We identified 5 risk factors for nocardiosis after SOT. Low-dose cotrimoxazole was not found to prevent Nocardia infection. These findings may help improve management of transplant recipients.

Background. Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at risk of nocardiosis, a rare opportunistic bacterial infection, but prognosis and outcome of these patients are poorly defined. Our objectives were to identify factors associated with 1-year mortality after nocardiosis and describe the outcome of patients receiving short-course antibiotics (≤120 days).Methods. We analyzed data from a multicenter European case-control study that included 117 SOT recipients with nocardiosis diagnosed between 2000 and 2014. Factors associated with 1-year all-cause mortality were identified using multivariable conditional logistic regression.Results. One-year mortality was 10-fold higher in patients with nocardiosis (16.2%, 19/117) than in control transplant recipients (1.3%, 3/233, P < .001). A history of tumor (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.8), invasive fungal infection (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.5), and donor age (OR, 1.0046; 95% CI, 1.0007-1.0083) were independently associated with 1-year mortality. Acute rejection in the year before nocardiosis was associated with improved survival (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98). Seventeen patients received short-course antibiotics (median duration 56 [24-120] days) with a 1-year success rate (cured and surviving) of 88% and a 5.9% risk of relapse (median follow-up 49 months).Conclusions. One-year mortality was 10-fold higher in SOT patients with nocardiosis than in those without. Four factors, largely reflecting general medical condition rather than severity and/or management of nocardiosis, were independently associated with 1-year mortality. Patients who received short-course antibiotic treatment had good outcomes, suggesting that this may be a strategy for further study.

We conducted a multicentre test-negative case–control study in 27 hospitals of 11 European countries to measure 2015/16 influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalised influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B among people aged ≥ 65 years. Patients swabbed within 7 days after onset of symptoms compatible with severe acute respiratory infection were included. Information on demographics, vaccination and underlying conditions was collected. Using logistic regression, we measured IVE adjusted for potential confounders. We included 355 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 cases, 110 influenza B cases, and 1,274 controls. Adjusted IVE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI): 22 to 57). It was 59% (95% CI: 23 to 78), 48% (95% CI: 5 to 71), 43% (95% CI: 8 to 65) and 39% (95% CI: 7 to 60) in patients with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung and heart disease, respectively. Adjusted IVE against influenza B was 52% (95% CI: 24 to 70). It was 62% (95% CI: 5 to 85), 60% (95% CI: 18 to 80) and 36% (95% CI: -23 to 67) in patients with diabetes mellitus, lung and heart disease, respectively. 2015/16 IVE estimates against hospitalised influenza in elderly people was moderate against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 and B, including among those with diabetes mellitus, cancer, lung or heart diseases.

In a multicentre European hospital study we measured influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against A(H3N2) in 2016/17. Adjusted IVE was 17% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1 to 31) overall; 25% (95% CI: 2 to 43) among 65–79-year-olds and 13% (95% CI: −15 to 30) among those ≥ 80 years. As the A(H3N2) vaccine component has not changed for 2017/18, physicians and public health experts should be aware that IVE could be low where A(H3N2) viruses predominate.

Background: Influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B viruses co-circulated in Europe in 2017-18, predominated by influenza B. WHO-recommended, trivalent vaccine components were lineage-mismatched for B. The I-MOVE hospital network measured 2017-18 seasonal influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against influenza A(H3N2) and B among hospitalised patients (≥65 years) in Europe.Methods: Following the same generic protocol for test-negative design, hospital teams in nine countries swabbed patients ≥65 years with recent onset (≤7 days) severe acute respiratory infection (SARI), collecting information on demographics, vaccination status and underlying conditions. Cases were RT-PCR positive for influenza A(H3N2) or B; controls: negative for any influenza. "Vaccinated" patients had SARI onset >14 days after vaccination. We measured pooled IVE against influenza, adjusted for study site, age, sex, onset date and chronic conditions. Results:We included 3483 patients: 376 influenza A(H3N2) and 928 B cases, and 2028 controls. Most (>99%) vaccinated patients received the B lineage-mismatched trivalent vaccine. IVE against influenza A(H3N2) was 24% (95% CI: 2 to 40); 35% (95% CI: 6 to 55) in 65-to 79-year-olds and 14% (95% CI: −22 to 39) in ≥80-year-olds.Against influenza B, IVE was 30% (95% CI: 16 to 41); 37% (95% CI: 19 to 51) in 65-to 79-year-olds and 19% (95% CI: −7 to 38) in ≥80-year-olds. | 303 ROSE Et al.Conclusions: IVE against influenza B was similar to A(H3N2) in hospitalised older adults, despite trivalent vaccine and circulating B lineage mismatch, suggesting some cross-protection. IVE was lower in those ≥80 than 65-79 years. We reinforce the importance of influenza vaccination in older adults as, even with a poorly matched vaccine, it still protects one in three to four of this population from severe influenza. K E Y W O R D SEurope, hospital, influenza, older adults, test-negative design, vaccine effectiveness

