associated with COVID-19 vaccine allocation decisions. The purpose of this report is to describe the four ethical principles that will assist ACIP in formulating recommendations for the allocation of COVID-19 vaccine while supply is limited, in addition to scientific data and implementation feasibility: (1) maximize benefits and minimize harms; (2) promote justice; (3) mitigate health inequities; and (4) promote transparency. These principles can also aid state, tribal, local, and territorial public health authorities as they develop vaccine implementation strategies within their own communities based on ACIP recommendations.

In December 2020, an interim recommendation for the use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years was made under Food and Drug Administration's Emergency Use Authorization. In preparation for Biologics License Application approval, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to inform the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practice's (ACIP) decision-making for a standard recommendation. We conducted a rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine effectiveness (VE) against symptomatic COVID-19, hospitalization due to COVID-19, death due to COVID-19, and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. We identified studies through August 20, 2021 from an ongoing systematic review conducted by the International Vaccine Access Center and the World Health Organization. We evaluated each study for risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled estimates were calculated using meta-analysis. The body of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We identified 80 articles, selected 35 for full-text review, and included 26. The pooled VE of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was 92.4% (95% CI: 87.5%-95.3%) against symptomatic COVID-19 with moderate evidence certainty (eight studies), 94.3% (95% CI: 87.9%-97.3%) against hospitalization due to COVID-19 with moderate certainty (eight studies), 96.1% (95% CI: 91.5%-98.2%) against death due to COVID-19 with moderate certainty (four studies), and 89.3% (88.4%-90.1%) against asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with very low certainty (two studies). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine demonstrated high effectiveness in all pre-specified outcomes and extended knowledge of the vaccine's benefits to outcomes and populations not informed by the RCTs. Use of an existing systematic review facilitated a rapid meta-analysis to inform an ACIP policy decision. This approach can be utilized as additional COVID-19 vaccines are considered for standard recommendations by ACIP.

Vaccination is the main means for preventing measles, mumps, and rubella virus infections and their related complications (1,2). Achieving and maintaining high 2-dose measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination coverage in the United States has led to elimination of endemic measles in 2000, rubella and congenital rubella syndrome in 2004, and a sharp decrease in mumps cases. However, measles and rubella remain endemic in many countries, leading to importations of cases and occasional local transmission within the United States (3). Reported U.S. mumps cases declined >99% from the prevaccine period (4); however, mumps is endemic worldwide, and since 2006, the number of mumps cases and mumps outbreaks has increased in the United States, with wider geographic spread since 2016 (4). Given the risk for importation of measles and rubella and the resurgence of mumps, maintaining high measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccination coverage is important. Since 1978, only one MMR vaccine, M-M-R II (Merck and Co., Inc.), has been available in the United States. On June 6, 2022, the Food and Drug Administration approved a second MMR vaccine, PRIORIX (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals), for the prevention of measles, mumps, and rubella in persons aged ≥12 months. The three live attenuated viruses contained in PRIORIX are genetically similar or identical to the corresponding components in M-M-R II (Table) (5-7). On June 23, 2022, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) unanimously recommended PRIORIX as an option to prevent measles, mumps, and rubella according to the existing recommended schedules and for off-label uses (i.e., indications not included in the package insert)* (1,2). ACIP considered PRIORIX to be safe, immunogenic, and noninferior to M-M-R II. Both PRIORIX and M-M-R II are fully interchangeable for all indications for which MMR vaccination is recommended. This report contains ACIP recommendations specific to PRIORIX and supplements the existing ACIP recommendations for MMR use (1,2).

In 2018, CDC recommended a highly efficacious adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) as a 2-dose series for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) for immunocompetent persons age ≥ 50 years, with the 2nd dose recommended 2-6 months after the 1st dose. We estimated second-dose RZV series completion in the U.S. among 50-64-year-olds using two administrative databases. Second-dose RZV series completion was ∼70% within 6-months and 80% within 12-months of first dose. Among those who received only 1 RZV dose with at least 12 months of follow-up time, 96% had a missed opportunity for a second-dose vaccination, defined as a provider or pharmacy visit, among whom 36% had a visit for influenza or pneumococcal vaccination within 2-12 months of their first-dose of RZV. We found that RZV series completion rates in 50-64-year-olds was high. Availability of RZV at pharmacies has potentially helped increase series completion, but missed opportunities remain.

