MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Late Breaking Abstract - Real-world effectiveness of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine among older adults in the United States

2025· article· W4416634552 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda C Miles, Jelena Vojicic, Lindsay R. Grant, Summer Rosenstock, H. Li, Jeffrey Vietri, Alison E Randall, Xin Zhao, Wencheng Zhu, Anan Zhou, Christian Theilacker, Jennifer C. Moïsi, Luis Jódar, Paul Balmer, Alejandro Cané, Paula Peyrani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPneumococcal conjugate vaccinePneumococcal pneumoniaPneumoniaPneumococcal polysaccharide vaccinePneumococcal vaccineHazard ratioStreptococcus pneumoniaePneumococcal infectionsRespiratory tract infections

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) was licensed by the FDA in 2021 for prevention of vaccine type invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and pneumococcal pneumonia based on immunologic non-inferiority criteria. Prior to this study, no clinical efficacy or vaccine effectiveness (VE) against IPD, all-cause pneumonia (ACP), and lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) has been reported for PCV20. This study evaluated PCV20 VE against all IPD, all-cause pneumonia (ACP), and LRTI among US older adults. In this retrospective cohort study, adults age ≥65 years were followed from 07/2022 to 06/2024 for the first episode of IPD due to any serotype, ACP, or LRTI based on ICD-10-CM coding. We compared PCV20 vaccinated to unvaccinated time segments. Individuals vaccinated with 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) <2 years, PCV13 <5 years, PCV20, or PCV15 prior to the start of each time-segment were excluded. Inverse probability weighting was used to control for confounding and dropout. Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HR) and VE was calculated as (1 – HR) x 100%. 16.5 million adults were included, of whom 12.2% received PCV20 during follow-up. A higher proportion of adults contributing vaccinated time had >5 outpatient visits in the prior year and had received a PPSV23 or PCV13 vaccine. Following weighting, the adjusted PCV20 VE was 25.6% (95% confidence interval: 19.5%, 31.3%) against IPD due to any serotype, 15.2% (14.6%, 15.8%) against ACP, and 7.4% (6.9%, 7.8%) against LRTI. This is the first study to assess the real-world effectiveness of PCV20 and provides evidence of PCV20 effectiveness against IPD, ACP, and LRTI among adults ≥65 years of age.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPneumonia and Respiratory Infections→French-language works237,207→