The Democratic Republic of Congo has been back in the news, this time not for mpox but for a mystery illness in an isolated, rural region of the country. Varying numbers of fatalities have been noted, but solid facts are sorely lacking. I am reminded of how early outbreak news percolates and changes; odds are low but not zero that this is a serious, new pathogen. Meanwhile, we can discuss several new publications that are on more solid scientific footing.
Vaccine Effectiveness Updates
Two manuscripts accepted for publication provided new information on VE measurements, one concerning influenza and the other looking at covid vaccines in young children.
CDC, along with other investigators, published an analysis of influenza VE for the 2023-24 flu season. For that year, the vaccine strains were well-matched for what eventually circulated in the US. The most common strain circulating was A H5N1pdm2009. Looking just at the pediatric population, VE in preventing hospitalizations and urgent care/ED visits was very good in all age groups as shown below: 58% for both outcomes overall, though with a wider confidence interval for hospitalizations since these were less common events.
The covid vaccine article is quite complex, involving investigators at multiple sites and listing 35 identified authors! Sadly it doesn't have any nice tables/figures that allow a short summary. I see 2 categories of take-home messages from the data: 1) as always, VE depends on which outcome you're looking at; 2) covid vaccines aren't that effective at preventing infection, but do help significantly in preventing complications of infection.
This multi-center study is actually a grouping of 3 cohorts (total 614 subjects) of children who had longitudinally-collected data including weekly sampling during the period of omicron variant circulation, 9/19/22 - 4/30/23. Variants were verified by genetic sequencing of about half the strains. Antibody studies and history questionnaires at study entry were utilized to determine evidence of prior infection. Here are the numbers from the study:
- Children with prior infection had less chance of both infection and symptomatic infection than did those without prior infection: Hazard Ratio [HR]: 0.28 [95%CI: 0.16-0.49] and HR: 0.21 [95%CI: 0.08-0.54. This was true regardless of timing of prior infection.
- Children with prior infection AND vaccination also had lower hazard ratios: HR: 0.31 [95%CI: 0.13-0.77], compared to those who were unvaccinated with no prior infection.
- The one slightly unique finding in this study is as follows: "There was no difference in risk of infection or symptomatic COVID-19 by vaccination status alone, regardless of timing of vaccination or manufacturer type. However, naïve participants vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech were more likely to be infected and experience symptomatic COVID-19 compared to naïve and unvaccinated participants (HR: 2.59 [95%CI: 1.27-5.28]), whereas participants with evidence of prior infection and who were vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech were less likely to be infected (HR: 0.22 [95%CI: 0.05-0.95])." In other words, vaccination didn't do very well at preventing infection.
This study is very complex but also very rigorous; I can't do it justice in a small summary. The major limitation is the relatively low sample size, meaning that the investigators couldn't do much in the way of subgroup analysis to try to look at other variables. Relatively few children received the bivalent Pfizer vaccine, so it's very hard to interpret specific differences between Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Also, the small sample size precluded any assessment of complication risks following natural infection, one of the big advantages for being vaccinated.
Does Nirsevimab Prevent Other Infections Besides RSV?
According to another new study, the answer is "sort of." Investigators looked at around 3000 infants randomized 2:1 to receive either nirsevimab or placebo and then followed with respiratory swab PCR testing. The pictorial bottom line:
Not mentioned in the pictorial summary is that the cumulative incidence of rhinovirus/enterovirus coinfections was lower in the nirsevimab group, leading to my "sort of" conclusion.
The important bottom line of the study, however, is that no replacement infections appeared. Replacement infections refer to the concern that once an infectious agent is greatly reduced by preventive measures, another pathogen will take its place, lessening the impact of the preventive measure. This was a concern for Hib vaccine early on, but no other meningitic pathogens arose. Later, the same concern arose for pneumococcal vaccination. There is evidence that replacement pneumococcal serotypes started to become more common, but the overall rates of pneumococcal infections still declined significantly. This is why we're still trying to add other pneumococcal serotypes to newer conjugate vaccines.
