BACKGROUND: Stigma and lack of social support are barriers to HIV prevention, especially among cisgender Black women in the United States. While HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) can decrease HIV transmission, PrEP initiation and adherence remains low among Black women, especially in the U.S. South. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to characterize experiences with stigma and social support among PrEP-naïve and PrEP-experienced Black cisgender women in Mississippi. DESIGN: Qualitative study in which semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted. METHODS: We purposively recruited PrEP-naïve cisgender Black women who met PrEP indications to participate in focus groups and all PrEP-experienced cisgender Black women at a sexual health clinic in Jackson, Mississippi to participate in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze focus group and interview transcripts. RESULTS: A total of 37 PrEP-naïve Black cisgender women participated across 6 focus groups and 8 PrEP-experienced cisgender Black women completed semi-structured interviews. Four themes were identified: (1) the intersection of gendered racism, discrimination, and HIV stigma, (2) enacted and anticipated PrEP stigma, (3) stigma mitigation strategies and PrEP adherence, and (4) social support's role in PrEP initiation and adherence. PrEP-naïve and -experienced Black women discussed the negative consequence that sexual stigmatization and gendered racism has on HIV testing. PrEP-naïve Black women discussed how HIV stigma decreases PrEP initiation. Conversely, PrEP-experienced Black women were able to identify strategies they utilized to mitigate stigma. PrEP-experienced Black women discussed how differing levels of social support impact their PrEP use. CONCLUSION: Improving social support and stigma mitigation strategies could help improve PrEP initiation and adherence among cisgender Black women at-risk of acquiring HIV in the U.S. South. Educating communities on PrEP, and training providers on stigma-mitigating strategies when serving Black women in the U.S. South who are seeking HIV prevention is paramount. | PrEP initiation and adherence among Black cisgender women in Mississippi: The role of HIV and PrEP stigma and social supportWhy was the study done?Stigma and lack of social support have been demonstrated as barriers to HIV prevention, especially among cisgender Black women in the United States (U.S.). While HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), a HIV prevention medication, has the ability to decrease HIV transmission, rates of starting PrEP remain low among Black women, especially in the U.S. South. Improving PrEP programs for US Black women calls for understanding how stigma and social support impact PrEP use among Black women.What did the researchers do?We recruited cisgender Black women who was eligible for PrEP but have never taken PrEP (PrEP-naïve) to participate in focus groups and cisgender Black women who have taken PrEP (PrEP-experienced) to participate in one-on-one in-depth interviews from healthcare clinics in Jackson, Mississippi. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyze focus group and interview transcripts.What did the researchers find?A total of 37 Black cisgender women across six groups participated in focus groups and eight cisgender Black women were interviewed. PrEP-naïve women reported: · HIV stigma in the community, which can lead to anticipated PrEP stigma · Experiencing sex-based sexual stigmatization at provider’s offices when seeking HIV testing PrEP-experienced Black women reported: Experiencing stigma when disclosing their PrEP use, such as their family and friends thinking that the woman and/or her partner is living with HIV. PrEP-experienced Black women who were in serodifferent partnership and had others in their network who knew about PrEP received support to take PrEP.What do the findings mean?Improving social support and stigma mitigation strategies could help improve PrEP initiation and adherence among cisgender Black women at-risk of acquiring HIV in the U.S. South. This includes educating communities on HIV and PrEP, and training providers on stigma-mitigating strategies when serving Black women in the U.S. South. | eng

The Phase 3 randomized controlled trial, TBTC Study 31/ACTG A5349 (NCT02410772) demonstrated that a 4-month rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen for drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis was safe and effective. The primary efficacy outcome was 12-month tuberculosis disease free survival, while the primary safety outcome was the proportion of grade 3 or higher adverse events during the treatment period. We conducted an analysis of demographic, clinical, microbiologic, radiographic, and pharmacokinetic data and identified risk factors for unfavorable outcomes and adverse events. Among participants receiving the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen, low rifapentine exposure is the strongest driver of tuberculosis-related unfavorable outcomes (HR 0.65 for every 100 µg∙h/mL increase, 95%CI 0.54-0.77). The only other risk factors identified are markers of higher baseline disease severity, namely Xpert MTB/RIF cycle threshold and extent of disease on baseline chest radiography (Xpert: HR 1.43 for every 3-cycle-threshold decrease, 95%CI 1.07-1.91; extensive disease: HR 2.02, 95%CI 1.07-3.82). From these risk factors, we developed a simple risk stratification to classify disease phenotypes as easier-, moderately-harder, or harder-to-treat TB. Notably, high rifapentine exposures are not associated with any predefined adverse safety outcomes. Our results suggest that the easier-to-treat subgroup may be eligible for further treatment shortening while the harder-to-treat subgroup may need higher doses or longer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Previous estimates of vaccine effectiveness (VE) against asymptomatic influenza virus infection based on seroconversion have varied widely and may be biased. We estimated 2022-2023 influenza VE against illness and asymptomatic infection in a prospective cohort. METHODS: In the HEROES-RECOVER cohort, adults at increased occupational risk of influenza exposure across 7 US sites provided weekly symptom reports and nasal swabs for reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) influenza testing. Laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections were classified as symptomatic (≥1 symptom) or asymptomatic during the week of testing. Participants reported demographic information and vaccination through surveys; most sites verified vaccination through medical record and immunization registry review. Person-time was calculated as days from the site-specific influenza season start (September-October 2022) through date of infection, study withdrawal, or season end (May 2023). We compared influenza incidence among vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants overall, by symptom status, and by influenza A subtype, using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for site and occupation. We estimated VE as (1 - adjusted hazard ratio) × 100%. RESULTS: In total, 269 of 3785 (7.1%) participants had laboratory-confirmed influenza, including 263 (98%) influenza A virus infections and 201 (75%) symptomatic illnesses. Incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza illness among vaccinated versus unvaccinated participants was 23.7 and 33.2 episodes per 100 000 person-days, respectively (VE: 38%; 95% CI: 15%-55%). Incidence of asymptomatic influenza virus infection was 8.0 versus 11.6 per 100 000 (VE: 13%; 95% CI: -47%, 49%). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination reduced incidence of symptomatic but not asymptomatic influenza virus infection, suggesting that influenza vaccination attenuates progression from infection to illness.

