RESUMO
Abstract: Disease surveillance data was critical in supporting public health decisions throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. At the same time, the unprecedented circumstances of the pandemic revealed many shortcomings of surveillance systems for viral respiratory pathogens. Strengthening of surveillance systems was identified as a priority for the recently established Australian Centre for Disease Control, which represents a critical opportunity to review pre-pandemic and pandemic surveillance practices, and to decide on future priorities, during both pandemic and inter-pandemic periods. On 20 October 2022, we ran a workshop with experts from the academic and government sectors who had contributed to the COVID-19 response in Australia on 'The role of surveillance in epidemic response', at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Following the workshop, we developed five recommendations to strengthen respiratory virus surveillance systems in Australia, which we present here. Our recommendations are not intended to be exhaustive. We instead chose to focus on data types that are highly valuable yet typically overlooked by surveillance planners. Three of the recommendations focus on data collection activities that support the monitoring and prediction of disease impact and the effectiveness of interventions (what to measure) and two focus on surveillance methods and capabilities (how to measure). Implementation of our recommendations would enable more robust, timely, and impactful epidemic analysis.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Austrália/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Vigilância da População , Monitoramento Epidemiológico , Saúde Pública , Vigilância em Saúde PúblicaRESUMO
Abstract: Annual seasonal influenza epidemics cause substantial disease and economic burden worldwide. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020 and 2021, influenza activity significantly declined. However, influenza resurged in Australia following the relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions, with increased influenza virus circulation in early 2022 coinciding with the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 variant wave. Together with other respiratory virus diseases, these disease impacts on the Australian population and healthcare system have re-emphasised the importance of influenza vaccination and control. We aim to provide an overview of the current seasonal influenza vaccination program in Australia and summarise evidence and considerations underpinning potential future immunisation strategies. Influenza causes disproportionately higher morbidity and mortality in young children and older adults. Other populations at elevated risk from influenza include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, pregnant women, and people with certain underlying medical conditions. All Australians aged ≥ 6 months are recommended to receive influenza vaccine every year. The National Immunisation Program (NIP) provides free vaccine for eligible at-risk populations. While approximately 70% of older adults had received influenza vaccine in 2022, coverage in other age groups remains suboptimal. There are several key unmet needs and challenges, but also potential strategies for enhancing the influenza vaccination program in Australia. Improved monitoring and evaluation, including the use of relevant linked datasets for such purposes, is imperative to better understand variations in coverage and vaccination impact in specific populations. Adoption of evidence-based strategies, such as culturally appropriate resources that consider the characteristics of diverse Australian populations, may also help to achieve higher vaccine coverage rates. Additionally, greater vaccine uptake across the population could be facilitated by expanding the NIP-eligible population where cost-effective, and adopting the use of more effective and different types of vaccines when available.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Programas de Imunização , Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Humanos , Austrália/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra Influenza/efeitos adversos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Vacinação/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Feminino , Criança , Idoso , Adolescente , Pré-Escolar , Lactente , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem , Relatórios Anuais como Assunto , Gravidez , MasculinoRESUMO
Cogan syndrome (CS) is a chronic inflammatory disorder primarily affecting young adults. It is characterized by interstitial keratitis, vestibuloauditory dysfunction, and, rarely, systemic vasculitis and aortitis. In this case report, we present a rare instance of a young male with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the context of aneurysmal coronary vessels and proximal occlusion of the left anterior descending artery. This case underscores the importance of recognizing cardiac risk factors in the setting of CS, as they can be life-threatening. Regular follow up is necessary, especially for patients showing signs of vasculitis or experiencing cardiac symptoms. A multidisciplinary approach to management can help optimize the prognosis for these complex patients. Learning objective: Comprehend Cogan syndrome (CS): Grasp the clinical manifestations and potential cardiovascular complications of CS. Diagnostic approach in CS: Differentiate cardiac symptoms in CS from typical coronary diseases, emphasizing the role of heart catheterization. Multidisciplinary management: Recognize the importance of integrating rheumatologists, cardiologists, and surgeons for optimal CS patient outcomes.