Parvovirus and Myocarditis
Last week I mentioned the reports about increase in parvovirus infections likely spurred by non-pharmaceutical measures to prevent respiratory pathogen spread during the pandemic. A spinoff of this kind of surge can be a surge in complications of these pathogens. I was intrigued by this report from Italy about parvoviral myocarditis, which is a slightly controversial topic. Etiology of viral myocarditis is difficult to determine without myocardial biopsy, and parvovirus myocarditis is particularly suspect because of older reports of parvoviral detection in cardiac tissue from individuals who never had concern for myocarditis. So, for an individual patient, it's hard to be certain of a parvoviral etiology for myocarditis even with a positive tissue biopsy. This post-pandemic surge may help clarify the situation.
Europe in general seemed to have an earlier surge in parvovirus infection than we did in the US, possibly because pandemic restrictions were lessened earlier there. Here is a breakdown of the Italian report by age and timing.
And a breakdown of how the diagnosis was made. Only 2 were with myocardial biopsy; blood PCR can persist positive for a long time after parvoviral infection. IgM serology always is suspect due to nonspecific factors. A matched control group without myocarditis to see rates of parvovirus IgM and blood PCR positivity would have been helpful.
Of course I'm hoping we don't see a surge of myocarditis cases soon. If cases do spike, it will be particularly tough to figure out if it happens during a covid surge.
Mycoplasma Complications Too?
Along similar lines, a study from Texas suggests that the Mycoplasma pneumoniae surge might be associated with a greater risk of complications. This is a retrospective review from a single institution documenting an increase in M. pneumoniae infections seen below the shaded section.
It's important to recognize, as the authors do, that this is a cohort skewed towards inpatients who had multiplex PCR testing. Also, mycoplasma PCR can persist positive for many weeks after infection (as do live organisms), so a positive PCR doesn't conclusively mean that the current illness is caused by mycoplasma. What was important and of some concern in the report is that 13 of the 41 children hospitalized with respiratory symptoms required ICU care. They also described 16 children with RIME (Reactive Infectious Mucocutaneous Eruption) with one of those children requiring ICU admission.
Avian Flu Updates
The news media (sometimes breathlessly) relayed new findings that a single mutation in influenza A H5N1 strains could increase adherence to human respiratory epithelium, increasing chances for greater infection rates in humans. I haven't yet bought into this panic.
Keep in mind that single mutations don't necessarily occur in isolation; often multiple mutations occur, some increasing virulence while others resulting in lower virulence. This in vitro study is an important contribution to our understanding of how avian flu might evolve and most importantly supports the need for close tracking of this agent in all animals, including humans.
Along those lines, I was please to hear that the US Department of Agriculture will implement mandatory milk testing nationwide for A H5N1. Previously this has been mostly a voluntary effort in the US. We still need much more monitoring for this agent in order to prepare for potential increase in human cases. Let's hope funding will be available to support these efforts.
WRIS
The winter respiratory infection season has begun, at least for RSV. We are now officially at moderate activity nationwide.
Influenza is increasing slowly with A H3N2 the most common subtype. COVID-19 projections are increasing, though not yet a big bump in clinical illness.
WHO to Help in the DRC
I figure I've been watching various feeds for outbreak alerts for about 30 years, starting with the ProMED service that still sends me at least a daily update. So, I've had early looks at these events, but also a slew of false alarms of new diseases that turned out to be mini-outbreaks of previously well-described illnesses. The latter are far more common than newly emerging infectious agents. So, I'm both watching closely but not overly concerned about the cluster of respiratory illnesses with significant mortality being reported from Kwango province (outlined in red) in rural southwestern DRC, bordering Angola.
Early reports suggest a predilection for children. The rural location with lack of medical facilities hinders any investigation. Also, this type of region, with close proximity of humans to many animal species, provides the potential for infectious agents to jump to other animal hosts. It appears the region now has appropriate support from WHO, and I would expect to hear more definitive information within the next several days, maybe in time for an update in my next post.
I guess the rural location is also a silver lining, with less risk for worldwide spread if this is in fact a new disease. I'll go out on a limb using past unknown outbreak experience and predict this won't be a new pathogen. Here's hoping.