BACKGROUND: Immunogenicity studies suggest that recombinant influenza vaccine (RIV) may provide better protection against influenza than standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccines (SD IIV). This randomized trial evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (VE) and immunogenicity of RIV versus SD IIV in frontline workers and students aged 18-64 years. METHODS: Participants were randomized to receive RIV or SD IIV and followed for reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed influenza during the 2022-2023 influenza season. Sera were collected from a subset of participants before and at 1 and 6 months postvaccination and tested by hemagglutination inhibition for A/H1N1, A/H3N2, B/Yamagata, and B/Victoria and against cell-grown vaccine reference viruses for A/H1N1 and A/H3N2. RESULTS: Overall, 3988 participants were enrolled and vaccinated (25% of the trial sample size goal); RT-PCR-confirmed influenza occurred in 20 of 1963 RIV recipients and 28 of 1964 SD IIV recipients. Relative VE was 29% (95% confidence interval [CI], -26% to 60%). In the immunogenicity substudy (n = 118), the geometric mean titer ratio (GMTR) comparing RIV to SD IIV at 1 month was 2.3 (95% CI, 1.4-3.7) for cell-grown A/H1N1, 2.1 (95% CI, 1.3-3.4) for cell-grown A/H3N2, 1.1 (95% CI, .7-1.6) for B/Victoria, and 1.4 (95% CI, .9-2.0) for B/Yamagata. At 6 months, GMTRs were >1 against A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Yamagata. CONCLUSIONS: Relative VE of RIV compared to SD IIV did not reach statistical significance, but RIV elicited more robust humoral immune responses to 2 of 4 vaccine viruses at 1 month and 3 of 4 viruses at 6 months after vaccination, suggesting possible improved and sustained immune protection from RIV. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT05514002.

Elevated body mass index (BMI) has been linked to severe influenza illness and impaired vaccine immunogenicity, but the relationship between BMI and clinical vaccine effectiveness (VE) is less well described. This secondary analysis of data from a test-negative study of outpatients with acute respiratory illness assessed BMI and VE against medically attended, PCR-confirmed influenza over seven seasons (2011-12 through 2017-18). Vaccination status was determined from electronic medical records (EMR) and self-report; BMI was estimated from EMR-documented height and weight categorized for adults as obesity (≥ 30 kg/m(2)), overweight (25-29 kg/m(2)), or normal and for children based on standardized z-scales. Current season VE by virus type/subtype was estimated separately for adults and children. Pooled VE for all seasons was calculated as 1-adjusted odds ratios from logistic regression with an interaction term for BMI and vaccination. Among 28,089 adults and 12,380 children, BMI category was not significantly associated with VE against outpatient influenza for any type/subtype. Adjusted VE against A/H3N2, A/H1N1pdm09, and B in adults ranged from 16-31, 46-54, and 44-57%, and in children from 29-34, 57-65, and 50-55%, respectively, across the BMI categories. Elevated BMI was not associated with reduced VE against laboratory confirmed, outpatient influenza illness.

Leptospirosis, an acute bacterial zoonotic disease, is endemic in Puerto Rico. Infection in approximately 10%-15% of patients with clinical disease progresses to severe, potentially fatal illness. Increased incidence has been associated with flooding in endemic areas around the world. In 2022, Hurricane Fiona, a Category 1 hurricane, made landfall and inundated Puerto Rico with heavy rainfall and severe flooding, increasing the risk for a leptospirosis outbreak. In response, the Puerto Rico Department of Health (PRDH) changed guidelines to make leptospirosis cases reportable within 24 hours, centralized the case investigation management system, and provided training and messaging to health care providers. To evaluate changes in risk for leptospirosis after Hurricane Fiona to that before the storm, the increase in cases was quantified, and patient characteristics and geographic distribution were compared. During the 15 weeks after Hurricane Fiona, 156 patients experienced signs and symptoms of leptospirosis and had a specimen with a positive laboratory result reported to PRDH. The mean weekly number of cases during this period was 10.4, which is 3.6 as high as the weekly number of cases during the previous 37 weeks (2.9). After Hurricane Fiona, the proportion of cases indicating exposure to potentially contaminated water increased from 11% to 35%, and the number of persons receiving testing increased; these factors likely led to the resulting overall surge in reported cases. Robust surveillance combined with outreach to health care providers after flooding events can improve leptospirosis case identification, inform clinicians considering early initiation of treatment, and guide public messaging to avoid wading, swimming, or any contact with potentially contaminated floodwaters.

Objectives. To compare the incidence, case-hospitalization rates, and vaccination rates of COVID-19 between people experiencing sheltered homelessness (PESH) and the broader community in Chicago, Illinois, and describe the impact of a whole community approach to disease mitigation during the public health emergency. Methods. Incidence of COVID-19 among PESH was compared with community-wide incidence using case-based surveillance data from March 1, 2020, to May 11, 2023. Seven-day rolling means of COVID-19 incidence were assessed for the overall study period and for each of 6 distinct waves of COVID-19 transmission. Results. A total of 774 009 cases of COVID-19 were detected: 2579 among PESH and 771 430 in the broader community. Incidence and hospitalization rates per 100 000 in PESH were more than 5 times higher (99.84 vs 13.94 and 16.88 vs 2.14) than the community at large in wave 1 (March 1, 2020-October 3, 2020). This difference decreased through wave 3 (March 7, 2021-June 26, 2021), with PESH having a lower incidence rate per 100 000 than the wider community (8.02 vs 13.03). Incidence and hospitalization of PESH rose again to rates higher than the broader community in waves 4 through 6 but never returned to wave 1 levels. Throughout the study period, COVID-19 incidence among PESH was 2.88 times higher than that of the community (70.90 vs 24.65), and hospitalization was 4.56 times higher among PESH (7.51 vs 1.65). Conclusions. Our findings suggest that whole-community approaches can minimize disparities in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission between vulnerable populations and the broader community, and reinforce the benefits of a shared approach that include multiple partners when addressing public health emergencies in special populations. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print August 28, 2024:e1-e9. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307801).