In Europe, annual influenza vaccination is recommended to elderly. From 2011 to 2014 and in 2015-16, we conducted a multicentre test negative case control study in hospitals of 11 European countries to measure influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory confirmed hospitalised influenza among people aged ≥65years. We pooled four seasons data to measure IVE by past exposures to influenza vaccination. We swabbed patients admitted for clinical conditions related to influenza with onset of severe acute respiratory infection ≤7days before admission. Cases were patients RT-PCR positive for influenza virus and controls those negative for any influenza virus. We documented seasonal vaccination status for the current season and the two previous seasons. We recruited 5295 patients over the four seasons, including 465A(H1N1)pdm09, 642A(H3N2), 278 B case-patients and 3910 controls. Among patients unvaccinated in both previous two seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was 30% (95%CI: -35 to 64), 8% (95%CI: -94 to 56) and 33% (95%CI: -43 to 68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Among patients vaccinated in both previous seasons, current seasonal IVE (pooled across seasons) was -1% (95%CI: -80 to 43), 37% (95%CI: 7-57) and 43% (95%CI: 1-68) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B respectively. Our results suggest that, regardless of patients' recent vaccination history, current seasonal vaccine conferred some protection to vaccinated patients against hospitalisation with influenza A(H3N2) and B. Vaccination of patients already vaccinated in both the past two seasons did not seem to be effective against A(H1N1)pdm09. To better understand the effect of repeated vaccination, engaging in large cohort studies documenting exposures to vaccine and natural infection is needed.

Objective Influenza virus infections cause a high disease and economic burden during seasonal epidemics. However, there is still a need for reliable disease burden estimates to provide a more detailed picture of the impact of influenza. Therefore, the objectives of this study is to estimate the incidence of hospitalisation for influenza virus infection and associated hospitalisation costs in adult patients in the Netherlands during two consecutive influenza seasons. Methods We conducted a retrospective study in adult patients with a laboratory confirmed influenza virus infection in three Dutch hospitals during respiratory seasons 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. Incidence was calculated as the weekly number of hospitalised influenza patients divided by the total population in the catchment populations of the three hospitals. Arithmetic mean hospitalisation costs per patient were estimated and included costs for emergency department consultation, diagnostics, general ward and/or intensive care unit admission, isolation, antibiotic and/or antiviral treatment. These hospitalisation costs were extrapolated to national level and expressed in 2017 euros. ResultsThe study population consisted of 380 hospitalised adult influenza patients. The seasonal cumulative incidence was 3.5 cases per 10,000 persons in respiratory season 2014-2015, compared to 1.8 cases per 10,000 persons in 2015-2016. The arithmetic mean hospitalisation cost per influenza patient was €6128 (95% CI €4934-€7737) per patient in 2014-2015 and €8280 (95% CI €6254-€10,665) in 2015-2016, potentially reaching total hospitalisation costs of €28 million in 2014-2015 and €20 million in 2015-2016. Conclusions Influenza virus infections lead to 1.8-3.5 hospitalised patients per 10,000 persons, with mean hospitalisation costs of €6100-€8300 per adult patient, resulting in 20-28 million euros annually in The Netherlands. The highest arithmetic mean hospitalisation costs per patient were found in the 45-64 year age group. These influenza burden estimates could be used for future influenza cost-effectiveness and impact studies.

BackgroundWhile influenza-like-illness (ILI) surveillance is well-organized at primary care level in Europe, few data are available on more severe cases. With retrospective data from intensive care units (ICU) we aim to fill this current knowledge gap. Using multiple parameters proposed by the World Health Organization we estimate the burden of severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) in the ICU and how this varies between influenza epidemics.MethodsWe analyzed weekly ICU admissions in the Netherlands (2007–2016) from the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) quality registry (100% coverage of adult ICUs in 2016; population size 14 million) to calculate SARI incidence, SARI peak levels, ICU SARI mortality, SARI mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, and the ICU SARI/ILI ratio. These parameters were calculated both yearly and per separate influenza epidemic (defined epidemic weeks). A SARI syndrome was defined as admission diagnosis being any of six pneumonia or pulmonary sepsis codes in the APACHE IV prognostic model. Influenza epidemic periods were retrieved from primary care sentinel influenza surveillance data.ResultsAnnually, an average of 13% of medical admissions to adult ICUs were for a SARI but varied widely between weeks (minimum 5% to maximum 25% per week). Admissions for bacterial pneumonia (59%) and pulmonary sepsis (25%) contributed most to ICU SARI. Between the eight different influenza epidemics under study, the value of each of the severity parameters varied. Per parameter the minimum and maximum of those eight values were as follows: ICU SARI incidence 558–2400 cumulated admissions nationwide, rate 0.40–1.71/10,000 inhabitants; average APACHE score 71–78; ICU SARI mortality 13–20%; ICU SARI/ILI ratio 8–17 cases per 1000 expected medically attended ILI in primary care); peak-incidence 101–188 ICU SARI admissions in highest-incidence week, rate 0.07–0.13/10,000 population).ConclusionsIn the ICU there is great variation between the yearly influenza epidemic periods in terms of different influenza severity parameters. The parameters also complement each other by reflecting different aspects of severity. Prospective syndromic ICU SARI surveillance, as proposed by the World Health Organization, thereby would provide insight into the severity of ongoing influenza epidemics, which differ from season to season.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2274-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.