Background New York City (NYC) was hard-hit by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and is also home to a large population of people with HIV (PWH). Methods We matched lab-confirmed COVID-19 case and death data reported to the NYC Health Department as of June 2, 2020, against the NYC HIV surveillance registry. We describe and compare the characteristics and COVID-19-related outcomes of PWH diagnosed with COVID-19 with all NYC PWH and with all New Yorkers diagnosed with COVID-19. Results Through June 2, 204,583 NYC COVID-19 cases were reported. The registry match identified 2,410 PWH with diagnosed COVID-19 eligible for analysis (1.06% of all COVID-19 cases). Compared with all NYC PWH and all New Yorkers diagnosed with COVID-19, a higher proportion of PWH with COVID-19 were older, male, Black or Latino, and living in high-poverty neighborhoods. At least one underlying condition was reported for 58.9% of PWH with COVID-19. Compared with all NYC COVID-19 cases, a higher proportion of PWH with COVID-19 experienced hospitalization, intensive care unit admission and/or death; most PWH who experienced poor COVID-19-related outcomes had CD4 <500 cells/µL. Conclusions Given NYC HIV prevalence is 1.5%, PWH were not overrepresented among COVID-19 cases. However, compared with NYC COVID-19 cases overall, a greater proportion of PWH had adverse COVID-19-related outcomes, perhaps because of a higher prevalence of factors associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes. Given the pandemic’s exacerbating effects on health inequities, HIV public health and clinical communities must strengthen services and support for people living with and affected by HIV.

People with HIV in New York City were frequently hospitalized. While AIDS-defining illnesses were relatively rare, non-AIDS-defining infection hospitalizations were more common. Disparities in hospitalization rates indicate a need for targeted improved primary care and comorbid disease management.

Background Patients on hemodialysis have an elevated risk for COVID-19 infection but were not included in efficacy trials of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Methods We conducted a retrospective, observational study to estimate the real-world effectiveness and immunogenicity of two mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in a large, representative population of adult hemodialysis patients in the United States. In separate, parallel analyses, patients who began a vaccination series with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 in January and February 2021 were matched with unvaccinated patients and followed after they completed the first of two doses. In a subset of patients, blood samples were collected approximately 28 days after the second dose and anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G was measured. Results A total of 12,169 patients received the BNT162b2 vaccine (matched with 44,377 unvaccinated controls); 23,037 patients received the mRNA-1273 vaccine (matched with 63,243 unvaccinated controls). Compared with controls, vaccinated patients' risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 post-vaccination became progressively lower after the first dose (day 1) to days ≥43. Following a COVID-19 diagnosis, vaccinated patients were significantly less likely than unvaccinated patients to be hospitalized (for BNT162b2, 28.0% versus 43.4%; for mRNA-1273, 37.2% versus 45.6%) and significantly less likely to die (for BNT162b2, 4.0% versus 12.1%; for mRNA-1273, 5.6% versus 14.5%). Antibodies were detected in 98.1% (309/315) and 96.0% (308/321) of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 patients, respectively. Conclusions In patients on hemodialysis, vaccination with BNT162b2 or mRNA-12 was associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 diagnosis and significantly lower risk of hospitalization or death among those diagnosed with COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in nearly all patients after vaccination. These findings support the use of these vaccines in this population.

No abstract

Early in the COVID-19 crisis, a statewide executive order (“PAUSE”) severely restricted the movement of New Yorkers from March 23-June 7, 2020. We used NYC surveillance data for HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis to describe trends in diagnosis and reporting surrounding PAUSE. During PAUSE, the volume of positive HIV/STI tests, and diagnoses of HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis declined substantially, reaching a nadir in April before rebounding. Some shifts in characteristics of reported cases were identified.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Studies have demonstrated that mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are highly effective among dialysis patients. Because individual vaccines may be differentially available or acceptable to patients, it is important to understand comparative effectiveness relative to other vaccines, such those based on adenovirus technologies. Methods In this retrospective study, we compared the clinical effectiveness of adenovirus vector-based Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) to mRNA-based BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) in a contemporary cohort of dialysis patients. Patients who received a first BNT162b2 dose were matched 1:1 to Ad26.COV2.S recipients based on date of first vaccine receipt, US state of residence, site of dialysis care (in-center versus home), prior history of COVID-19, and propensity score. The primary outcome was the comparative rate of COVID-19 diagnoses starting in the seventh week postvaccination. In a subset of consented Ad26.COV2.S patients, blood samples were collected ≥28 days after vaccination and anti-SARS-Cov-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies were measured Results A total of 2572 matched pairs of patients qualified for analysis. Cumulative incidence rates of COVID-19 did not differ for BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S. No differences were observed in peri-COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among patients receiving BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S who were diagnosed with COVID-19 during follow-up. Results were similar when excluding patients with prior history of COVID-19, in subgroup analyses restricted to patients who completed the two-dose BNT162b2 regimen, and in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 59.4% of 244 patients who received Ad26.COV2.S. Conclusions In a large real-world cohort of dialysis patients, no difference was detected in clinical effectiveness of BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S over the first 6 months postvaccination, despite an inconsistent antibody response to the latter.