COVID-19 Vaccination Prioritization on the Basis of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Number Needed to Vaccinate to Prevent Death.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Leong DP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8084283 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
COVID-19 Vaccination Prioritization on the Basis of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Number Needed to Vaccinate to Prevent Death.
Leong Darryl P DP Banerjee Amitava A Yusuf Salim S
The Canadian journal of cardiology 20210429 7
The supply limitations of COVID-19 vaccines have led to the need to prioritize vaccine distribution. Obesity, diabetes, and hypertension have been associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19 infection. Approximately half as many individuals with a cardiovascular risk factor need to be vaccinated against COVID-19 to prevent related death compared with individuals without a risk factor. Adults with body mass index ≥ 30, diabetes, or hypertension should be of a similar priority for COVID-1 ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundA vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 6, 11, 16 and 18 is now licensed for use in Canada and many other countries. We sought to estimate the number needed to vaccinate to prevent HPV-related diseases and death.MethodsA cohort model of the natural history of HPV infection was developed. Model simulations were based on 209 different parameter sets that reproduced Canadian HPV type-specific data for infection, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, cervical cancer and genital warts. The number needed to vaccinate was calculated as the number of women who would need to be vaccinated to prevent an HPV-related event during their lifetime.ResultsAmong 12-year-old girls, we estimated that the number needed to vaccinate to prevent an episode of genital warts would be 8 (80% credibility interval [CrI] 5-15) and a case of cervical cancer 324 (80% CrI 195-757). These estimates were based on the assumption that the vaccine procures lifelong protection and that its efficacy is 95%. If vaccine protection is assumed to wane at 3% per year, the predicted number needed to vaccinate would increase to 14 (80% CrI 6-18) and 9080 (80% CrI 1040-does not prevent), respectively. The latter number would be greatly reduced with the addition of a booster dose, to 480 (80% CrI 254-1572).InterpretationOur model predictions suggest that vaccination with the currently available HPV vaccine may significantly reduce the incidence of genital warts, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and cervical cancer. However, the benefits (particularly in terms of cervical cancer reduction) are highly dependent on the duration of vaccine protection, on which evidence is currently limited.
| S-EPMC1950193 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8563006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is one of the most important respiratory pathogens in young children. Infants <6 months of age and infants and young children with extreme pre-term birth, and cardiac and pulmonary co-morbidities experience the highest incidence of severe RSV disease. There are no licensed vaccines; immunoprophylaxis is recommended for the highest risk children. Extended half-life RSV monoclonal antibodies (EHL-mAbs) are under development intended for immunization of all infants and high-risk children <2 years of age. We modeled the anticipated public health benefits of RSV EHL-mAb immunization using the number needed to immunize (NNI).MethodsWe combined RSV hospitalization, outpatient and outpatient lower respiratory tract infection (LRI) incidence estimates and a range of immunization efficacies to estimate the annual NNI. We calculated the absolute incidence rate reduction (ARR) by multiplying the incidence rates by immunization efficacy. NNI was calculated as the reciprocal of the ARR.ResultsFor an RSV EHL-mAb with 70% efficacy, 6-18 infants would need to be immunized to prevent one RSV-associated outpatient visit, and 13-33 infants would need to be immunized to prevent one RSV-associated LRI outpatient visit. To prevent one RSV-associated hospitalization, 37-85 infants 0-5 months of age, and 107-280 infants 6-11 months of age would need to be immunized.ConclusionsPublic health benefits, such as disease cases averted due to immunization, are essential elements in consideration of candidate vaccines for a national immunization program. An RSV EHL-mAb of moderate efficacy could have high impact. These data provide an additional perspective for public health decision making.
| S-EPMC8684408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOnce a canine rabies-free status has been achieved, there is little guidance available on vaccination standards to maintain that status. In areas with risk of reintroduction, it may be practical to continue vaccinating portions of susceptible dogs to prevent re-establishment of canine rabies.MethodsWe used a modified version of RabiesEcon, a deterministic mathematical model, to evaluate the potential impacts and cost-effectiveness of preventing the reintroduction of canine rabies through proactive dog vaccination. We analyzed four scenarios to simulate varying risk levels involving the reintroduction of canine rabies into an area where it is no longer present. In a sensitivity analysis, we examined the influences of reintroduction frequency and intensity, the density of susceptible dog population, dog birth rate, dog life expectancy, vaccine efficacy, rate of loss of vaccine immunity, and the basic reproduction number (R0).ResultsTo prevent the re-establishment of canine rabies, it is necessary to vaccinate 38% to 56% of free-roaming dogs that have no immunity to rabies. These coverage levels were most sensitive to adjustments in R0 followed by the vaccine efficacy and the rate of loss of vaccine immunity. Among the various preventive vaccination strategies, it was most cost-effective to continue dog vaccination at the minimum coverage required, with the average cost per human death averted ranging from $257 to $398 USD.ConclusionsWithout strong surveillance systems, rabies-free countries are vulnerable to becoming endemic when incursions happen. To prevent this, it may be necessary to vaccinate at least 38% to 56% of the susceptible dog population depending on the risk of reintroduction and transmission dynamics.
