MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308294967 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2716

Association of Post-Vaccination Adverse Reactions After Influenza Vaccine with Mortality and Cardiopulmonary Outcomes in Patients with High-Risk Cardiovascular Disease: The INVESTED Trial

2022· article· en· W4308294967 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Peikert, Brian Claggett, KyungMann Kim, Jacob A. Udell, Jacob Joseph, Akshay S. Desai, Michael E. Farkouh, Sheila M. Hegde, Adrian F. Hernandez, Deepak L. Bhatt, J. Michael Gaziano, H. Keipp Talbot, Clyde W. Yancy, Inder S. Anand, Lu Mao, Lawton S. Cooper, Scott D. Solomon, Orly Vardeny

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersRelypsaAmerican RegentSeqirusIdorsia PharmaceuticalsDuke Clinical Research InstituteCytokineticsAstellas PharmaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftMyoKardiaNovo NordiskVerily Life SciencesSarepta TherapeuticsAstraZenecaAmarin CorporationLivaNovaBoston Scientific CorporationBristol-Myers SquibbCSL BehringBiogenU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsAlnylam PharmaceuticalsBelvoir Media GroupDaiichi Sankyo EuropeGilead SciencesSanofi PasteurKowa CompanySanofiAmgenNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSun PharmaNational Institutes of HealthRegeneron Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioVaccinationAdverse effectInternal medicineHeart failureInfluenza vaccineMyocardial infarctionConfidence intervalImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Influenza vaccination is associated with reduced cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality among patients with heart failure or recent myocardial infarction. The immune response to vaccination frequently results in mild adverse reactions (AR), which leads to vaccine hesitancy. This post hoc analysis explored the association between vaccine-related AR and morbidity and mortality in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: The INVESTED trial randomized 5260 patients with recent heart failure hospitalization or acute myocardial infarction to high-dose trivalent or standard-dose quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine. We examined the association between vaccine-related AR and adverse clinical outcomes across both treatment groups in propensity-adjusted models. Among 5210 participants with available information on post-vaccination symptoms, 1968 participants (37.8%) experienced a vaccine-related AR. Compared to those without AR, post-vaccination AR, most commonly injection site pain (60.3%), were associated with lower risk for the composite of all-cause death or cardiopulmonary hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.92, p < 0.001), cardiopulmonary hospitalizations (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.76-0.95], p = 0.003), all-cause death (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.62-0.96], p = 0.02), cardiovascular hospitalizations (HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.78-0.99], p = 0.03) and non-cardiopulmonary hospitalizations (HR 0.80 [95% CI 0.69-0.92], p = 0.003). While mild (76.4%) and moderate (20.6%) AR were most common and together associated with lower risk for the primary outcome (HR 0.81 [95% CI 0.74-0.90], p < 0.001), severe AR (2.9%) were related to increased risk (HR 1.68 [95% CI 1.17-2.42], p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Mild to moderate post-vaccination reactions after influenza vaccine were associated with reduced risk of cardiopulmonary hospitalizations and all-cause mortality in patients with high-risk cardiovascular disease, while severe reactions may indicate increased risk. Mild to moderate AR to influenza vaccination may be a marker of immune response and should not deter future vaccinations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicInfluenza Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207