After 25 years of varicella vaccination in the United States, classic varicella and its complications have become an uncommon occurrence. The clinical manifestation of varicella among vaccinated persons is usually modified, with fewer skin lesions, mostly maculopapular, and milder presentation. However, the potential for severe manifestations from varicella still exists among both vaccinated and unvaccinated persons, and thus healthcare providers should keep varicella in the differential diagnosis of a maculopapular or vesicular rash. The prompt recognition and diagnosis of varicella is important because when confirmed, clinical and public health measures need to be taken swiftly.

When the US varicella vaccination program was introduced in 1995, its impacts on the epidemiology of herpes zoster (HZ) were not precisely known. We used a large claims database to examine HZ incidence in the US during 1998-2019 among persons aged ≥30 years (the prevaccine cohort, born before 1990), and aged 1-29 years (includes the postvaccine cohort, born since 1990). We defined incident HZ as the first instance of an outpatient or emergency department (ED) claim with an HZ diagnostic code. Additionally, we examined the proportion of HZ visits among all ED visits as a complementary method to assess for healthcare-seeking artifacts in the findings. In persons aged ≥30 years (prevaccine cohort), we observed age-specific increases in HZ incidence during the earlier study years, with decelerations in later years, starting in 2007 with oldest age groups. Similar patterns were seen when we examined HZ visits as a proportion of all ED visits. For persons aged 1-29 years, age-specific HZ incidence increased early in the study period for the oldest age groups who were born prevaccine, but later declined in a stepwise pattern once each age group was comprised of persons born in the postvaccine period. Our results, corroborated with previously published studies, do not support prior modeling predictions that the varicella vaccination program would increase HZ incidence among adult cohorts who previously experienced varicella. Our findings also suggest that continued declines in age-specific HZ incidence as varicella-vaccinated cohorts age are likely.

To describe the impact of the US varicella vaccination program on severe varicella outcomes, we analyzed varicella hospitalizations using the National Inpatient Sample 1993-2019 and varicella deaths using the National Center for Health Statistics data 1990-2019. Over 25 years of vaccination program (1995-2019), varicella hospitalizations, and deaths declined 94% and 97%, respectively, among persons aged <50 years. Most of the decline (90%) occurred during the 1-dose period (through 2006/2007) by attaining and maintaining high vaccination coverage; additional declines occurred during the 2-dose period, especially in the age groups covered by the 2-dose recommendation. The greatest decline for both hospitalizations and deaths (97% and >99%, respectively) was among persons aged <20 years, born during the varicella vaccination program. In the <20 age group, varicella hospitalization has become a rare event, and varicella deaths have been practically eliminated in the United States. A total of >10 500 varicella hospitalizations and 100 varicella deaths are now prevented annually in the United States as a direct result of vaccination and reduction in varicella-zoster virus circulation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the health and economic impact of the varicella vaccination program on varicella disease in the United States (US), 1996-2020. METHODS: Analysis was conducted using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or published annual population-based varicella incidence, and varicella-associated hospitalization, outpatient visit, and mortality rates in the US population aged 0-49 years during 1996-2020 (range, 199.5-214.2 million persons) compared to before vaccination (1990-1994). Disease costs were estimated using the societal perspective. Vaccination program costs included costs of vaccine, administration, postvaccination adverse events, and travel and work time lost to obtain vaccination. All costs were adjusted to 2020 US dollars using a 3% annual discount rate. The main outcome measures were the number of varicella-associated cases, hospitalizations, hospitalization days, and premature deaths prevented; life-years saved; and net societal savings from the US varicella vaccination program. RESULTS: Among US persons aged 0-49 years, during 1996-2020, it is estimated that more than 91 million varicella cases, 238 000 hospitalizations, 1.1 million hospitalization days, and almost 2000 deaths were prevented and 118 000 life-years were saved by the varicella vaccination program, at net societal savings of $23.4 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Varicella vaccination has resulted in substantial disease prevention and societal savings for the US over 25 years of program implementation.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the use of recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) (Shingrix), which protects against herpes zoster (HZ), among immunocompromised adults aged 19 to 49 years, as a contribution to deliberations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. METHODS: Hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients experience a high incidence of HZ, and the efficacy of RZV in preventing HZ has been studied in clinical trials. The cost-effectiveness model calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that compared vaccination with RZV with a no vaccination strategy among adults aged 19 to 49 years. Costs and outcomes were calculated until age 50 years using the healthcare sector perspective and summarized as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The base case represents HCT recipients, with scenario analyses representing persons with other immunocompromising conditions, including hematologic malignancies, human immunodeficiency virus, and autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. Uncertainty was investigated using univariate, multivariate, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Base-case results indicated vaccination with RZV would avert approximately 35% of HZ episodes and complications, while saving approximately 11% of net costs. Compared with no vaccination, vaccination of HCT recipients with RZV generated cost-savings (ie, lower costs and improved health) in the base case and in 81% of simulations in the probabilistic analysis. In scenario analyses, vaccination cost US dollar ($) 9500/QALY among patients with hematologic malignancies, $79000/QALY among persons living with human immunodeficiency virus, and $208000/QALY among persons with selected autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Generally favorable economic estimates supported recommendations for vaccination of immunocompromised adults with RZV to prevent episodes of HZ and related complications.