Hybrid immunity, as a result of infection and vaccination to SARS-CoV-2, has been well studied in adults but limited evidence is available in children. We evaluated the antibody responses to primary SARS-CoV-2 infection among vaccinated and unvaccinated children aged ≥ 5 years. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort study of children aged ≥ 5 was conducted during August 2021-August 2022, at sites in Arizona, Texas, Utah, and Florida. Children submitted weekly nasal swabs for PCR testing and provided sera 14-59 days after PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Antibodies were measured by ELISA against the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and S2 domain of ancestral Spike (WA1), in addition to Omicron (BA.2) RBD, following infection in children, with and without prior monovalent ancestral mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Among the 257 participants aged 5 to 18 years, 166 (65%) had received at least two mRNA COVID-19 vaccine doses ≥ 14 days prior to infection. Of these, 53 occurred during Delta predominance, with 37 (70%) unvaccinated at the time of infection. The remaining 204 infections occurred during Omicron predominance, with 53 (26%) participants unvaccinated. After adjusting for weight, age, symptomatic infection, and gender, significantly higher mean RBD AUC values were observed among the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group for both WA1 and Omicron (p < 0.0001). A smaller percentage of vaccinated children reported fever during illness, with 55 (33%) reporting fever compared to 44 (48%) unvaccinated children reporting fever (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Children with vaccine-induced immunity at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection had higher antibody levels during convalescence and experienced less fever compared to unvaccinated children during infection.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 is a condition that can lead to other chronic conditions. These conditions are frequently diagnosed in the primary care setting. We used a novel primary care registry to quantify the burden of post-COVID conditions among adult patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis across the United States. METHODS: We used the American Family Cohort, a national primary care registry, to identify study patients. After propensity score matching, we assessed the prevalence of 17 condition categories individually and cumulatively, comparing patients having COVID-19 in 2020-2021 with (1) historical control patients having influenza-like illness in 2018 and (2) contemporaneous control patients seen for wellness or preventive visits in 2020-2021. RESULTS: We identified 28,215 patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis and 235,953 historical control patients with influenza-like illness. The COVID-19 group had higher prevalences of breathing difficulties (4.2% vs 1.9%), type 2 diabetes (12.0% vs 10.2%), fatigue (3.9% vs 2.2%), and sleep disturbances (3.5% vs 2.4%). There were no differences, however, in the postdiagnosis monthly trend in cumulative morbidity between the COVID-19 patients (trend = 0.026; 95% CI, 0.025-0.027) and the patients with influenza-like illness (trend = 0.026; 95% CI, 0.023-0.027). Relative to contemporaneous wellness control patients, COVID-19 patients had higher prevalences of breathing difficulties and type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show a moderate burden of post-COVID conditions in primary care, including breathing difficulties, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. Based on clinical registry data, the prevalence of post-COVID conditions in primary care practices is lower than that reported in subspecialty and hospital settings.

RATIONALE: Optimizing pyrazinamide dosing is critical to improve treatment efficacy while minimizing toxicity during tuberculosis treatment. Study 31/ACTG A5349 represents the largest Phase 3 randomized controlled therapeutic trial to date for such investigation. OBJECTIVES: We sought to report pyrazinamide pharmacokinetic parameters, risk factors for lower pyrazinamide exposure, and relationships between pyrazinamide exposure with efficacy and safety outcomes. We aimed to determine pyrazinamide dosing strategies that optimize risks and benefits. METHODS: We analyzed pyrazinamide steady-state pharmacokinetic data using population nonlinear mixed-effects models. We evaluated the contribution of pyrazinamide exposure to long-term efficacy using parametric time-to-event models and safety outcomes using logistic regression. We evaluated optimal dosing with therapeutic windows targeting ≥95% durable cure and safety within the observed proportion of the primary safety outcome. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 2255 participants with 6978 plasma samples, pyrazinamide displayed 7-fold exposure variability (151-1053 mg·h/L). Body weight was not a clinically relevant predictor of drug clearance and thus did not justify the need for weight-banded dosing. Both clinical and safety outcomes were associated with pyrazinamide exposure, resulting in a therapeutic window of 231-355 mg·h/L for the control and 226-349 mg·h/L for the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen. Flat dosing of pyrazinamide at 1000 mg would have permitted an additional 13.1% (n=96) participants allocated to the control and 9.2% (n=70) to the rifapentine-moxifloxacin regimen dosed within the therapeutic window, compared to the current weight-banded dosing. CONCLUSIONS: Flat dosing of pyrazinamide at 1000 mg daily would be readily implementable and could optimize treatment outcomes in drug-susceptible tuberculosis. Clinical trial registration available at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, ID: NCT02410772.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, most chlamydia cases are reported from non-sexually transmitted disease clinics, and there is limited information focusing on the reasons for chlamydia testing in private settings. These analyses describe clinical visits to primary care providers where chlamydia testing was performed to help discern between screening and diagnostic testing for chlamydia. METHODS: Using the largest primary care clinical registry in the United States, the PRIME registry, chlamydia tests were identified using Current Procedural Terminology procedure codes and categorized as diagnostic testing for sexually transmitted infection (STI)-related symptoms, screening for chlamydia, or "other," based on Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Evaluation and Management codes selected for visits. RESULTS: Of 120,013 clinical visits with chlamydia testing between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2022, 70.4% were women; 20.6% were with STI-related symptoms, 59.9% were for screening, and 19.5% for "other" reasons. Of those 120,013 clinical visits with chlamydia testing, the logit model showed that patients were significantly more likely to have STI-related symptoms if they were female than male, non-Hispanic Black than non-Hispanic White, aged 15 to 24 years than aged ≥45 years, and resided in the South than in the Northeast. CONCLUSION: It is important to know what proportion of chlamydial infections is identified through screening programs and to have this information stratified by demographics. The inclusion of laboratory results could further facilitate a better understanding of the impact of chlamydia screening programs on the identification and treatment of chlamydia in private office settings in the United States.

