Explore the vast range of titles available.

Determining the factors that impact the risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2 is a priority as the virus continues to infect people worldwide. The objective was to determine the effectiveness of vaccines and other factors associated with infection among Canadian healthcare workers (HCWs) followed from 15 June 2020 to 1 December 2023. We also investigate the association between antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 and subsequent infections with SARS-CoV-2. Of the 2474 eligible participants, 2133 (86%) were female, 33% were nurses, the median age was 41 years, and 99.3% had received at least two doses of COVID-19 vaccine by 31 December 2021. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 was 0.91 per 1000 person-days. Prior to the circulation of the Omicron variants, vaccine effectiveness (VE) was estimated at 85% (95% CI 1, 98) for participants who received the primary series of vaccine. During the Omicron period, relative adjusted VE was 43% (95% CI 29, 54), 56% (95% CI 42, 67), and 46% (95% CI 24, 62) for 3, 4, and ≥ 5 doses compared with those who received primary series after adjusting for previous infection and other covariates. Exposure to infected household members, coworkers, or friends in the previous 14 days were risk factor for infection, while contact with an infected patient was not statistically significant. Participants with higher levels of immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-receptor binding domain (RBD) antibodies had lower rates of infection than those with the lowest levels. COVID-19 vaccines remained effective throughout the follow-up of this cohort of highly vaccinated HCWs. IgG anti-RBD antibody levels may be useful as correlates of protection for issues such as vaccine development and testing. There remains a need to increase the awareness among HCWs about the risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 from contacts at a variety of venues.

Background: While testing healthcare workers (HCWs) for SARS‐CoV‐2 is important to reduce transmission within healthcare settings, understanding the self‐reported patterns of testing is important for interpreting vaccine effectiveness and other COVID‐19‐related information. Objective: Using longitudinal data from the COVID‐19 cohort study, this study described trends in SARS‐CoV‐2 testing among Canadian HCWs between June 2020 and November 2023. Methods: HCWs completed an illness report for each instance of SARS‐CoV‐2 testing and episodes of symptoms compatible with COVID‐19 even if untested. Overall rates of testing among the participating cohort were calculated. Rates were stratified by province, reason for testing and COVID‐19 vaccination status using 4‐week intervals to smooth estimates. For episodes of symptomatic illness (only), the median time between symptom onset and first test was calculated, along with the percent of episodes initially receiving a negative result for SARS‐CoV‐2 that were reported as being retested. Results: Rates of testing for SARS‐CoV‐2 generally mirrored rates of hospitalisation for COVID‐19 among Canadians. Rates of testing were highest during the Omicron BA.1 wave (11.9 participants tested at least once per 1000 person‐days) and varied by province; vaccination status did not impact rates. The most common reason for testing was for symptoms. Testing for known exposure or routine reasons greatly decreased after the Omicron BA.1 wave. In participants who were tested for episodes of symptomatic illness, the median time between symptom onset and first test was 1 day (interquartile range 0–2). Reported retesting after an initial negative result remained low throughout the study period. Conclusions: Understanding testing behaviours is important for public health decision‐making including the analysis and interpretation of case data and vaccine effectiveness studies. It can also highlight possible missed case–finding opportunities in healthcare settings.

Background In many jurisdictions healthcare workers (HCWs) are using respirators for aerosol-generating medical procedures (AGMPs) performed on adult and pediatric populations with all suspect/confirmed viral respiratory infections (VRIs). This systematic review assessed the risk of VRIs to HCWs in the presence of AGMPs, the role respirators versus medical/surgical masks have on reducing that risk, and if the risk to HCWs during AGMPs differed when caring for adult or pediatric patient populations. Main text We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Cochrane SR, CINAHL, COVID-19 specific resources, and MedRxiv for English and French articles from database inception to September 9, 2021. Independent reviewers screened abstracts using pre-defined criteria, reviewed full-text articles, selected relevant studies, abstracted data, and conducted quality assessments of all studies using the ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Thirty-eight studies were included; 23 studies on COVID-19, 10 on SARS, and 5 on MERS/ influenza/other respiratory viruses. Two of the 16 studies which assessed associations found that HCWs were 1.7 to 2.5 times more likely to contract COVID-19 after exposure to AGMPs vs. not exposed to AGMPs. Eight studies reported statistically significant associations for nine specific AGMPs and transmission of SARS to HCWS. Intubation was consistently associated with an increased risk of SARS. HCWs were more likely (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.2–3.4) to contract human coronaviruses when exposed to an AGMP in one study. There were no reported associations between AGMP exposure and transmission of influenza or in a single study on MERS. There was limited evidence supporting the use of a respirator over a medical/surgical mask during an AGMP to reduce the risk of viral transmission. One study described outcomes of HCWs exposed to a pediatric patient during intubation. Conclusion Exposure to an AGMP may increase the risk of transmission of COVID-19, SARS, and human coronaviruses to HCWs, however the evidence base is heterogenous and prone to confounding, particularly related to COVID-19. There continues to be a significant research gap in the epidemiology of the risk of VRIs among HCWs during AGMPs, particularly for pediatric patients. Further evidence is needed regarding what constitutes an AGMP.