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Immunocompromised hosts (ICH) experience more breakthrough infections and worse clinical outcomes following infection with COVID-19 than immunocompetent people. Prophylactic monoclonal antibody therapies can be challenging to access, and escape variants emerge rapidly. Immunity conferred through vaccination remains a central prevention strategy for COVID-19. COVID-19 vaccines do not elicit optimal immunity in ICH but boosting, through additional doses of vaccine improves humoral and cellular immune responses. This trial aims to assess the immunogenicity and safety of different COVID-19 vaccine booster strategies against SARS-CoV-2 for ICH in Australia. METHODS: Bringing optimised COVID-19 vaccine schedules to immunocompromised populations (BOOST-IC) is an adaptive randomised trial of one or two additional doses of COVID-19 vaccines 3 months apart in people living with HIV, solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, or those who have haematological malignancies (chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma or multiple myeloma). Key eligibility criteria include having received 3 to 7 doses of Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)-approved COVID-19 vaccines at least 3 months earlier, and having not received SARS-CoV-2-specific monoclonal antibodies in the 3 months prior to receiving the study vaccine. The primary outcome is the geometric mean concentration of anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G (IgG) 28 days after the final dose of the study vaccine. Key secondary outcomes include anti-spike SARS-CoV-2 IgG titres and the proportion of people seroconverting 6 and 12 months after study vaccines, local and systemic reactions in the 7 days after vaccination, adverse events of special interest, COVID-19 infection, mortality and quality of life. DISCUSSION: This study will enhance the understanding of COVID-19 vaccine responses in ICH, and enable the development of safe, and optimised vaccine schedules in people with HIV, SOT, or haematological malignancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05556720. Registered on 23rd August 2022.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Esquemas de Imunização , Hospedeiro Imunocomprometido , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/imunologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19/administração & dosagem , Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Imunogenicidade da Vacina , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Imunização Secundária , Austrália , Adulto , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) biomarker studies rarely employ multi-omic biomarker strategies and pertinent clinicopathologic characteristics to predict mortality. In this study we determine for the first time a combined epigenetic, gene expression, and histology signature that differentiates between patients with different tobacco use history (heavy tobacco use with ≥10 pack years vs. no tobacco use). Using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohort (n = 257) and an internal cohort (n = 40), we identify 3 epigenetic markers (GPR15, GNG12, GDNF) and 13 expression markers (IGHA2, SCG5, RPL3L, NTRK1, CD96, BMP6, TFPI2, EFEMP2, RYR3, DMTN, GPD2, BAALC, and FMO3), which are dysregulated in OSCC patients who were never smokers vs. those who have a ≥ 10 pack year history. While mortality risk prediction based on smoking status and clinicopathologic covariates alone is inaccurate (c-statistic = 0.57), the combined epigenetic/expression and histologic signature has a c-statistic = 0.9409 in predicting 5-year mortality in OSCC patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) also known as non-ventilator associated pneumonia, is one of the most common infections acquired in hospitalised patients. Improving oral hygiene appears to reduce the incidence of HAP. This study aimed to describe current practices, barriers and facilitators, knowledge and educational preferences of registered nurses performing oral health care in the Australian hospital setting, with a focus on the prevention of HAP. We present this as a short research report. METHODS: We undertook a cross sectional online anonymous survey of Australian registered nurses. Participants were recruited via electronic distribution through existing professional networks and social media. The survey used was modified from an existing survey on oral care practice. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 179 participants. Hand hygiene was considered a very important strategy to prevent pneumonia (n = 90, 58%), while 45% (n = 71) felt that oral care was very important. The most highly reported barriers for providing oral care included: an uncooperative patient; inadequate staffing; and a lack of oral hygiene requisite. Patients' reminders, prompts and the provision of toothbrushes were common ways believed to help facilitate improvements in oral care. CONCLUSION: Findings from this survey will be used in conjunction with consumer feedback, to help inform a planned multi-centre randomised trial, the Hospital Acquired Pneumonia PrEveNtion (HAPPEN) study, aimed at reducing the incidence of HAP. Findings may also be useful for informing studies and quality improvement initiatives aimed at improving oral care to reduce the incidence of HAP.