While the number of immunocompromised (IC) individuals continues to rise, the existing literature on influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) in IC populations is limited. Understanding the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of the seasonal influenza vaccines in immunocompromised (IC) populations remains paramount. Using 2017–2018 US Flu VE Network data, we examined the VE of the 2017–2018 seasonal influenza vaccine against symptomatic influenza in outpatient settings among IC adults. We used logistic regression and adjusted for enrollment site, race, self-reported general health status, age, and onset date of symptoms. The VE among non-IC was 31% (95% CI: 22, 39) and among IC participants was −4% (95% CI: −66, 35), though the difference was not statistically significant. This study demonstrates the capacity to study a large IC population using an existing influenza VE network and contributes to the literature to support large, multicenter VE studies for IC populations. © 2024 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Due to differences in chemical properties and half-lives, best practices for exposure assessment may differ for legacy versus novel brominated flame retardants (BFRs). Our objective was to identify the environment matrix that best predicted biomarkers of children's BFR exposures. Paired samples were collected from children, aged 3-6 years, and their homes including dust, a small piece of polyurethane foam from the furniture, and a handwipe and wristband from each child. Biological samples collected included serum, which was analyzed for 11 polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and urine, which was analyzed for tetrabromobenzoic acid (TBBA), a metabolite of 2-ethylhexyl-2,3,4,5-tetrabromobenzoate (EH-TBB). Significant positive correlations were typically observed between BFRs measured in dust, handwipes and wristbands, though wristbands and handwipes tended to be more strongly correlated with one another than with dust. PBDEs, EH-TBB and BEH-TEBP were detected in 30% of the sofa foam samples, suggesting that the foam was treated with PentaBDE or Firemaster® 550/600 (FM 550/600). PBDEs were detected in all serum samples and TBBA was detected in 43% of urine samples. Statistically significant positive correlations were observed between the environmental samples and serum for PBDEs. Urinary TBBA was 6.86 and 6.58 times more likely to be detected among children in the highest tertile of EH-TBB exposure for handwipes and wristbands, respectively (95 % CI: 2.61, 18.06 and 1.43, 30.05 with p<0.001 and 0.02, respectively). The presence of either PentaBDE or FM 550/600 in furniture was also associated with significantly higher levels of these chemicals in dust, handwipes and serum (for PBDEs) and more frequent detection of TBBA in urine (p=0.13). Our results suggest children are exposed to a range of BFRs in the home, some of which likely originate from residential furniture, and that silicone wristbands are a practical tool for evaluating external exposure to both the legacy and novel BFRs.

BACKGROUND: Flu-like reactions can occur after exposure to rifampin, rifapentine, or isoniazid. Prior studies have reported the presence of antibodies to rifampin, but associations with underlying pathogenesis are unclear. METHODS: We evaluated PREVENT TB study participants who received weekly isoniazid + rifapentine for 3 months (3HP) or daily isoniazid for 9 months (9H) as treatment for M. tuberculosis infection. Flu-like reaction was defined as a grade ≥2 of any of flu-like symptoms. Controls (3HP or 9H) did not report flu-like reactions. We developed a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) to detect antibodies against rifapentine, isoniazid, rifampin, and rifapentine metabolite. RESULTS: Among 128 participants, 69 received 3HP (22 with flu-like reactions; 47 controls) and 59 received 9H (12 with flu-like reactions; 47 controls). In participants receiving 3HP, anti-rifapentine IgG was identified in 2/22 (9%) participants with flu-like reactions and 6/47 (13%) controls (P = 0.7), anti-isoniazid IgG in 2/22 (9%) participants with flu-like reactions and 4/47 (9%) controls (P = 0.9), and anti-rifapentine metabolite IgG in 2/47 (4%) controls (P = 0.9). Among participants receiving 9H, IgG and IgM anti-isoniazid antibodies were each present in 4/47 (9%) controls, respectively, but none among participants with flu-like reactions; anti-rifapentine IgG antibodies were not present in any participants with flu-like reactions or controls. CONCLUSIONS: We detected anti-rifapentine, anti-isoniazid, and anti-rifapentine metabolite antibodies, but the proportions of participants with antibodies were low, and did not differ between participants with flu-like reactions and those without such reactions. This suggests that flu-like reactions associated with 3HP and 9H were not antibody-mediated.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize high type 1 diabetes (T1D) genetic risk in a population where type 2 diabetes (T2D) predominates. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Characteristics typically associated with T1D were assessed in 109,594 Million Veteran Program participants with adult-onset diabetes, 2011-2021, who had T1D genetic risk scores (GRS) defined as low (0 to <45%), medium (45 to <90%), high (90 to <95%), or highest (≥95%). RESULTS: T1D characteristics increased progressively with higher genetic risk (P < 0.001 for trend). A GRS ≥ 90% was more common with diabetes diagnoses before age 40 years, but 95% of those participants were diagnosed at age ≥40 years, and they resembled T2D in mean age (64.3 years) and BMI (32.3 kg/m2). Compared with the low risk group, the highest-risk group was more likely to have diabetic ketoacidosis (low 0.9% vs. highest GRS 3.7%), hypoglycemia prompting emergency visits (3.7% vs. 5.8%), outpatient plasma glucose <50 mg/dL (7.5% vs. 13.4%), a shorter median time to start insulin (3.5 vs. 1.4 years), use of a T1D diagnostic code (16.3% vs. 28.1%), low C-peptide levels if tested (1.8% vs. 32.4%), and glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies (6.9% vs. 45.2%), all P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Characteristics associated with T1D were increased with higher genetic risk, and especially with the top 10% of risk. However, the age and BMI of those participants resemble people with T2D, and a substantial proportion did not have diagnostic testing or use of T1D diagnostic codes. T1D genetic screening could be used to aid identification of adult-onset T1D in settings in which T2D predominates.