On July 18, 2022, the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) notified CDC of detection of poliovirus type 2 in stool specimens from an unvaccinated immunocompetent young adult from Rockland County, New York, who was experiencing acute flaccid weakness. The patient initially experienced fever, neck stiffness, gastrointestinal symptoms, and limb weakness. The patient was hospitalized with possible acute flaccid myelitis (AFM). Vaccine-derived poliovirus type 2 (VDPV2) was detected in stool specimens obtained on days 11 and 12 after initial symptom onset. To date, related Sabin-like type 2 polioviruses have been detected in wastewater* in the patient's county of residence and in neighboring Orange County up to 25 days before (from samples originally collected for SARS-CoV-2 wastewater monitoring) and 41 days after the patient's symptom onset. The last U.S. case of polio caused by wild poliovirus occurred in 1979, and the World Health Organization Region of the Americas was declared polio-free in 1994. This report describes the second identification of community transmission of poliovirus in the United States since 1979; the previous instance, in 2005, was a type 1 VDPV (1). The occurrence of this case, combined with the identification of poliovirus in wastewater in neighboring Orange County, underscores the importance of maintaining high vaccination coverage to prevent paralytic polio in persons of all ages.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster vaccination rates remain low despite longstanding national recommendations to vaccinate immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) updated its recommendations for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in October 2021 to include immunocompromised adults aged ≥19 years. OBJECTIVE: To assess practices, attitudes, and knowledge about RZV, barriers to recommending RZV, and likelihood of recommending RZV to patients with various immunocompromising conditions. DESIGN: Mail and internet-based survey conducted from May through July 2020. PARTICIPANTS: General internists and family physicians throughout the USA. MAIN MEASURES: Survey responses. KEY RESULTS: The response rate was 66% (632/955). Many physicians were already recommending RZV to immunocompromised populations, including adults ≥50 years with HIV (67% of respondents) and on recombinant human immune modulator therapy (56%). Forty-seven percent of respondents both stocked/administered RZV and referred patients elsewhere, frequently a pharmacy, for vaccination; 42% did not stock RZV and only referred patients. The majority agreed pharmacies do not inform them when RZV has been given (64%). Physicians were generally knowledgeable about RZV; however, 25% incorrectly thought experiencing side effects from the first dose of RZV that interfere with normal activities was a reason to not receive the second dose. The top reported barrier to recommending RZV was experience with patients declining RZV due to cost concerns (67%). Most physicians reported they would be likely to recommend RZV to immunocompromised patients. CONCLUSION: Most primary care physicians welcome updated ACIP RZV recommendations for immunocompromised adults. Knowledge gaps, communication issues, and financial barriers need to be addressed to optimize vaccination delivery.