TrumenbaTM, a bivalent, factor-H binding protein meningococcal serogroup B (MenB-fHBP) vaccine was authorized for use in Canada in October 2017 for the prevention of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) caused by serogroup B in individuals 10-25 years of age. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides recommendations regarding the use of meningococcal vaccines to the Public Health Agency of Canada. To summarize NACI recommendations regarding the use of MenB-fHBP vaccine in Canada. The NACI Meningococcal Disease Working Group developed a predefined search strategy to identify all eligible studies, assessed the quality of these studies, and summarized and analyzed the findings. According to the NACI evidence-based process, the working group then proposed recommendations and identified the grade of evidence that supported them. In light of the evidence, the recommendations were then considered and approved by NACI. The two serogroup B meningococcal vaccines currently authorized for use in Canada are not interchangeable as they contain different antigens and there are no published studies on the immunogenicity resulting from a vaccination series combining the two products. Following the review of evidence, NACI recommends that MenB-fHBP vaccine may be considered as an option for use in individuals 10 years of age and older in situations when a serogroup B meningococcal vaccine should be offered: 1) during serogroup B meningococcal disease outbreaks or with the emergence of hyperendemic strains that are predicted to be susceptible to the vaccine; 2) for individuals who are close contacts with a case of invasive meningococcal disease caused by serogroup B ; 3) for individuals with underlying medical conditions that would put them at higher risk of meningococcal disease than the general population; or 4) for individuals at higher risk of exposure to serogroup B meningococcal isolates than the general population. NACI also recommends that MenB-fHBP vaccine may be considered as an option for individuals 10-25 years of age who are not at higher risk of meningococcal disease than the general population, but who wish to reduce their risk of invasive serogroup B meningococcal disease. NACI recommends immunization against serogroup B IMD for all individuals who are at a higher risk of disease due to an underlying medical condition or an increased risk of exposure. In addition to providing guidance to public health decision-makers (i.e. provinces/territories making decisions for publicly-funded immunization programs), these NACI recommendations provide information to individuals, vaccine providers and organizations about vaccines that may not currently be included in publicly funded immunization programs. NACI continues to recommend against the use of the serogroup B vaccines in routine universal immunization programs in Canada at this time.

Mammalian cell culture-based technology is an innovative technique for influenza vaccine manufacturing that may be a valuable alternative to overcome some of the problems and vulnerabilities associated with conventional egg-based influenza vaccine production. Flucelvax Quad (Seqirus, Inc.) is the first and only mammalian cell culture-based quadrivalent inactivated, subunit influenza vaccine (IIV4-cc) authorized for adult and pediatric use in Canada. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) has not previously made a recommendation on cell culture-based influenza vaccines in any population. To review the available evidence for the efficacy, effectiveness, immunogenicity, and safety of IIV4-cc, and to summarize the NACI recommendation regarding the use of Flucelvax Quad in Canada in adults and children. A systematic literature review on the vaccine efficacy, effectiveness, immunogenicity and safety of IIV4-cc in persons four years of age and older was performed. The systematic review's methodology was specified in a written protocol. The NACI evidence-based process was used to assess the quality of eligible studies, summarize and analyze the findings, and develop a recommendation regarding the use of Flucelvax Quad in adults and children. The proposed recommendation was then considered and approved by NACI in light of the available evidence. Thirteen eligible studies were included in the evidence synthesis. In the four observational studies that assessed vaccine effectiveness of IIV4-cc, there were some data indicating potentially improved protection against influenza compared to conventional egg-based quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4) or trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3), particularly against A(H3N2) virus infection. There was also some evidence that IIV4-cc may be more effective than egg-based trivalent or quadrivalent influenza vaccines against non-laboratory confirmed influenza-related outcomes, but there is insufficient evidence for laboratory-confirmed outcomes. Two randomized controlled trials assessed the immunogenicity and safety of IIV4-cc compared with mammalian cell culture-based trivalent inactivated, subunit influenza vaccine (IIV3-cc). The IIV4-cc was well-tolerated and the reported solicited local and systemic adverse events were generally mild to moderate in intensity, self-limited and did not precipitate sequelae. One clinical review of cases and six peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (four in adults and two in children) that reported on the safety of IIV3-cc were included in the review. The evidence on immunogenicity and safety was consistent across these studies and showed that there was no significant difference in adults and children four years of age and older who had received IIV3-cc or an egg-based IIV3. NACI concluded that there is fair evidence (Grade B Evidence) that Flucelvax Quad is effective, safe, and has non-inferior immunogenicity to comparable vaccines, based on direct evidence in adults and children nine years of age and older. NACI recommends that Flucelvax Quad may be considered among the IIV4 offered to adults and children nine years of age and older (Discretionary NACI Recommendation).