BACKGROUND: The Global COVID Vaccine Safety (GCoVS) Project, established in 2021 under the multinational Global Vaccine Data Network™ (GVDN®), facilitates comprehensive assessment of vaccine safety. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of adverse events of special interest (AESI) following COVID-19 vaccination from 10 sites across eight countries. METHODS: Using a common protocol, this observational cohort study compared observed with expected rates of 13 selected AESI across neurological, haematological, and cardiac outcomes. Expected rates were obtained by participating sites using pre-COVID-19 vaccination healthcare data stratified by age and sex. Observed rates were reported from the same healthcare datasets since COVID-19 vaccination program rollout. AESI occurring up to 42 days following vaccination with mRNA (BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273) and adenovirus-vector (ChAdOx1) vaccines were included in the primary analysis. Risks were assessed using observed versus expected (OE) ratios with 95 % confidence intervals. Prioritised potential safety signals were those with lower bound of the 95 % confidence interval (LBCI) greater than 1.5. RESULTS: Participants included 99,068,901 vaccinated individuals. In total, 183,559,462 doses of BNT162b2, 36,178,442 doses of mRNA-1273, and 23,093,399 doses of ChAdOx1 were administered across participating sites in the study period. Risk periods following homologous vaccination schedules contributed 23,168,335 person-years of follow-up. OE ratios with LBCI > 1.5 were observed for Guillain-Barré syndrome (2.49, 95 % CI: 2.15, 2.87) and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (3.23, 95 % CI: 2.51, 4.09) following the first dose of ChAdOx1 vaccine. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis showed an OE ratio of 3.78 (95 % CI: 1.52, 7.78) following the first dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine. The OE ratios for myocarditis and pericarditis following BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and ChAdOx1 were significantly increased with LBCIs > 1.5. CONCLUSION: This multi-country analysis confirmed pre-established safety signals for myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Other potential safety signals that require further investigation were identified.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on whether hybrid immunity differs by count and order of immunity-conferring events (SARS-CoV-2 infection or COVID-19 vaccination). From a cohort of health care personnel, first responders, and other frontline workers in six US states, we examined heterogeneity of the effect of hybrid immunity on SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels. METHODS: Exposures included event-count (sum of infections and vaccine doses) and event-order, categorized into seven permutations of vaccination and/or infection. Outcome was level of serum binding antibodies against receptor binding domain (RBD) of the ancestral SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (total RBD-binding Ig), measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Mean antibody levels were examined up to 365 days after each of the 1st-7th events. RESULTS: Analysis included 5,793 participants measured from August 7, 2020 to April 15, 2023. Hybrid immunity from infection before one or two vaccine doses elicited modestly superior antibody responses after the 2nd and 3rd events (compared to infections or vaccine-doses alone). This superiority was not evident after the 4th and 5th events (additional doses). Among adults infected before vaccination, adjusted geometric mean ratios (95% CI) of anti-RBD early response (versus vaccinated-only) were 1.23 (1.14-1.33), 1.09 (1.03-1.14), 0.87 (0.81-0.94), and 0.99 (0.85-1.15) after the 2nd-5th events, respectively. Post-vaccination infections elicited superior responses: adjusted geometric mean ratios (95% CI) of anti-RBD early response (versus vaccinated-only) were: 0.93 (0.75-1.17), 1.11 (1.06-1.16), 1.17 (1.11-1.24), and 1.20 (1.07-1.34) after the 2nd-5th events, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Findings reflecting heterogeneity in antibody levels by permutations of infection and vaccination history could inform COVID-19 vaccination policy.

IMPORTANCE: Bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were recommended in the US for children and adolescents aged 12 years or older on September 1, 2022, and for children aged 5 to 11 years on October 12, 2022; however, data demonstrating the effectiveness of bivalent COVID-19 vaccines are limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of bivalent COVID-19 vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19 among children and adolescents. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Data for the period September 4, 2022, to January 31, 2023, were combined from 3 prospective US cohort studies (6 sites total) and used to estimate COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness among children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. A total of 2959 participants completed periodic surveys (demographics, household characteristics, chronic medical conditions, and COVID-19 symptoms) and submitted weekly self-collected nasal swabs (irrespective of symptoms); participants submitted additional nasal swabs at the onset of any symptoms. EXPOSURE: Vaccination status was captured from the periodic surveys and supplemented with data from state immunization information systems and electronic medical records. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Respiratory swabs were tested for the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined as a positive test regardless of symptoms. Symptomatic COVID-19 was defined as a positive test and 2 or more COVID-19 symptoms within 7 days of specimen collection. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios for SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19 among participants who received a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose vs participants who received no vaccine or monovalent vaccine doses only. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race, ethnicity, underlying health conditions, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status, geographic site, proportion of circulating variants by site, and local virus prevalence. RESULTS: Of the 2959 participants (47.8% were female; median age, 10.6 years [IQR, 8.0-13.2 years]; 64.6% were non-Hispanic White) included in this analysis, 25.4% received a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose. During the study period, 426 participants (14.4%) had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among these 426 participants, 184 (43.2%) had symptomatic COVID-19, 383 (89.9%) were not vaccinated or had received only monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses (1.38 SARS-CoV-2 infections per 1000 person-days), and 43 (10.1%) had received a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose (0.84 SARS-CoV-2 infections per 1000 person-days). Bivalent vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection was 54.0% (95% CI, 36.6%-69.1%) and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 was 49.4% (95% CI, 22.2%-70.7%). The median observation time after vaccination was 276 days (IQR, 142-350 days) for participants who received only monovalent COVID-19 vaccine doses vs 50 days (IQR, 27-74 days) for those who received a bivalent COVID-19 vaccine dose. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The bivalent COVID-19 vaccines protected children and adolescents against SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptomatic COVID-19. These data demonstrate the benefit of COVID-19 vaccine in children and adolescents. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