OBJECTIVE: Persons with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) are at increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ). In 2018, CDC recommended a highly efficacious vaccine, recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV), for prevention of HZ in immunocompetent ≥50 years-olds. We estimated RZV vaccination among adults age ≥50 years with IMIDs during 2018-2019 and examined possible vaccine-related flares following RZV. METHODS: We identified a cohort of IMID patients using medical claims data from IBM® MarketScan® (age 50-64 years) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare (age ≥65 years). Presumed flares were defined as hospitalization/emergency department visit for their respective IMIDs, or steroid treatment with a short-acting oral glucocorticoid or parenteral glucocorticoid injection. We conducted a self-controlled case series (SCCS) analysis to examine a temporal association between RZV and flares. RESULTS: Among enrollees with IMIDs, 14.8% of 55,654 MarketScan and 43.2% of 160,545 Medicare enrollees received ≥1-dose of RZV during 2018-2019. Two-dose series completion was 76.6% in MarketScan and 85.4% in Medicare enrollees. In the SCCS analysis, 10% and 13% developed flares in the control as compared to 9% and 11-12% in the risk window following 1- or 2-doses of RZV among MarketScan and Medicare enrollees, respectively. We found no statistically significant increase in flares following RZV administration for any IMID in either age group following RZV dose-1 or dose-2. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an increase in presumed flares following RZV vaccination. Among adults aged ≥50 years with IMIDs, a substantial proportion received RZV compared to general zoster coverage estimates and series-completion was high. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) to prevent against herpes zoster (HZ) and related complications in immunocompetent adults ≥50 y and immunocompromised adults ≥19 y. In 2019, a statistical safety signal for Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following RZV was identified using data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). Subsequently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and collaborators undertook additional analyses using Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare data to further investigate the potential risk of GBS following RZV. Concurrently, epidemiologic data suggested a potentially elevated risk of GBS following HZ in U.S. adults. Using data from these sources and a published simulation model, this study evaluated the health benefits and risks associated with vaccinating immunocompetent adults ≥50 y with RZV compared to no vaccination. In the base case analysis, RZV vaccination averted 43,000-63,000 cases of HZ, including GBS complications, per million vaccinated per 10-y age cohort compared to 3-6 additional cases of GBS projected following RZV per million vaccinated in the same population. This analysis highlights the projected health benefits of RZV vaccination compared to the relatively low potential risk of GBS following RZV.

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended phased allocation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in December 2020. To support the development of this guidance, we used a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to evaluate the relative impact of three vaccine allocation strategies on infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. All three strategies initially prioritized healthcare personnel (HCP) for vaccination. Strategies of subsequently prioritizing adults aged ≥65 years, or a combination of essential workers and adults aged ≥75 years, prevented the most deaths. Meanwhile, prioritizing adults with high-risk medical conditions immediately after HCP prevented the most infections. All three strategies prevented a similar fraction of hospitalizations. While no model is capable of fully capturing the complex social dynamics which shape epidemics, exercises such as this one can be a useful way for policy makers to formalize their assumptions and explore the key features of a problem before making decisions.

Using an agent-based model, we examined the impact of community prevalence, the Delta variant, staff vaccination coverage, and boosters for residents on outbreak dynamics in nursing homes. Increased staff coverage and high booster vaccine effectiveness leads to fewer infections, but cumulative incidence is highly dependent on community transmission.

Zoster Vaccine Recombinant, Adjuvanted (Shingrix, GlaxoSmithKline [GSK]) is a 2-dose (0.5 mL each) subunit vaccine containing recombinant glycoprotein E in combination with adjuvant (AS01(B)) that was licensed in the United States for prevention of herpes zoster for adults aged ≥50 years by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended for immunocompetent adults aged ≥50 years by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in 2017* (1). On July 23, 2021, the FDA expanded the indication for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) to include adults aged ≥18 years who are or will be at increased risk for herpes zoster because of immunodeficiency or immunosuppression caused by known disease or therapy (2). On October 20, 2021, ACIP recommended 2 doses of RZV for the prevention of herpes zoster and related complications in adults aged ≥19 years(†) who are or will be immunodeficient or immunosuppressed because of disease or therapy. RZV is the first herpes zoster vaccine approved for use in immunocompromised persons. With moderate to high vaccine efficacy and an acceptable safety profile, RZV has the potential to prevent considerable herpes zoster incidence and related complications. This report updates previous ACIP recommendations for the prevention of herpes zoster (1,3).

