Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Geroscience ; 46(3): 2863-2877, 2024 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38367195

RESUMEN

Baricitinib is considered a first-line treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected adult patients with an associated cytokine storm syndrome (CSS). Our objective was to compare rates of secondary infections and long-term outcomes of elderly and non-elderly patients who received baricitinib for COVID-19. We conducted a single-centre observational study between November 2020 and September 2023, focusing on hospitalized adult SARS-CoV-2 patients with CSS, categorized as elderly (≥ 65 years) and non-elderly (< 65 years). Enrolment, severity stratification, and diagnosis of infectious complications followed predefined criteria. Outcomes of all-cause mortality and rates of non-severe and severe secondary infections were assessed at 1-year post-treatment initiation. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for survival analysis. In total, 490 patients were enrolled (median age 65 ± 23 (21-100) years (years, median ± IQR, min-max); 49.18% elderly; 59.59% male). Elderly patients were admitted to the hospital significantly earlier (7 ± 5 days vs. 8 ± 4 days; p = 0.02), experienced a higher occurrence of severe COVID-19 (121/241, 50.21% vs. 98/249, 39.36%; p = 0.02), and required the use of non-invasive ventilation at baseline (167/225, 74.22% vs. 153/236, 64.83%; p = 0.03). At 1 year, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the elderly subgroup (111/241, 46.06% vs. 29/249, 11.65%; p < 0.01). At 90 days and 1 year, rates of any severe secondary infection were also more prevalent among the elderly (56/241, 23.24% vs. 37/249 14.86%; p = 0.02 and 58/241, 24.07% vs. 39/249, 15.66%; p = 0.02). In conclusion, elderly SARS-CoV-2-infected patients experience a more severe clinical course, higher secondary infection rates, and increased risk for long-term mortality, regardless of immunomodulatory therapy.


Asunto(s)
Azetidinas , COVID-19 , Coinfección , Purinas , Pirazoles , Sulfonamidas , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Tratamiento Farmacológico de COVID-19 , Hungría , SARS-CoV-2 , Adulto Joven , Adulto
3.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(2)2024 Jan 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38254774

RESUMEN

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy. Approximately 15% of MM patients are affected by the t(4;14) translocation resulting in the IGH::NSD2 fusion transcript. Breakage occurs in three major breakpoint regions within the NSD2 gene (MB4-1, MB4-2, and MB4-3), where MB4-1 leads to the production of full-length protein, while truncated proteins are expressed in the other two cases. Measurable residual disease (MRD) has been conclusively established as a crucial prognostic factor in MM. The IGH::NSD2 fusion transcript can serve as a sensitive MRD marker. Using bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) samples from 111 patients, we developed a highly sensitive quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and digital PCR (dPCR) system capable of detecting fusion mRNAs with a sensitivity of up to 1:100,000. PB samples exhibited sensitivity three orders of magnitude lower compared to BM samples. Patients with an MB4-2 breakpoint demonstrated significantly reduced overall survival (p = 0.003). Our novel method offers a simple and sensitive means for detecting MRD in a substantial proportion of MM patients. Monitoring may be carried out even from PB samples. The literature lacks consensus regarding survival outcomes among patients with different NSD2 breakpoints. Our data align with previous findings indicating that patients with the MB4-2 breakpoint type tend to exhibit unfavorable overall survival.

4.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 11(12)2023 Nov 29.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38140190

RESUMEN

Although the COVID-19 pandemic is profoundly changing, data on the effect of vaccination and duration of protection against infection and severe disease can still be advantageous, especially for patients with COPD, who are more vulnerable to respiratory infections. The Hungarian COVID-19 registry was retrospectively investigated for risk of infection and hospitalization by time since the last vaccination, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated in adults with COPD diagnosis and an exact-matched control group during the Delta variant of concern (VOC) wave in Hungary (September-December 2021). For the matching, sex, age, major co-morbidities, vaccination status, and prior infection data were obtained on 23 August 2021. The study population included 373,962 cases divided into COPD patients (age: 66.67 ± 12.66) and a 1:1 matched group (age: 66.73 ± 12.67). In both groups, the female/male ratio was 52.2:47.7, respectively. Among the unvaccinated, there was no difference between groups in risk for infection or hospitalization. Regarding vaccinated cases, in the COPD group, a slightly faster decline in effectiveness was noted for hospitalization prevention, although in both groups, the vaccine lost its significant effect between 215 and 240 days after the last dose of vaccination. Based on a time-stratified multivariate Cox analysis of the vaccinated cases, the hazard was constantly higher in the COPD group, with an HR of 1.09 (95%: 1.05-1.14) for infection and 1.87 (95% CI: 1.59-2.19) for hospitalization. In our study, COPD patients displayed lower vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalization but a similar waning trajectory, as vaccines lost their preventive effect after 215 days. These data emphasize revaccination measures in the COPD patient population.

5.
Vaccines (Basel) ; 12(1)2023 Dec 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38276662

RESUMEN

The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines developed against the original virus strain deteriorated noticeably in efficacy against the Omicron variant (B.1.1.529). Moreover, the immunity developed after vaccination or due to natural infection rapidly waned. In the present study, covering this period, we summarize the incidence of breakthrough infections among healthcare workers (HCWs) with respect to administration of the three vaccine doses. Additionally, we evaluate the long-term SARS-CoV-2-specific humoral and T cell responses at two different time points: six and twelve months after receipt of the third (booster) dose. The spike-protein-specific antibody levels and the quantity of structural-protein-specific T cells were evaluated at these time points and compared with the values measured earlier, 14 days after the booster vaccination. The study participants were categorized into two cohorts: Members of the first cohort received a two-dose BNT162b2 mRNA-based vaccine regimen, followed by an additional BNT162b2 booster six months later. Individuals in the second cohort received an inactivated-virus-based BBIBP-CorV booster six months after the initial two-dose BNT162b2 vaccination. Overall, 64.3% of participants were infected with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by PCR or antigen test; however, additional subjects from the first cohort (23%) who did not know about their previous infection but had an anti-nucleocapsid T cell response were also considered virus-experienced. According to our results, no statistically significant difference was found between the two cohorts regarding the SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell response, neutralizing anti-RBD IgG, and anti-S IgA serum antibody levels either six or twelve months after receiving the booster, despite the overall higher median values of the first cohort. The only significant difference was the higher anti-S1/S2 IgG antibody level in the first cohort one year after the BNT162b2 booster (p = 0.039). In summary, the BNT162b2 and BBIBP-CorV boosters maintain durable humoral and T cell-mediated immune memory even one year after application. Although the booster provided limited protection against Omicron breakthrough infections, as 73.6% of these infections occurred after the booster vaccination, which means 53.5% cumulative incidence, it still offered excellent protection against severe disease and hospitalization in both cohorts.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...