Background: Several influenza vaccines are authorized in Canada and the evidence on influenza immunization is continually evolving. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines annually to the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC). Objective: To summarize NACI recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines for 2021–2022 and to highlight new recommendations. Methods: Annual influenza vaccine recommendations are developed by NACI's Influenza Working Group for consideration and approval by NACI. The development of the recommendations is based on the NACI evidence-based process. Results: The following new recommendations were made: 1) Influvac® Tetra may be considered as an option among the standard dose quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccines (IIV4-SD) offered to adults and children three years of age and older; 2) Fluzone High Dose Quadrivalent (IIV4-HD) may be considered an option for individuals 65 years of age and older who are currently recommended to receive Fluzone® High Dose (trivalent); and 3) Flucelvax® Quad may be considered amongst the quadrivalent influenza vaccines offered to adults and children nine years of age and older for annual influenza immunization. Guidance for use of influenza immunizations during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is also highlighted. Conclusion: NACI continues to recommend that an age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be offered annually to anyone six months of age and older who does not have contraindications to the vaccine. Vaccination should be offered as a priority to people at high risk of influenza-related complications or hospitalization, people capable of transmitting influenza to those at high risk of complications, and others as indicated.

Annual influenza vaccination is recommended for all individuals six months of age and older, including those with HIV infection. Prior to this statement, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) stated that live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was contraindicated for all individuals with HIV infection. The objective of this article is to update NACI's guidance on the use of LAIV for HIV-infected individuals. A systematic literature review of the use of LAIV in individuals with HIV was undertaken. The Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System was searched for reports of adverse events following vaccination with LAIV in HIV-infected individuals. NACI approved the revised recommendations. NACI concluded that LAIV is immunogenic in children with HIV, and available data suggest that it is safe, although data were insufficient to detect possible uncommon adverse effects. LAIV may be considered as an option for vaccination of children 2-17 years old who meet the following criteria: 1) receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy for at least four months; 2) CD4 count of 500/µL or greater if age 2-5 years, or of 200/µL or greater if age 6-17 years; and 3) HIV plasma RNA less than 10,000 copies/mL. LAIV remains contraindicated for adults with HIV because of insufficient data. Intramuscular influenza vaccination is considered the standard for children living with HIV by NACI and the Canadian Paediatric & Perinatal HIV/AIDS Research Group, particularly for those without HIV viral load suppression (i.e. plasma HIV RNA is 40 copies/mL or greater). However, if intramuscular (IM) vaccination is not accepted by the patient or substitute decision-maker, LAIV would be reasonable for children meeting the criteria listed above. LAIV may be considered as an option for annual vaccination of selected children with HIV.

Evidence on influenza vaccination is continually evolving. The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides annual recommendations to the Public Health Agency of Canada regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines. To summarize NACI's recommendations regarding the use of seasonal influenza vaccines for the 2020-2021 influenza season and to highlight new and updated recommendations. 1) To update wording on influenza vaccination of health care workers, NACI reassessed the evidence in the context of ethics and acceptability frameworks, in accordance with NACI's recently expanded mandate. 2) To provide recommendations on the use of live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in HIV-infected individuals, the Influenza Working Group developed a predefined search strategy to identify all eligible studies, then assessed the quality and summarized and analyzed the findings according to the NACI evidence-based process. NACI provided new recommendations based on assessment of the evidence. 1) NACI continues to recommend that health care workers and other care providers in facilities and community settings should be vaccinated annually against influenza and that this group be included among those particularly recommended to receive the influenza vaccine. 2) NACI concluded that LAIV is immunogenic in children with stable HIV infection; therefore, NACI newly recommends that LAIV may be considered as an option for children 2-17 years of age with stable HIV infection on highly active antiretroviral therapy and with adequate immune function. NACI continues to recommend that an age-appropriate influenza vaccine should be offered annually to anyone six months of age and older who does not have contraindications to the vaccine, with a focus on the groups for whom influenza vaccination is particularly recommended.

•The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged traditional vaccine guidance infrastructure.•NACI made many strategic adaptations to facilitate timely vaccine advice in Canada.•The pandemic highlighted critical roles for NITAGs in vaccine program design.•Learning from COVID-19 pandemic adaptations, we see a roadmap for future pandemics. The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged traditional vaccine guidance infrastructure and frameworks, and added urgency and complexity to the operation of National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs). Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) provides immunization guidance to the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) who publicly shares expert and evidence-informed guidance with Canadian provinces and territories. Throughout the pandemic, NACI and PHAC implemented many adaptations to meet urgent needs for pandemic vaccine guidance. In this paper, we describe: structural adaptations in response to the accelerated pace and amount of work required to issue recommendations that were timed around product authorizations and dynamic epidemiology; technical adaptations in response to rapidly evolving evidence of variable quality which required close monitoring, and which promoted reliance on basic vaccine principles due to incomplete direct evidence; the need to provide nimble advice (e.g., off-label recommendations, preferential recommendations); communications adaptations (e.g. identify sustainable spokespeople for the committee, receive stakeholder feedback, and ensure urgent nuanced advice was communicated to a diverse audience); and research adaptations focussing on solutions to constrained supply (e.g. prioritisation, extended intervals, and heterologous schedules). The early pandemic vaccine experience has created a roadmap of lessons and adaptations that should be leveraged in future pandemic vaccine programs, and has highlighted the essential role of NITAGs to complement regulatory structures during pandemics to ensure timely, impactful, and evidence-informed public health vaccine guidance.