Epidemiologic data regarding the risk of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) following herpes zoster (HZ) are limited. We conducted a self-controlled case series analysis using two large national data sources to evaluate the risk of GBS following HZ among U.S. adults. We analyzed medical claims from the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (persons 18-64 years during 2010-2018) and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medicare (persons ≥65 years during 2014-2018) databases. HZ cases were defined as persons with an outpatient claim with a primary or secondary ICD-9 or ICD-10 diagnostic code for HZ. GBS cases were defined as persons with an inpatient claim with a principle diagnostic code for GBS and an associated procedural code. We compared the rates of GBS following HZ in the 1-42-day risk window versus primary (100-365-day) or secondary (43-99-day) control windows. We identified 489,516 persons 18-64 years of age and 650,229 persons ≥65 years of age with HZ, among whom 11 and 41, respectively, developed GBS 1-365 days following HZ. The risk of GBS following HZ was increased during the risk window as compared to the primary control window for both groups, with a rate ratio of 6.3 (95% CI, 1.8-21.9) for those 18-64 years and 4.1 (95% CI, 1.9-8.7) for those ≥65 years. This study provides new and methodologically rigorous epidemiologic support for an association between HZ and GBS, and useful context regarding the benefits versus potential risks of zoster vaccination.

Three COVID-19 vaccines are currently approved under a Biologics License Application (BLA) or authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended for primary vaccination by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the United States: the 2-dose mRNA-based Pfizer-BioNTech/Comirnaty and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines and the single-dose adenovirus vector-based Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine (1,2) (Box 1). In August 2021, FDA amended the EUAs for the two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to allow for an additional primary dose in certain immunocompromised recipients of an initial mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series (1). During September-October 2021, FDA amended the EUAs to allow for a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose following a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series in certain recipients aged ≥18 years who are at increased risk for serious complications of COVID-19 or exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19), as well as in recipients aged ≥18 years of Janssen COVID-19 vaccine (1) (Table). For the purposes of these recommendations, an additional primary (hereafter additional) dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to persons who likely did not mount a protective immune response after initial vaccination. A booster dose refers to a dose of vaccine administered to enhance or restore protection by the primary vaccination, which might have waned over time. Health care professionals play a critical role in COVID-19 vaccination efforts, including for primary, additional, and booster vaccination, particularly to protect patients who are at increased risk for severe illness and death.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 (BNT162b2) vaccine is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. On August 23, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a Biologics License Application (BLA) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, marketed as Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (1). The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is also recommended for adolescents aged 12-15 years under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) (1). All persons aged ≥12 years are recommended to receive 2 doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each), administered 3 weeks apart (2,3). As of November 2, 2021, approximately 248 million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine had been administered to persons aged ≥12 years in the United States.* On October 29, 2021, FDA issued an EUA amendment for a new formulation of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for use in children aged 5-11 years, administered as 2 doses (10 μg, 0.2 mL each), 3 weeks apart (Table) (1). On November 2, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation(†) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years for the prevention of COVID-19. To guide its deliberations regarding recommendations for the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework(§) and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.(¶) The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in children aged 5-11 years under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine has high efficacy (>90%) against COVID-19 in children aged 5-11 years, and ACIP determined benefits outweigh risks for vaccination. Vaccination is important to protect children against COVID-19 and reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine (BNT162b2) is a lipid nanoparticle-formulated, nucleoside mRNA vaccine encoding the prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine consists of 2 intramuscular doses (30 μg, 0.3 mL each) administered 3 weeks apart. In December 2020, the vaccine was granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as well as an interim recommendation for use among persons aged ≥16 years by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) (1). In May 2021, the EUA and interim ACIP recommendations for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were extended to adolescents aged 12-15 years (2). During December 14, 2020-September 1, 2021, approximately 211 million doses of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were administered in the United States.* On August 23, 2021, FDA approved a Biologics License Application for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty (Pfizer, Inc.), in persons aged ≥16 years (3). The ACIP COVID-19 Vaccines Work Group's conclusions regarding the evidence for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine were presented to ACIP at a public meeting on August 30, 2021. To guide its deliberations regarding the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendation (EtR) Framework,(†) and incorporated a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.(§) In addition to initial clinical trial data, ACIP considered new information gathered in the 8 months since issuance of the interim recommendation for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, including additional follow-up time in the clinical trial, real-world vaccine effectiveness studies, and postauthorization vaccine safety monitoring. The additional information increased certainty that benefits from prevention of asymptomatic infection, COVID-19, and associated hospitalization and death outweighs vaccine-associated risks. On August 30, 2021, ACIP issued a recommendation(¶) for use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥16 years for the prevention of COVID-19.