OBJECTIVES: Pediatric COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake is not well understood. Among parents of a prospective cohort of children aged 6 months-17 years, we assessed COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP), and uptake over 15 months. METHODS: The PROTECT study collected sociodemographic characteristics of children at enrollment and COVID-19 vaccination data and parental KAPs quarterly. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to test the effect of KAPs on vaccine uptake; McNemar's test for paired samples was used to evaluate KAP change over time. RESULTS: A total of 2,837 children were enrolled, with more than half (61 %) vaccinated by October 2022. Positive parental beliefs about vaccine safety and effectiveness strongly predicted vaccine uptake among children aged 5-11 years (aOR 13.1, 95 % CI 8.5-20.4 and aOR 6.4, 95 % CI 4.3-9.6, respectively) and children aged 12+ years (aOR 7.0, 95 % CI 3.8-13.0 and aOR 8.9, 95 % CI 4.4-18.0). Compared to enrollment, at follow-up parents (of vaccinated and unvaccinated children) reported higher self-assessed vaccine knowledge, but more negative beliefs towards vaccine safety, effectiveness, and trust in government. Parents unlikely to vaccinate their children at enrollment reported more positive beliefs on vaccine knowledge, safety, and effectiveness at follow-up. CONCLUSION: The PROTECT cohort allows for an examination of factors driving vaccine uptake and how beliefs about COVID-19 and the COVID-19 vaccines change over time. Findings of the current analysis suggest that these beliefs change over time and policies aiming to increase vaccine uptake should focus on vaccine safety and effectiveness.

Both SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus can be transmitted by asymptomatic, presymptomatic, or symptomatic infected persons. We assessed effects on work attendance while ill before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States by analyzing data collected prospectively from persons with acute respiratory illnesses enrolled in a multistate study during 2018-2022. Persons with previous hybrid work experience were significantly less likely to work onsite on the day before through the first 3 days of illness than those without that experience, an effect more pronounced during the COVID-19 pandemic than during prepandemic influenza seasons. Persons with influenza or COVID-19 were significantly less likely to work onsite than persons with other acute respiratory illnesses. Among persons with positive COVID-19 test results available by the second or third day of illness, few worked onsite. Hybrid and remote work policies might reduce workplace exposures and help reduce spread of respiratory viruses.

Human movement is increasingly being recognized as a major driver of arbovirus risk and dissemination. The Communities Organized to Prevent Arboviruses (COPA) study is a cohort in southern Puerto Rico to measure arboviral prevalence, evaluate interventions, and collect mobility data. To quantify the relationship between arboviral prevalence and human mobility patterns, we fit multilevel logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios for mobility-related predictors of positive chikungunya IgG or Zika IgM test results collected from COPA, assuming mobility data does not change substantially from year to year. From May 8, 2018-June 8, 2019, 39% of the 1,845 active participants during the study period had a positive arboviral seroprevalence result. Most (74%) participants reported spending five or more weekly hours outside of their home. A 1% increase in weekly hours spent outside the home was associated with a 4% (95% confidence interval (CI): 2-7%) decrease in the odds of testing positive for arbovirus. After adjusting for age and whether a person had air conditioning (AC) at home, any time spent in a work location was protective against arbovirus infection (32% decrease, CI: 9-49%). In fact, there was a general decreased prevalence for individuals who visited locations that were inside and had AC or screens, regardless of the type of location (32% decrease, CI: 12-47%). In this population, the protective characteristics of locations visited appear to be the most important driver of the relationship between mobility and arboviral prevalence. This relationship indicates that not all mobility is the same, with elements like screens and AC providing protection in some locations. These findings highlight the general importance of AC and screens, which are known to be protective against mosquitoes and mosquito-transmitted diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To develop initial American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines on the use of exercise, rehabilitation, diet, and additional interventions in conjunction with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as part of an integrative management approach for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: An interprofessional guideline development group constructed clinically relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) questions. A literature review team then completed a systematic literature review and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate the certainty of evidence. An interprofessional Voting Panel (n = 20 participants) that included 3 individuals with RA achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: The Voting Panel achieved consensus on 28 recommendations for the use of integrative interventions in conjunction with DMARDs for the management of RA. Consistent engagement in exercise received a strong recommendation. Of 27 conditional recommendations, 4 pertained to exercise, 13 to rehabilitation, 3 to diet, and 7 to additional integrative interventions. These recommendations are specific to RA management, recognizing that other medical indications and general health benefits may exist for many of these interventions. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides initial ACR recommendations on integrative interventions for the management of RA to accompany DMARD treatments. The broad range of interventions included in these recommendations illustrates the importance of an interprofessional, team-based approach to RA management. The conditional nature of most recommendations requires clinicians to engage persons with RA in shared decision-making when applying these recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Infant and neonatal mortality estimates are typically derived from retrospective birth histories collected through surveys in countries with unreliable civil registration and vital statistics systems. Yet such data are subject to biases, including under-reporting of deaths and age misreporting, which impact mortality estimates. Prospective population-based cohort studies are an underutilized data source for mortality estimation that may offer strengths that avoid biases. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the Child Health Epidemiology Reference Group, including 11 population-based pregnancy or birth cohort studies, to evaluate the appropriateness of vital event data for mortality estimation. Analyses were descriptive, summarizing study designs, populations, protocols, and internal checks to assess their impact on data quality. We calculated infant and neonatal morality rates and compared patterns with Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data. RESULTS: Studies yielded 71,760 pregnant women and 85,095 live births. Specific field protocols, especially pregnancy enrollment, limited exclusion criteria, and frequent follow-up visits after delivery, led to higher birth outcome ascertainment and fewer missing deaths. Most studies had low follow-up loss in pregnancy and the first month with little evidence of date heaping. Among studies in Asia and Latin America, neonatal mortality rates (NMR) were similar to DHS, while several studies in Sub-Saharan Africa had lower NMRs than DHS. Infant mortality varied by study and region between sources. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective, population-based cohort studies following rigorous protocols can yield high-quality vital event data to improve characterization of detailed mortality patterns of infants in low- and middle-income countries, especially in the early neonatal period where mortality risk is highest and changes rapidly.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is one option for preventing unintended pregnancies and short interpregnancy intervals. Efforts to increase access to contraception may benefit from applying the social ecological model (SEM), a framework that considers individual, interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy influences on behavior. We aimed to summarize findings from interventions on LARC use and map interventions to SEM levels. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the 2010-2020 literature in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases to summarize interventions that did and did not increase LARC use. Although increasing LARC use is not an appropriate goal from a reproductive autonomy standpoint, it is the stated goal of much of the research conducted to date and typically indicates an improvement in access. We mapped these interventions to SEM levels and categorized their strategies: cost support, patient counseling, administrative support, provider training, and other. RESULTS: Of 27 interventions reviewed, 17 (63%) increased LARC use. We observed a greater proportion of interventions that increased LARC uptake among those with strategies implemented at policy (8/10 [80%]) or organizational (14/19 [74%]) SEM levels compared with interventions implemented at other SEM levels. When both individual and organizational SEM-level components were implemented, five of six interventions (83%) increased uptake. All five interventions with both organizational- and policy-level components increased LARC use. Among the 27 interventions, patient counseling (n = 12) and cost support (n = 12) were common strategies. Five of 12 interventions (42%) involving patient counseling and 11 of 12 (92%) involving cost support increased LARC use. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational and policy SEM components and cost support strategies were most prevalent in interventions that increased LARC use. Future interventions to improve access to contraception, while respecting patient autonomy, could incorporate more than one SEM level.

