Flawed MIREC fluoride and intelligence quotient publications: A failed attempt to undermine community water fluoridation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence presented in a set of articles that use the Canadian Maternal-Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study database to claim that community water fluoridation (CWF) is associated with harm to foetal and infant cognitive development. METHODS: Critical appraisal of measurements and processes in the MIREC database, and articles derived therefrom. MIREC's cohort is approximately 2000 pregnant women recruited in 10 centres across Canada, 2008-2011, leading to measuring 512 children aged 3-6 years in six cities. Fluoride exposure was measured by city fluoridation status, self-reports and maternal spot urine samples. Intelligence Quotient (IQ) was measured using the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-III) by different assessors in each city. RESULTS: MIREC's fluoride and IQ measurements are invalid and therefore cannot support the claim that CWF is associated with IQ decline in children. CONCLUSIONS: The MIREC fluoride-IQ articles' results should be considered unacceptable for legal and policy purposes; other water fluoridation studies and systematic reviews show no effect of fluoridation on cognition.

2023/24 mid-season influenza and Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness estimates from the Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network (SPSN).

The Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network reports mid-season 2023/24 influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) of 63% (95% CI: 51-72) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, lower for clade 5a.2a.1 (56%; 95% CI: 33-71) than clade 5a.2a (67%; 95% CI: 48-80), and lowest against influenza A(H3N2) (40%; 95% CI: 5-61). The Omicron XBB.1.5 vaccine protected comparably well, with VE of 47% (95% CI: 21-65) against medically attended COVID-19, higher among people reporting a prior confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection at 67% (95% CI: 28-85).

Pharmacokinetic analysis of vilobelimab, anaphylatoxin C5a and antidrug antibodies in PANAMO: a phase 3 study in critically ill, invasively mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Vilobelimab, a complement 5a (C5a)-specific monoclonal antibody, reduced mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients in a phase 3 multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. As part of the study, vilobelimab concentrations and C5a levels as well as antidrug antibodies (ADAs) to vilobelimab were analysed. RESULTS: From Oct 1, 2020 to Oct 4, 2021, 368 invasively mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients were randomized: 177 patients were randomly assigned to receive vilobelimab while 191 patients received placebo. Pharmacokinetic sampling was only performed at sites in Western Europe. Blood samples for vilobelimab measurements were available for 93 of 177 (53%) patients in the vilobelimab group and 99 of 191 (52%) patients in the placebo group. On day 8, after three infusions, mean vilobelimab (trough) concentrations ranged from 21,799.3 to 302,972.1 ng/mL (geometric mean 137,881.3 ng/mL). Blood samples for C5a measurements were available for 94 of 177 (53%) patients in the vilobelimab group and 99 of 191 (52%) patients in the placebo group. At screening, C5a levels were highly elevated and comparable between groups. In the vilobelimab group, median C5a levels were 118.3 ng/mL [IQR 71.2-168.2 ng/mL] and in the placebo group, median C5a levels were 104.6 ng/mL [IQR 77.5-156.6 ng/mL]. By day 8, median C5a levels were reduced by 87% in the vilobelimab group (median 14.5 ng/mL [IQR 9.5-21.0 ng/mL], p < 0.001) versus an 11% increase in the placebo group (median 119.2 ng/mL [IQR 85.9-152.1 ng/mL]). Beyond day 8, though plasma sampling was sparse, C5a levels did not reach screening levels in the vilobelimab group while C5a levels remained elevated in the placebo group. Treatment-emergent ADAs were observed in one patient in the vilobelimab group at hospital discharge on day 40 and in one patient in the placebo group at hospital discharge on day 25. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that vilobelimab efficiently inhibits C5a in critically ill COVID-19 patients. There was no evidence of immunogenicity associated with vilobelimab treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04333420. Registered 3 April 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04333420.

Vaccine effectiveness estimates from an early-season influenza A(H3N2) epidemic, including unique genetic diversity with reassortment, Canada, 2022/23.

The Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) during the unusually early 2022/23 influenza A(H3N2) epidemic. Like vaccine, circulating viruses were clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2, but with genetic diversity affecting haemagglutinin positions 135 and 156, and reassortment such that H156 viruses acquired neuraminidase from clade 3C.2a1b.1a. Vaccine provided substantial protection with A(H3N2) VE of 54% (95% CI: 38 to 66) overall. VE was similar against H156 and vaccine-like S156 viruses, but with potential variation based on diversity at position 135.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness against A(H3N2) during the delayed 2021/22 epidemic in Canada.

Influenza virus circulation virtually ceased in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic, re-emerging with the relaxation of restrictions in spring 2022. Using a test-negative design, the Canadian Sentinel Practitioner Surveillance Network reports 2021/22 vaccine effectiveness of 36% (95% CI: -38 to 71) against late-season illness due to influenza A(H3N2) clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2 viruses, considered antigenically distinct from the 3C.2a1b.2a.1 vaccine strain. Findings reinforce the World Health Organization's decision to update the 2022/23 northern hemisphere vaccine to a more representative A(H3N2) clade 3C.2a1b.2a.2 strain.

Leaving the Walkman and ICD-9 Behind: Modernizing the Disease Classification System Used by Canadian Physicians.

The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) was released in the 1970s and adopted in Canada for physician billing claims in 1979 (CIHI n.d.b.; WHO & International Conference for the Ninth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases 1977). ICD-9 is no longer adequate for representing our modern healthcare environment and patient needs. We summarize the findings from a small survey of ICD-9 users across Canada - such as family physicians, researchers and decision makers - who describe the limitations of ICD-9 and the features that they would desire in a new or updated classification system.