RESUMO
Objectives: To evaluate the need and feasibility of a nurse-led antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programme in two Australian residential aged care homes (RACHs) to inform a stepped-wedged, cluster randomized controlled trial (SW-cRCT). Methods: A mixed-methods pilot study of a nurse-led AMS programme was performed in two RACHs in Victoria, Australia (July-December 2019). The AMS programme comprised education, infection assessment and management guidelines, and documentation to support appropriate antimicrobial use in urinary, lower respiratory and skin/soft tissue infections. The programme was implemented over three phases: (i) pre-implementation education and integration (1â month); (ii) implementation of the intervention (3â months); and (iii) post-intervention evaluation (1â month). Baseline RACH and resident data and weekly infection and antimicrobial usage were collected and analysed descriptively to evaluate the need for AMS strategies. Feedback on intervention resources and implementation barriers were identified from semi-structured interviews, an online staff questionnaire and researcher field notes. Results: Six key barriers to implementation of the intervention were identified and used to refine the intervention: aged care staffing and capacity; access to education; resistance to practice change; role of staff in AMS; leadership and ownership of the intervention at the RACH and organization level; and family expectations. A total of 61 antimicrobials were prescribed for 40 residents over the 3â month intervention. Overall, 48% of antibiotics did not meet minimum criteria for appropriate initiation (respiratory: 73%; urinary: 54%; skin/soft tissue: 0%). Conclusions: Several barriers and opportunities to improve implementation of AMS in RACHs were identified. Findings were used to inform a revised intervention to be evaluated in a larger SW-cRCT.
Assuntos
Infecções Bacterianas , Infecção Hospitalar , Enterococcus faecium , Infecções por Bactérias Gram-Positivas , Enterococos Resistentes à Vancomicina , Humanos , Vancomicina , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Enterococcus , Infecções Bacterianas/tratamento farmacológico , Políticas , Infecções por Bactérias Gram-Positivas/prevenção & controle , Infecção Hospitalar/tratamento farmacológicoAssuntos
Melioidose , Sepse , Humanos , Medicina de Precisão , Países em Desenvolvimento , Sepse/terapia , Sepse/diagnósticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to extensive vaccination campaigns worldwide, including in Australia. Immunity waning and the emergence of new viral variants pose challenges to the effectiveness of vaccines. Our study aimed to assess the relative effectiveness (rVE) of 3 and 4 compared with 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine. The study focuses on the Victorian population, a majority of whom had no prior exposure to the virus before vaccination. METHODS: We used routinely collected data for the state of Victoria, Australia, to assess rVE during an Omicron-dominant period, 1 June 2022 to 1 March 2023. Immunisation, notifications, hospitalisations and mortality data for residents aged 65 years and older were linked for analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the rVE against COVID-19 hospitalisation or death, accounting for key confounders with vaccination as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: In 1,070,113 people 65 years or older who had received their second dose, a third and fourth dose of a COVID-19 vaccine significantly reduced the hazard of hospitalisation or death compared to two doses. rVE was highest within two weeks from administration at 40 % (95 % CI: 0 % to 64 %) and 66 % (95 % CI: 60 % to 71 %) for a third and fourth dose, respectively. Additional protection conferred by third and fourth doses waned over time from administration. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the need for additional vaccine doses and updated vaccine strategies. These findings have implications for public health advice and COVID-19 vaccine strategies. Further research and monitoring of vaccine effectiveness in real-world settings are warranted to inform ongoing pandemic response efforts.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Vitória/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Vacinação , ImunizaçãoRESUMO
Objective: We explored the utility of the standardized infection ratio (SIR) for surgical site infection (SSI) reporting in an Australian jurisdiction. Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Statewide SSI surveillance data from 2013 to 2019. Patients: Individuals who had cardiac bypass surgery (CABG), colorectal surgery (COLO), cesarean section (CSEC), hip prosthesis (HPRO), or knee prosthesis (KPRO) procedures. Methods: The SIR was calculated by dividing the number of observed infections by the number of predicted infections as determined using the National Healthcare Safety Network procedure-specific risk models. In line with a minimum precision criterion, an SIR was not calculated if the number of predicted infections was <1. Results: A SIR >0 (≥1 observed SSI, predicted number of SSI ≥1, no missing covariates) could be calculated for a median of 89.3% of reporting quarters for CABG, 75.0% for COLO, 69.0% for CSEC, 0% for HPRO, and 7.1% for KPRO. In total, 80.6% of the reporting quarters, when the SIR was not calculated, were due to no observed infections or predicted infections <1, and 19.4% were due to missing covariates alone. Within hospitals, the median percentage of quarters during which zero infections were observed was 8.9% for CABG, 20.0% for COLO, 25.4% for CSEC, 67.3% for HPRO, and 71.4% for KPRO. Conclusions: Calculating an SIR for SSIs is challenging for hospitals in our regional network, primarily because of low event numbers and many facilities with predicted infections <1. Our SSI reporting will continue to use risk-indexed rates, in tandem with SIR values when predicted number of SSI ≥1.