BACKGROUND Information is limited on messenger RNA (mRNA) BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (VE) in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection or attenuating disease when administered in real-world conditions.METHODS Prospective cohorts of 3,975 healthcare personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing during December 14 2020—April 10 2021. Self-collected mid-turbinate nasal swabs were tested by qualitative and quantitative reverse-transcription–polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR). VE was calculated as 100%×(1−hazard ratio); adjusted VE was calculated using vaccination propensity weights and adjustments for site, occupation, and local virus circulation.RESULTS SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 204 (5.1%) participants; 16 were partially (≥14 days post-dose-1 to 13 days after dose-2) or fully (≥14 days post-dose-2) vaccinated, and 156 were unvaccinated; 32 with indeterminate status (&lt;14 days after dose-1) were excluded. Adjusted mRNA VE of full vaccination was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI]=76%–97%) against symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection; VE of partial vaccination was 81% (95% CI=64%-90%). Among partially or fully vaccinated participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection, mean viral RNA load (Log10 copies/mL) was 40% lower (95% CI=16%-57%), the risk of self-reported febrile COVID-19 was 58% lower (Risk Ratio=0.42, 95% CI=0.18-0.98), and 2.3 fewer days (95% CI=0.8-3.7) were spent sick in bed compared to unvaccinated infected participants.CONCLUSIONS Authorized mRNA vaccines were highly effective among working-age adults in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections when administered in real-world conditions and attenuated viral RNA load, febrile symptoms, and illness duration among those with breakthrough infection despite vaccination.Competing Interest StatementAllison L. Naleway reported funding from Pfizer for a meningococcal B vaccine study unrelated to the submitted work. Kurt T. Hegmann serves at the Editor of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine evidence-based practice guidelines. Matthew S. These reported grants and personal fees from Reed Group and the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, outside the submitted work. Other authors have reported no conflicts of interest.Funding StatementFunding provided in whole or in part by federal funds from the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention under contract numbers 75D30120R68013 awarded to Marshfield Clinic Research Laboratory, 75D30120C08379 to University of Arizona, and 75D30120C08150 awarded to Abt Associates, Inc.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study was reviewed and approved by the University of Arizona IRB as the single IRB for this studyAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesSummary data will be available once all study objectives are met.

Introduction In a multi-center prospective cohort of essential workers, we assessed knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) by vaccine intention, prior SARS-CoV-2 positivity, and occupation, and their impact on vaccine uptake over time.Methods Initiated in July 2020, HEROES-RECOVER cohort provided socio-demographics and COVID-19 vaccination data. Using follow-up two surveys approximately three months apart, COVID-19 vaccine KAP, intention, and receipt was collected; the first survey categorized participants as reluctant, reachable, or endorsers.Results A total of 4,803 participants were included in the analysis. Most (70%) were vaccine endorsers, 16% were reachable, and 14% were reluctant. By May 2021, 77% had received at least one vaccine dose. KAP responses strongly predicted vaccine uptake, particularly positive attitudes about safety (aOR=5.46, 95% CI: 1.4-20.8) and effectiveness (aOR=5.0, 95% CI: 1.3-19.1). Participants prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 22% less likely to believe the COVID-19 vaccine was effective compared with uninfected participants (aOR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64-0.96). This was even more pronounced in first responders compared with other occupations, with first responders 42% less likely to believe in COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness (aOR=0.58, 95% CI 0.40-0.84). KAP responses shifted positively, with reluctant and reachable participant scores modestly increasing in positive responses for perceived vaccine effectiveness (7% and 12%, respectively) on the second follow-up survey; 25% of initially reluctant participants received the COVID-19 vaccine.Discussion Our study demonstrates attitudes associated with COVID-19 vaccine uptake and a positive shift in attitudes over time. First responders, despite potential high exposure to SARS-CoV-2, and participants with a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection were more vaccine reluctant.Conclusions COVID-19 vaccine KAP responses predicted vaccine uptake and associated attitudes improved over time. Perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine can shift over time. Targeting messages about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness in reducing SARS-CoV-2 virus infection and illness severity may increase vaccine uptake for reluctant and reachable participants.Competing Interest StatementThe findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Allison L. Naleway reported funding from Pfizer for a meningococcal B vaccine study unrelated to the submitted work.Funding StatementThis study was funded by the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (contracts 75D30120R68013 to Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, 75D30120C08379 to the University of Arizona, and 75D30120C08150 to Abt Associates).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:- Ethics committee/IRB of University of Arizona gave ethical approval for this work - Ethic committee/IRB of all RECOVER Abt sites (University of Utah, Baylor Scott &amp; White, University of Miami, St Luke's, and Kaiser Permanente) gave ethical approval for this work - Ethics committee/IRB of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention deferred to RECOVER Abt sites and University of Arizona for this workI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study repo ted in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authorsFDAU.S. Food and Drug AdministrationCDCCenters for Disease Control and PreventionEUAEmergency Use AuthorizationKAPKnowledge, attitudes, and practicesHEROESArizona Healthcare, Emergency Response and Other Essential Workers SurveillanceRECOVERStudy and Research on the Epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 in Essential Response PersonnelH-RHEROES-RECOVERHCPHealth care personnelFWFrontline workersPPEPersonal protective equipment

Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs), firefighters, and other first responders are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to healthcare personnel but have relatively low COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Resistance to COVID-19 vaccine mandates among first responders has the potential to disrupt essential public services and threaten public health and safety. Using data from the HEROES-RECOVER prospective cohorts, we report on the increased illness burden of COVID-19 among unvaccinated first responders. From January to September 2021, first responders contributed to weekly active surveillance for COVID-19-like illness (CLI). Self-collected respiratory specimens collected weekly, irrespective of symptoms, and at the onset CLI were tested by Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) assay for SARSCoV-2. Among 1415 first responders, 17% were LEOs, 68% firefighters, and 15% had other first responder occupations. Unvaccinated (41%) compared to fully vaccinated (59%) first responders were less likely to believe COVID-19 vaccines are very or extremely effective (17% versus 54%) or very or extremely safe (15% versus 54%). From January through September 2021, among unvaccinated LEOs, the incidence of COVID-19 was 11.9 per 1,000 person-weeks (95%CI=7.0-20.1) compared to only 0.6 (95%CI=0.2-2.5) among vaccinated LEOs. Incidence of COVID-19 was also higher among unvaccinated firefighters (9.0 per 1,000 person-weeks; 95%CI=6.4-12.7) compared to those vaccinated (1.8 per 1,000; 95%CI=1.1-2.8). Once they had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, unvaccinated first responders were sick for a mean+/-SD of 14.7+/-21.7 days and missed a mean of 38.0+/-46.0 hours of work. These findings suggest that state and local governments with large numbers of unvaccinated first responders may face major disruptions in their workforce due to COVID-19 illness. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.

Background. In the United States, influenza activity during the 2021-2022 season was modest and sufficient enough to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness for the first time since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated influenza vaccine effectiveness against lab-confirmed outpatient acute illness caused by predominant A(H3N2) viruses. Methods. Between October 2021 and April 2022, research staff across 7 sites enrolled patients aged >=6 months seeking outpatient care for acute respiratory illness with cough. Using a test-negative design, we assessed VE against influenza A(H3N2). Due to strong correlation between influenza and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were excluded from vaccine effectiveness estimations. Estimates were adjusted for site, age, month of illness, race/ethnicity and general health status. Results. Among 6,260 participants, 468 (7%) tested positive for influenza only, including 440 (94%) for A(H3N2). All 206 sequenced A(H3N2) viruses were characterized as belonging to genetic group 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.2, which has antigenic differences from the 2021-2022 season A(H3N2) vaccine component that belongs to clade 3C.2a1b subclade 2a.1. After excluding 1,948 SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, 4,312 patients were included in analyses of influenza VE; 2,463 (57%) were vaccinated against influenza. Effectiveness against A(H3N2) for all ages was 36% (95%CI, 20-49%) overall; 40% (95%CI, 24-53%) for those aged 6 months-49 years; and 10% (95%CI, -60-49%) for those aged >=50 years. Conclusion. Influenza vaccination in 2021-2022 provided protection against influenza A(H3N2)-related outpatient visits among young persons, with no measurable protection among older adults. 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.

Background. Studies have reported that prior-season influenza vaccination is associated with higher risk of clinical influenza infection among vaccinees in a given season. Understanding the underlying causes requires consideration of within-season waning and recent infection. Methods. Using the US Flu Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) Network data over 8 influenza seasons (2011-2012 to 2018-2019), we estimated the effect of prior-season vaccination on the odds of clinical infection in a given season, after accounting for waning vaccine protection using regression methods. We adjusted for potential confounding by recent clinical infection using inverse-probability weighting. We investigated theoretically whether unmeasured subclinical infection in the prior season, which is more likely in the non-repeat vaccinees, could explain the repeat vaccination effect. Results. Repeat vaccinees vaccinated earlier in a season by one week. After accounting for waning VE, repeat vaccinees were still more likely to test positive for influenza A(H3N2) (OR=1.11, 95% CI:1.02-1.21) but not for influenza B (OR=1.03, 95% CI:0.89-1.18) or A(H1N1) (OR=1.03, 95% CI:0.90-1.19) compared to those vaccinated in the given season only. Recent clinical infection with the homologous (sub)type protected against clinical infection with A(H3N2) or B. Individuals with clinical infection in one season had 1.11 (95% CI:1.03-1.19) times the odds of switching vaccination status in the following season. Adjusting for recent clinical infections did not strongly influence the estimated effect of prior-season vaccination. Adjusting for subclinical infection could theoretically attenuate this effect. Conclusion. Waning protection and recent clinical infection were insufficient to explain observed reduced VE in repeat vaccinees with a test-negative design. Copyright The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.

OBJECTIVE: To develop initial American College of Rheumatology (ACR) guidelines on the use of exercise, rehabilitation, diet, and additional interventions in conjunction with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as part of an integrative management approach for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: An interprofessional guideline development group constructed clinically relevant Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) questions. A literature review team then completed a systematic literature review and applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate the certainty of evidence. An interprofessional Voting Panel (n = 20 participants) that included 3 individuals with RA achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: The Voting Panel achieved consensus on 28 recommendations for the use of integrative interventions in conjunction with DMARDs for the management of RA. Consistent engagement in exercise received a strong recommendation. Of 27 conditional recommendations, 4 pertained to exercise, 13 to rehabilitation, 3 to diet, and 7 to additional integrative interventions. These recommendations are specific to RA management, recognizing that other medical indications and general health benefits may exist for many of these interventions. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides initial ACR recommendations on integrative interventions for the management of RA to accompany DMARD treatments. The broad range of interventions included in these recommendations illustrates the importance of an interprofessional, team-based approach to RA management. The conditional nature of most recommendations requires clinicians to engage persons with RA in shared decision-making when applying these recommendations.