| S-EPMC6907870 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the usefulness of additional COVID-19 vaccine doses-particularly given varying disease incidence-is needed to support public health policy. We characterize the benefits of COVID-19 booster doses using number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-associated hospitalization or emergency department encounter.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of immunocompetent adults at five health systems in four U.S. states during SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 predominance (December 2021-February 2022). Included patients completed a primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccine series and were either eligible to or received a booster dose. NNV were estimated using hazard ratios for each outcome (hospitalization and emergency department encounters), with results stratified by three 25-day periods and site.Findings1,285,032 patients contributed 938 hospitalizations and 2076 emergency department encounters. 555,729 (43.2%) patients were aged 18-49 years, 363,299 (28.3%) 50-64 years, and 366,004 (28.5%) ≥65 years. Most patients were female (n = 765,728, 59.6%), White (n = 990,224, 77.1%), and non-Hispanic (n = 1,063,964, 82.8%). 37.2% of patients received a booster and 62.8% received only two doses. Median estimated NNV to prevent one hospitalization was 205 (range 44-615) and NNV was lower across study periods for adults aged ≥65 years (110, 46, and 88, respectively) and those with underlying medical conditions (163, 69, and 131, respectively). Median estimated NNV to prevent one emergency department encounter was 156 (range 75-592).InterpretationThe number of patients needed to receive a booster dose was highly dependent on local disease incidence, outcome severity, and patient risk factors for moderate-to-severe disease.FundingFunding was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention though contract 75D30120C07986 to Westat, Inc. and contract 75D30120C07765 to Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.
| S-EPMC10266334 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBy mid 2023, European countries reached 75% of vaccine coverage for COVID-19 and although vaccination rates are quite high, many people are still hesitant. A plethora of studies have investigated factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, however, insufficient attention has been paid to the reasons why people get vaccinated against COVID-19. Our work aims to investigate the role of reasons in the decision to get vaccinated against COVID-19 in a representative sample of 1,689 adult Italians (March-April 2021) balanced in terms of age, gender, educational level and area of residence.MethodsThrough an online questionnaire, we asked participants to freely report up to three reasons for and against COVID-19 vaccination, and the weight each had in the decision to get vaccinated. We first investigated the role of emotional competence and COVID-19 risk perception in the generation of both reasons using regression models. Next, we studied the role that the different reasons had in the vaccination decision, considering both the intention to vaccinate (using a beta regression model) and the decision made by the participants who already had the opportunity to get vaccinated (using a logistic regression model). Finally, two different classification tree analyses were carried out to characterize profiles with a low or high willingness to get vaccinated or with a low or high probability to accept/book the vaccine.ResultsHigh emotional competence positively influences the generation of both reasons (ORs > 1.5), whereas high risk perception increases the generation of positive reasons (ORs > 1.4) while decreasing reasons against vaccination (OR = 0.64). As pro-reasons increase, vaccination acceptance increases, while the opposite happens as against-reasons increase (all p < 0.001). One strong reason in favor of vaccines is enough to unbalance the decision toward acceptance of vaccination, even when reasons against it are also present (p < 0.001). Protection and absence of distrust are the reasons that mostly drive willingness to be vaccinated and acceptance of an offered vaccine.ConclusionsKnowing the reasons that drive people's decision about such an important choice can suggest new communication insights to reduce possible negative reactions toward vaccination and people's hesitancy. Results are discussed considering results of other national and international studies.
| S-EPMC10634164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe addition of receptor-neprilysin inhibition to standard therapy, including a renin-angiotensin system blocker, has been demonstrated to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) compared with standard therapy alone. The long-term absolute risk reduction from angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) therapy, and whether it merits widespread use among diverse subpopulations, has not been well described.ObjectiveTo calculate estimated 5-year number needed to treat (NNT) values overall and for different subpopulations for the Prospective Comparison of ARNI with Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor (ACEI) to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and Morbidity in Heart Failure (PARADIGM-HF) cohort.Design, setting, and participantsOverall and subpopulation 5-year NNT values were estimated for different end points using data from PARADIGM-HF, a double-blind, randomized trial of sacubitril-valsartan vs enalapril. This multicenter, international study included 8399 men and women with HFrEF (ejection fraction, ≤40%). The study began in December 2009 and ended in March 2014. Analyses began in March 2018.InterventionsRandom assignment to sacubitril-valsartan or enalapril.Main outcomes and measuresCardiovascular death or HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and all-cause mortality.ResultsThe final cohort of 8399 individuals included 1832 women (21.8%) and 5544 white individuals (66.0%), with a mean (SD) age of 63.8 (11.4) years. The 5-year estimated NNT for the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization with ARNI therapy incremental to ACEI therapy in the overall cohort was 14. The 5-year estimated NNT values were calculated for different clinically relevant subpopulations and ranged from 12 to 19. The 5-year estimated NNT for all-cause mortality in the overall cohort with ARNI incremental to ACEI was 21, with values ranging from 16 to 31 among different subgroups. Compared with imputed placebo, the 5-year estimated NNT for all-cause mortality with ARNI was 11. The 5-year estimated NNT values were also calculated for other HFrEF therapies compared with controls from landmark trials for all-cause mortality and were found to be 18 for ACEI, 24 for angiotensin receptor blockers, 8 for β-blockers, 15 for mineralocorticoid antagonists, 14 for implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and 14 for cardiac resynchronization therapy.Conclusions and relevanceThe 5-year estimated NNT with ARNI therapy incremental to ACEI therapy overall and for clinically relevant subpopulations of patients with HFrEF are comparable with those for well-established HF therapeutics. These data further support guideline recommendations for use of ARNI therapy among eligible patients with HFrEF.