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Adults are at risk for illness, hospitalization, disability and, in some cases, death from vaccine-preventable diseases, particularly influenza and pneumococcal disease. CDC recommends vaccinations for adults on the basis of age, health conditions, prior vaccinations, and other considerations. Updated vaccination recommendations from CDC are published annually in the U.S. Adult Immunization Schedule. Despite longstanding recommendations for use of many vaccines, vaccination coverage among U.S. adults remains low. REPORTING PERIOD: August 2017-June 2018 (for influenza vaccination) and January-December 2018 (for pneumococcal, herpes zoster, tetanus and diphtheria [Td]/tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid, and acellular pertussis [Tdap], hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccination). DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) is a continuous, cross-sectional national household survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population. In-person interviews are conducted throughout the year in a probability sample of households, and NHIS data are compiled and released annually. NHIS's objective is to monitor the health of the U.S. population and provide estimates of health indicators, health care use and access, and health-related behaviors. Adult receipt of influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, Td/Tdap, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, and at least 1 dose of HPV vaccines was assessed. Estimates were derived for a new composite adult vaccination quality measure and by selected demographic and access-to-care characteristics (e.g., age, race/ethnicity, indication for vaccination, travel history [travel to countries where hepatitis infections are endemic], health insurance status, contacts with physicians, nativity, and citizenship). Trends in adult vaccination were assessed during 2010-2018. RESULTS: Coverage for the adult age-appropriate composite measure was low in all age groups. Racial and ethnic differences in coverage persisted for all vaccinations, with lower coverage for most vaccinations among non-White compared with non-Hispanic White adults. Linear trend tests indicated coverage increased from 2010 to 2018 for most vaccines in this report. Few adults aged ≥19 years had received all age-appropriate vaccines, including influenza vaccination, regardless of whether inclusion of Tdap (13.5%) or inclusion of any tetanus toxoid-containing vaccine (20.2%) receipt was measured. Coverage among adults for influenza vaccination during the 2017-18 season (46.1%) was similar to the estimate for the 2016-17 season (45.4%), and coverage for pneumococcal (adults aged ≥65 years [69.0%]), herpes zoster (adults aged ≥50 years and aged ≥60 years [24.1% and 34.5%, respectively]), tetanus (adults aged ≥19 years [62.9%]), Tdap (adults aged ≥19 years [31.2%]), hepatitis A (adults aged ≥19 years [11.9%]), and HPV (females aged 19-26 years [52.8%]) vaccination in 2018 were similar to the estimates for 2017. Hepatitis B vaccination coverage among adults aged ≥19 years and health care personnel (HCP) aged ≥19 years increased 4.2 and 6.7 percentage points to 30.0% and 67.2%, respectively, from 2017. HPV vaccination coverage among males aged 19-26 years increased 5.2 percentage points to 26.3% from the 2017 estimate. Overall, HPV vaccination coverage among females aged 19-26 years did not increase, but coverage among Hispanic females aged 19-26 years increased 10.8 percentage points to 49.6% from the 2017 estimate. Coverage for the following vaccines was lower among adults without health insurance compared with those with health insurance: influenza vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years, 19-49 years, and 50-64 years), pneumococcal vaccine (among adults aged 19-64 years at increased risk), Td vaccine (among all age groups), Tdap vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years and 19-64 years), hepatitis A vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years overall and among travelers aged ≥19 years), hepatitis B vaccine (among adults aged ≥19 years and 19-49 years and among travelers aged ≥19 years), herpes zoster vaccine (among adults aged ≥60 years), and HPV vaccine (among males and females aged 19-26 years). Adults who reported having a usual place for health care generally reported receipt of recommended vaccinations more often than those who did not have such a place, regardless of whether they had health insurance. Vaccination coverage was higher among adults reporting ≥1 physician contact during the preceding year compared with those who had not visited a physician during the preceding year, regardless of whether they had health insurance. Even among adults who had health insurance and ≥10 physician contacts during the preceding year, depending on the vaccine, 20.1%-87.5% reported not having received vaccinations that were recommended either for all persons or for those with specific indications. Overall, vaccination coverage among U.S.-born adults was significantly higher than that of foreign-born adults, including influenza vaccination (aged ≥19 years), pneumococcal vaccination (all ages), tetanus vaccination (all ages), Tdap vaccination (all ages), hepatitis B vaccination (aged ≥19 years and 19-49 years and travelers aged ≥19 years), herpes zoster vaccination (all ages), and HPV vaccination among females aged 19-26 years. Vaccination coverage also varied by citizenship status and years living in the United States. INTERPRETATION: NHIS data indicate that many adults remain unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases. Coverage for the adult age-appropriate composite measures was low in all age groups. Individual adult vaccination coverage remained low as well, but modest gains occurred in vaccination coverage for hepatitis B (among adults aged ≥19 years and HCP aged ≥19 years), and HPV (among males aged 19-26 years and Hispanic females aged 19-26 years). Coverage for other vaccines and groups with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices vaccination indications did not improve from 2017. Although HPV vaccination coverage among males aged 19-26 years and Hispanic females aged 19-26 years increased, approximately 50% of females aged 19-26 years and 70% of males aged 19-26 years remained unvaccinated. Racial/ethnic vaccination differences persisted for routinely recommended adult vaccines. Having health insurance coverage, having a usual place for health care, and having ≥1 physician contacts during the preceding 12 months were associated with higher vaccination coverage; however, these factors alone were not associated with optimal adult vaccination coverage, and findings indicate missed opportunities to vaccinate remained. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIONS: Substantial improvement in adult vaccination uptake is needed to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases. Following the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/adults/for-practice/standards/index.html), all providers should routinely assess adults' vaccination status at every clinical encounter, strongly recommend appropriate vaccines, either offer needed vaccines or refer their patients to another provider who can administer the needed vaccines, and document vaccinations received by their patients in an immunization information system.