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of simvastatin in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is unclear. METHODS: In an ongoing international, multifactorial, adaptive platform, randomized, controlled trial, we evaluated simvastatin (80 mg daily) as compared with no statin (control) in critically ill patients with Covid-19 who were not receiving statins at baseline. The primary outcome was respiratory and cardiovascular organ support-free days, assessed on an ordinal scale combining in-hospital death (assigned a value of -1) and days free of organ support through day 21 in survivors; the analyis used a Bayesian hierarchical ordinal model. The adaptive design included prespecified statistical stopping criteria for superiority (>99% posterior probability that the odds ratio was >1) and futility (>95% posterior probability that the odds ratio was <1.2). RESULTS: Enrollment began on October 28, 2020. On January 8, 2023, enrollment was closed on the basis of a low anticipated likelihood that prespecified stopping criteria would be met as Covid-19 cases decreased. The final analysis included 2684 critically ill patients. The median number of organ support-free days was 11 (interquartile range, -1 to 17) in the simvastatin group and 7 (interquartile range, -1 to 16) in the control group; the posterior median adjusted odds ratio was 1.15 (95% credible interval, 0.98 to 1.34) for simvastatin as compared with control, yielding a 95.9% posterior probability of superiority. At 90 days, the hazard ratio for survival was 1.12 (95% credible interval, 0.95 to 1.32), yielding a 91.9% posterior probability of superiority of simvastatin. The results of secondary analyses were consistent with those of the primary analysis. Serious adverse events, such as elevated levels of liver enzymes and creatine kinase, were reported more frequently with simvastatin than with control. CONCLUSIONS: Although recruitment was stopped because cases had decreased, among critically ill patients with Covid-19, simvastatin did not meet the prespecified criteria for superiority to control. (REMAP-CAP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02735707.).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Estado Terminal , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases , Sinvastatina , Humanos , Teorema de Bayes , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/terapia , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , Estado Terminal/mortalidade , Estado Terminal/terapia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/uso terapêutico , Sinvastatina/uso terapêutico , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Both vector and mRNA vaccines were an important part of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic and may be required in future outbreaks and pandemics. The aim of this study was to validate whether immunogenicity differs for adenoviral vectored (AdV) versus mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, and to investigate how anti-vector immunity and B cell dynamics modulate immunogenicity. We enrolled SARS-CoV-2 infection-naïve health care workers who had received two doses of either AdV AZD1222 (n = 184) or mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine (n = 274) between April and October 2021. Blood was collected at least once, 10-48 days after vaccine dose 2 for antibody and B cell analyses. Median ages were 42 and 39 years, for AdV and mRNA vaccinees, respectively. Surrogate virus neutralization test (sVNT) and spike binding antibody titres were a median of 4.2 and 2.2 times lower, respectively, for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees (p < 0.001). Median percentages of memory B cells that recognized fluorescent-tagged spike and RBD were 2.9 and 8.3 times lower, respectively for AdV compared to mRNA vaccinees. Titres of IgG reactive with human adenovirus type 5 hexon protein rose a median of 2.2-fold after AdV vaccination but were not correlated with anti-spike antibody titres. Together the results show that mRNA induced substantially more sVNT antibody than AdV vaccine, which reflected greater B cell expansion and targeting of the RBD rather than an attenuating effect of anti-vector antibodies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05110911.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Vacinas Virais , Humanos , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Vacina BNT162 , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , Anticorpos , Anticorpos AntiviraisRESUMO
Background: Understanding mortality burden associated with communicable diseases is key to informing resource allocation, disease prevention and control efforts, and evaluating public health interventions. We quantified excess mortality among people notified with communicable diseases in Victoria, Australia. Methods: Cases of communicable disease notified in Victoria between 1 January 1991 and 31 December 2021 were linked to the death registry. Informational gain obtained through linkage and 30-day case fatality rates were calculated for each disease. Standardised mortality ratios (SMR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated up to a year following illness onset. Findings: There were 1,032,619 cases and 5985 (0.58%) died ≤30 days of illness onset. Following linkage, the 30-day case fatality rate increased more than 2-fold. Diseases with high 7-day SMR signifying excess mortality included invasive pneumococcal disease (167.7, 95% CI 153.4-182.7); listeriosis (166.2, 95% CI 121.2-218.3); invasive meningococcal disease (145.9, 95% CI 116.7-178.3); legionellosis (43.3, 95% CI 28.0-62.0); and COVID-19 (21.9, 95% CI 19.7-24.3). Most diseases exhibited a strong negative gradient, with high SMRs in the first 7-days of illness onset that reduced over time. Interpretation: We demonstrated that the rate of death in Victoria's notifiable disease surveillance dataset is underestimated. Further, compared to a general population, there is evidence of elevated all-cause mortality among people notified with communicable diseases often up to one year following illness onset. Not all elevated risk is likely directly attributable to the communicable diseases of interest, rather, it may reflect underlying comorbidities or behaviours in these individuals. Regardless of attribution, infection with communicable diseases may represent a marker of mortality. Key to preventing deaths may be through timely and appropriate transition to primary and preventive healthcare following diagnosis. Funding: No funding was provided for this study.