| S-EPMC6583093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination reduces morbidity and mortality associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); unfortunately, it is associated with serious adverse events, including sudden unexplained death (SUD).ObjectiveWe aimed to study the genetic basis of SUD after COVID-19 vaccination in Thailand.MethodsFrom April to December 2021, cases with natural but unexplained death within 7 days of COVID-19 vaccination were enrolled for whole exome sequencing.ResultsThirteen were recruited, aged between 23 and 72 years; 10 (77%) were men, 12 were Thai; and 1 was Australian. Eight (61%) died after receiving the first dose of vaccine, and 7 (54%) died after receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19; however, there were no significant correlations between SUD and either the number or the type of vaccine. Fever was self-reported in 3 cases. Ten (77%) and 11 (85%) died within 24 hours and 3 days of vaccination, respectively. Whole exome sequencing analysis revealed that 5 cases harbored SCN5A variants that had previously been identified in patients with Brugada syndrome, giving an SCN5A variant frequency of 38% (5 of 13). This is a significantly higher rate than that observed in Thai SUD cases occurring 8-30 days after COVID-19 vaccination during the same period (10% [1 of 10]), in a Thai SUD cohort studied before the COVID-19 pandemic (12% [3 of 25]), and in our in-house exome database (12% [386 of 3231]).ConclusionThese findings suggest that SCN5A variants may be associated with SUD within 7 days of COVID-19 vaccination, regardless of vaccine type, number of vaccine dose, and presence of underlying diseases or postvaccine fever.
| S-EPMC9352648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe propose a new measure of treatment effect based on the expected reduction in the number of patients to treat (RNT) which is defined as the difference of the reciprocals of clinical measures of interest between two arms. Compared with the conventional number needed to treat (NNT), RNT shows superiority with both binary and time-to-event endpoints in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsFive real RCTs, two with binary endpoints and three with survival endpoints, are used to illustrate the concept of RNT and compare the performances between RNT and NNT. For survival endpoints, we propose two versions of RNT: one is based on the survival rate and the other is based on the restricted mean survival time (RMST). Hypothetical scenarios are also constructed to explore the advantages and disadvantages of RNT and NNT.ResultsBecause there is no baseline for computation of NNT, it fails to differentiate treatment effect in the absolute scale. In contrast, RNT conveys more information than NNT due to its reversed order of differencing and inverting. For survival endpoints, two versions of RNT calculated as the difference of the reciprocals of survival rates and RMSTs are complementary to each other. The RMST-based RNT can capture the entire follow-up profile and thus is clinically more intuitive and meaningful, as it inherits the time-to-event characteristics for survival endpoints instead of using truncated binary endpoints at a specific time point.ConclusionsThe RNT can serve as an alternative measure for quantifying treatment effect in RCTs, which complements NNT to help patients and clinicians better understand the magnitude of treatment benefit.
| S-EPMC7945324 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to develop a quantitative framework to estimate the likelihood of multifocal epilepsy based on the number of unifocal seizures observed in the epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU).MethodsPatient records from the EMU at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) from 2012 to 2014 were assessed for the presence of multifocal seizures as well the presence of multifocal interictal discharges and multifocal structural imaging abnormalities during the course of the EMU admission. Risk factors for multifocal seizures were assessed using sensitivity and specificity analysis. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate the risk of multifocal epilepsy for a given number of consecutive seizures. To overcome the limits of the Kaplan-Meier analysis, a parametric survival function was fit to the EMU subjects with multifocal seizures and this was used to develop a Bayesian model to estimate the risk of multifocal seizures during an EMU admission.ResultsMultifocal interictal discharges were a significant predictor of multifocal seizures within an EMU admission with a p < 0.01, albeit with only modest sensitivity 0.74 and specificity 0.69. Multifocal potentially epileptogenic lesions on MRI were not a significant predictor p = 0.44. Kaplan-Meier analysis was limited by wide confidence intervals secondary to significant patient dropout and concern for informative censoring. The Bayesian framework provided estimates for the number of unifocal seizures needed to predict absence of multifocal seizures. To achieve 90% confidence for the absence of multifocal seizure, three seizures are needed when the pretest probability for multifocal epilepsy is 20%, seven seizures for a pretest probability of 50%, and nine seizures for a pretest probability of 80%.SignificanceThese results provide a framework to assist clinicians in determining the utility of trying to capture a specific number of seizures in EMU evaluations of candidates for epilepsy surgery.
| S-EPMC4877132 | biostudies-literature