RESUMEN
BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination may be associated with change in menstrual cycle length following vaccination. MethodsWe conducted a longitudinal analysis within a subgroup of 14,915 participants in the Apple Womens Health Study (AWHS) who enrolled between November 2019 and December 2021 and met the following eligibility criteria: were living in the U.S., met minimum age requirements for consent, were English speaking, actively tracked their menstrual cycles, and responded to the COVID-19 Vaccine Update survey. In the main analysis, we included tracked cycles recorded when premenopausal participants were not pregnant, lactating, or using hormonal contraceptives. We used conditional linear regression and multivariable linear mixed-effects models with random intercepts to estimate the covariate-adjusted difference in mean cycle length, measured in days, between pre-vaccination cycles, cycles in which a vaccine was administered, and post-vaccination cycles within vaccinated participants, and between vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. We further compared associations between vaccination and menstrual cycle length by the timing of vaccine dose within a menstrual cycle (i.e., in follicular or luteal phase). We present Bonferroni-adjusted 95% confidence intervals to account for multiple comparisons. ResultsA total of 128,094 cycles (median = 10 cycles per participant; interquartile range: 4-22) from 9,652 participants (8,486 vaccinated; 1,166 unvaccinated) were included. The average within-individual standard deviation in cycle length was 4.2 days. Fifty-five percent of vaccinated participants received Pfizer-BioNTechs mRNA vaccine, 37% received Modernas mRNA vaccine, and 7% received the Johnson & Johnson/Janssen vaccine (J&J). We found no evidence of a difference between mean menstrual cycle length in the unvaccinated and vaccinated participants prior to vaccination (0.24 days, 95% CI: -0.34, 0.82). Among vaccinated participants, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a small increase in mean cycle length (MCL) for cycles in which participants received the first dose (0.50 days, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.78) and cycles in which participants received the second dose (0.39 days, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.67) of mRNA vaccines compared with pre-vaccination cycles. Cycles in which the single dose of J&J was administered were, on average, 1.26 days longer (95% CI: 0.45, 2.07) than pre-vaccination cycles. Post-vaccination cycles returned to average pre-vaccination length. Estimates for pre vs post cycle lengths were 0.14 days (95% CI: -0.13, 0.40) in the first cycle following vaccination, 0.13 days (95% CI: -0.14, 0.40) in the second, -0.17 days (95% CI: -0.43, 0.10) in the third, and -0.25 days (95% CI: -0.52, 0.01) in the fourth cycle post-vaccination. Follicular phase vaccination was associated with an increase in MCL in cycles in which participants received the first dose (0.97 days, 95% CI: 0.53, 1.42) or the second dose (1.43 days, 95% CI: 1.06, 1.80) of mRNA vaccines or the J&J dose (2.27 days, 95% CI: 1.04, 3.50), compared with pre-vaccination cycles. ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccination was associated with an immediate short-term increase in menstrual cycle length overall, which appeared to be driven by doses received in the follicular phase. However, the magnitude of this increase was small and diminished in each cycle following vaccination. No association with cycle length persisted over time. The magnitude of change associated with vaccination was well within the natural variability in the study population. Menstrual cycle change following COVID-19 vaccination appears small and temporary and should not discourage individuals from becoming vaccinated.
RESUMEN
Identifying areas with high COVID-19 burden and their characteristics can help improve vaccine distribution and uptake, reduce burdens on health care systems, and allow for better allocation of public health intervention resources. Synthesizing data from various government and nonprofit institutions of 3,142 United States (US) counties as of 12/21/2020, we studied county-level characteristics that are associated with cumulative case and death rates using regression analyses. Our results showed counties that are more rural, counties with more White/non-White segregation, and counties with higher percentages of people of color, in poverty, with no high school diploma, and with medical comorbidities such as diabetes and hypertension are associated with higher cumulative COVID-19 case and death rates. We identify the hardest hit counties in US using model-estimated case and death rates, which provide more reliable estimates of cumulative COVID-19 burdens than those using raw observed county-specific rates. Identification of counties with high disease burdens and understanding the characteristics of these counties can help inform policies to improve vaccine distribution, deployment and uptake, prevent overwhelming health care systems, and enhance testing access, personal protection equipment access, and other resource allocation efforts, all of which can help save more lives for vulnerable communities. Significance statementWe found counties that are more rural, counties with more White/non-White segregation, and counties with higher percentages of people of color, in poverty, with no high school diploma, and with medical comorbidities such as diabetes and hypertension are associated with higher cumulative COVID-19 case and death rates. We also identified individual counties with high cumulative COVID-19 burden. Identification of counties with high disease burdens and understanding the characteristics of these counties can help inform policies to improve vaccine distribution, deployment and uptake, prevent overwhelming health care systems, and enhance testing access, personal protection equipment access, and other resource allocation efforts, all of which can help save more lives for vulnerable communities.