RESUMO
The ability for vaccines to protect against infectious diseases varies among individuals, but computational models employed to inform policy typically do not account for this variation. Here we examine this issue: we implement a model of vaccine efficacy developed in the context of SARS-CoV-2 in order to evaluate the general implications of modelling correlates of protection on the individual level. Due to high levels of variation in immune response, the distributions of individual-level protection emerging from this model tend to be highly dispersed, and are often bimodal. We describe the specification of the model, provide an intuitive parameterisation, and comment on its general robustness. We show that the model can be viewed as an intermediate between the typical approaches that consider the mode of vaccine action to be either "all-or-nothing" or "leaky". Our view based on this analysis is that individual variation in correlates of protection is an important consideration that may be crucial to designing and implementing models for estimating population-level impacts of vaccination programs.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Doenças Transmissíveis , Vacinas , Humanos , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , SARS-CoV-2 , ImunidadeRESUMO
IMPORTANCE: There has been a decrease in healthcare-associated Clostridioides difficile infection in Australia, but an increase in the genetic diversity of infecting strains, and an increase in community-associated cases. Here, we studied the genetic relatedness of C. difficile isolated from patients at a major hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Diverse ribotypes were detected, including those associated with community and environmental sources. Some types of isolates were more likely to carry antimicrobial resistance determinants, and many of these were associated with mobile genetic elements. These results correlate with those of other recent investigations, supporting the observed increase in genetic diversity and prevalence of community-associated C. difficile, and consequently the importance of sources of transmission other than symptomatic patients. Thus, they reinforce the importance of surveillance for in both hospital and community settings, including asymptomatic carriage, food, animals, and other environmental sources to identify and circumvent important sources of C. difficile transmission.
Assuntos
Clostridioides difficile , Infecções por Clostridium , Infecção Hospitalar , Animais , Humanos , Clostridioides difficile/genética , Infecções por Clostridium/epidemiologia , Genômica , Infecção Hospitalar/epidemiologia , AustráliaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The addition of vancomycin to beta-lactam prophylaxis in arthroplasty may reduce surgical-site infections; however, the efficacy and safety are unclear. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, superiority, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned adult patients without known methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization who were undergoing arthroplasty to receive 1.5 g of vancomycin or normal saline placebo, in addition to cefazolin prophylaxis. The primary outcome was surgical-site infection within 90 days after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 4239 patients underwent randomization. Among 4113 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (2233 undergoing knee arthroplasty, 1850 undergoing hip arthroplasty, and 30 undergoing shoulder arthroplasty), surgical-site infections occurred in 91 of 2044 patients (4.5%) in the vancomycin group and in 72 of 2069 patients (3.5%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 1.73; P = 0.11). Among patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, surgical-site infections occurred in 63 of 1109 patients (5.7%) in the vancomyin group and in 42 of 1124 patients (3.7%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.23). Among patients undergoing hip arthroplasty, surgical-site infections occurred in 28 of 920 patients (3.0%) in the vancomyin group and in 29 of 930 patients (3.1%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.63). Adverse events occurred in 35 of 2010 patients (1.7%) in the vancomycin group and in 35 of 2030 patients (1.7%) in the placebo group, including hypersensitivity reactions in 24 of 2010 patients (1.2%) and 11 of 2030 patients (0.5%), respectively (relative risk, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.08 to 4.49), and acute kidney injury in 42 of 2010 patients (2.1%) and 74 of 2030 patients (3.6%), respectively (relative risk, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of vancomycin to cefazolin prophylaxis was not superior to placebo for the prevention of surgical-site infections in arthroplasty among patients without known MRSA colonization. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council; Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12618000642280.).
Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Antibioticoprofilaxia , Artroplastia de Substituição , Cefazolina , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica , Vancomicina , Adulto , Humanos , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Antibioticoprofilaxia/efeitos adversos , Antibioticoprofilaxia/métodos , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Austrália , Cefazolina/efeitos adversos , Cefazolina/uso terapêutico , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina , Infecções Estafilocócicas/epidemiologia , Infecções Estafilocócicas/prevenção & controle , Infecções Estafilocócicas/tratamento farmacológico , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/epidemiologia , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/prevenção & controle , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/etiologia , Vancomicina/efeitos adversos , Vancomicina/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Artroplastia de Substituição/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia de Substituição/métodos , Artroplastia de Substituição/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Importance: The efficacy of vitamin C for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is uncertain. Objective: To determine whether vitamin C improves outcomes for patients with COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: Two prospectively harmonized randomized clinical trials enrolled critically ill patients receiving organ support in intensive care units (90 sites) and patients who were not critically ill (40 sites) between July 23, 2020, and July 15, 2022, on 4 continents. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive vitamin C administered intravenously or control (placebo or no vitamin C) every 6 hours for 96 hours (maximum of 16 doses). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of organ support-free days defined as days alive and free of respiratory and cardiovascular organ support in the intensive care unit up to day 21 and survival to hospital discharge. Values ranged from -1 organ support-free days for patients experiencing in-hospital death to 22 organ support-free days for those who survived without needing organ support. The primary analysis used a bayesian cumulative logistic model. An odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 represented efficacy (improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both), an OR less than 1 represented harm, and an OR less than 1.2 represented futility. Results: Enrollment was terminated after statistical triggers for harm and futility were met. The trials had primary outcome data for 1568 critically ill patients (1037 in the vitamin C group and 531 in the control group; median age, 60 years [IQR, 50-70 years]; 35.9% were female) and 1022 patients who were not critically ill (456 in the vitamin C group and 566 in the control group; median age, 62 years [IQR, 51-72 years]; 39.6% were female). Among critically ill patients, the median number of organ support-free days was 7 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the vitamin C group vs 10 (IQR, -1 to 17 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.88 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.73 to 1.06]) and the posterior probabilities were 8.6% (efficacy), 91.4% (harm), and 99.9% (futility). Among patients who were not critically ill, the median number of organ support-free days was 22 (IQR, 18 to 22 days) for the vitamin C group vs 22 (IQR, 21 to 22 days) for the control group (adjusted proportional OR, 0.80 [95% CrI, 0.60 to 1.01]) and the posterior probabilities were 2.9% (efficacy), 97.1% (harm), and greater than 99.9% (futility). Among critically ill patients, survival to hospital discharge was 61.9% (642/1037) for the vitamin C group vs 64.6% (343/531) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.92 [95% CrI, 0.73 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 24.0% for efficacy. Among patients who were not critically ill, survival to hospital discharge was 85.1% (388/456) for the vitamin C group vs 86.6% (490/566) for the control group (adjusted OR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.61 to 1.17]) and the posterior probability was 17.8% for efficacy. Conclusions and Relevance: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, vitamin C had low probability of improving the primary composite outcome of organ support-free days and hospital survival. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04401150 (LOVIT-COVID) and NCT02735707 (REMAP-CAP).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Sepse , Humanos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Masculino , Ácido Ascórbico/uso terapêutico , Estado Terminal/terapia , Estado Terminal/mortalidade , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Teorema de Bayes , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Vitaminas/uso terapêutico , Sepse/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is limited data directly comparing the effectiveness of different COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: We compared rates of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1/2 infection during March to May 2022 in Australian adults who had received one of four COVID-19 vaccines in the last 14-63 days as either a primary course or a booster dose using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age and other characteristics. RESULTS: As a primary course, over 2318 person-years and 1033 infections, compared to recipients of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine, adjusted hazard ratios for SARS-CoV-2 infection were 1.03 (95%CI 0.82-1.30), 1.19 (0.95-1.49), 1.70 (1.46-1.97) for respectively mRNA-1273, ChAdOx-1 nCov-19 and NVX-CoV2373. For the booster dose, over 154,984 person-years and 93,580 infections the respective adjusted hazard ratios compared to BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine were 1.02 (95%CI 1.00-1.04), 1.20 (1.10-1.32), 1.39 (1.20-1.60). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest relatively higher effectiveness of ancestral strain mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron infection than viral vector and protein subunit vaccines and provide clinical confirmation of immunological data on differences in COVID-19 vaccine performance.