On February 27, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the Janssen COVID-19 (Ad.26.COV2.S) vaccine (Janssen Biotech, Inc, a Janssen Pharmaceutical company, Johnson & Johnson; New Brunswick, New Jersey). The Janssen COVID-19 vaccine is a recombinant, replication-incompetent adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26) vector vaccine, encoding the stabilized prefusion spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Vaccination with the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine consists of a single dose (5 × 1010 virus particles per 0.5-mL dose) administered intramuscularly. On February 28, 2021, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) issued an interim recommendation* for use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine in persons aged ≥18 years for the prevention of COVID-19. This vaccine is the third COVID-19 vaccine authorized under an EUA for the prevention of COVID-19 in the United States (2). To guide its deliberations regarding the vaccine, ACIP used the Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) framework,† following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.§ The ACIP recommendation for the use of the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine under an EUA is interim and will be updated as additional information becomes available.

BACKGROUND: Shingrix™ (recombinant zoster vaccine) was licensed to prevent herpes zoster, dispensed as two doses given 2-6 months apart, among adults ages ≥50 years. Clinical trials yielded efficacy of >90% for confirmed herpes zoster,but post-market vaccine performance has not been evaluated. Efficacy of a single dose, delayed second dose, or among persons with autoimmune or general immunosuppressive conditions have also not been studied. We aimed to assess post-market vaccine effectiveness of Shingrix. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study among vaccinated and unvaccinated Medicare Part D community dwelling beneficiaries ages >65 years. Herpes zoster was identified using a medical office visit diagnosis with treatment, and postherpetic neuralgia using a validated algorithm. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to improve cohort balance, and marginal structural models to estimate hazard ratios. RESULTS: We found a vaccine effectiveness of 70.1% (95% CI, 68.6-71.5) and 56.9% (95% CI, 55.0-58.8) for two and one doses, respectively. The two-dose vaccine effectiveness was not significantly lower for beneficiaries 80+ years, for second doses received at ≥180 days, or for individuals with autoimmune conditions. The vaccine was also effective among individuals with immunosuppressive conditions. Two-dose vaccine effectiveness against postherpetic neuralgia was 76.0% (95% CI, 68.4-81.8). CONCLUSIONS: This large real-world observational study of effectiveness of Shingrix demonstrates the benefit of completing the two-dose regimen. Second doses administered beyond the recommended 6 months did not impair vaccine effectiveness.Our effectiveness estimates were lower than the clinical trials estimates, likely due to differences in outcome specificity.