Clinicomicrobiological risk factors for infective endocarditis in viridans group streptococci bacteraemia.

BACKGROUND: When to perform echocardiography to rule out infective endocarditis (IE) in patients with viridans group streptococci (VGS) bloodstream infections (BSIs) is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify independent risk factors for IE in patients with VGS BSI. METHODS: This retrospective study conducted at Seoul National University Hospital from January 2013 to December 2022 involved patients with VGS and nutritionally variant streptococcal BSI, excluding single positive blood cultures and polymicrobial BSI cases. Independent risk factors were identified by multivariate logistic regression and sensitivity analyses according to echocardiography results, VGS species or the inclusion of possible IE cases. RESULTS: Of 845 VGS BSI cases, 349 were analysed and 86 IE cases were identified (24.6%). In the multivariate analysis, heart valve disease [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 14.14, 95% CI, 6.14-32.58; P < 0.001], persistent bacteraemia (aOR, 5.12, 95% CI, 2.03-12.94; P = 0.001), age (per year, aOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-1.00; P = 0.015), solid cancer (aOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13-0.53; P < 0.001) and haematologic malignancy (aOR, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.41; P = 0.006) were independently associated with IE. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent results; also, infection by a member of the mitis group was independent risk factor for IE (aOR, 6.50; 95% CI, 2.87-14.68; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Younger age, heart valve disease, persistent bacteraemia, absence of underlying malignancy and BSI by a member of the mitis group were independent risk factors for IE in patients with VGS BSI. Echocardiographic evaluation could be prudently considered based on these clinicomicrobiological risk factors.

Risk factors for resistant gram-positive bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gram-positive bacteria are frequently resistant to empirical beta-lactams in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. As microbiology and antibiotic susceptibility changes, we reevaluated the risk factors for resistant Gram-positive bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. METHODS: Episodes of bacteremic febrile neutropenia in Seoul National University Hospital from July 2019 to June 2022 were reviewed. Resistant Gram-positive bacteria were defined as a pathogen susceptible only to glycopeptide or linezolid in vitro (e.g., methicillin-resistant staphylococci, penicillin-resistant viridans streptococci, and ampicillin-resistant enterococci). Episodes were compared to identify independent risk factors for resistant Gram-positive bacteremia. RESULTS: Of 225 episodes, 78 (34.7%) involved resistant Gram-positive bacteremia. Multivariate analysis revealed that breakthrough bacteremia while being administered antibiotics (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 6.794; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 3.130-14.749; P < 0.001) and catheter-related infection (aOR 4.039, 95% CI 1.366-11.946; P = 0.012) were associated with resistant Gram-positive bacteremia. Chronic liver disease (aOR 0.231, 95% CI 0.059-0.905; P = 0.035) and hypotension at bacteremia (aOR 0.454, 95% CI 0.218-0.945; P = 0.035) were inversely associated with resistant Gram-positive bacteremia. CONCLUSIONS: Resistant Gram-positive bacteria should be considered in breakthrough bacteremia and catheter-related infection in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

Comparable humoral and cellular immunity against Omicron variant BA.4/5 of once-boosted BA.1/2 convalescents and twice-boosted COVID-19-naïve individuals.

The fourth vaccination dose confers additional protective immunity against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in individuals with no prior coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). However, its immunological benefit against currently circulating BA.4/5 is unclear in individuals who have received a booster shot and been infected with Omicron variant BA.1/2. We analyzed immune responses in whom had been boosted once and did not have COVID-19 (n = 16), boosted once and had COVID-19 when BA.1/2 was dominant in Korea (Hybrid-6M group, n = 27), and boosted twice and did not have COVID-19 (Vx4 group, n = 15). Antibody binding activities against RBDo BA.1 and RBDo BA.4/5 , antigen-specific memory CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell responses against BA.4/5, and B-cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type did not differ statistically between the Hybrid-6M and Vx4 groups. The humoral and cellular immune responses of the Hybrid-6M group against BA.4/5 were comparable to those of the Vx4 group. Individuals who had been boosted and had an Omicron infection in early 2022 may not have high priority for an additional vaccination.

Tracking antigen-specific TCR clonotypes in SARS-CoV-2 infection reveals distinct severity trajectories.

Despite the importance of antigen-specific T cells in infectious disease, characterizing and tracking clonally amplified T cells during the progression of a patient's symptoms remain unclear. Here, we performed a longitudinal, in-depth single-cell multiomics analysis of samples from asymptomatic, mild, usual severe, and delayed severe patients of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Our in-depth analysis revealed that hyperactive or improper T-cell responses were more aggressive in delayed severe patients. Interestingly, tracking of antigen-specific T-cell receptor (TCR) clonotypes along the developmental trajectory indicated an attenuation in functional T cells upon severity. In addition, increased glycolysis and interleukin-6 signaling in the cytotoxic T cells were markedly distinct in delayed severe patients compared to usual severe patients, particularly in the middle and late stages of infection. Tracking B-cell receptor clonotypes also revealed distinct transitions and somatic hypermutations within B cells across different levels of disease severity. Our results suggest that single-cell TCR clonotype tracking can distinguish the severity of patients through immunological hallmarks, leading to a better understanding of the severity differences in and improving the management of infectious diseases by analyzing the dynamics of immune responses over time.

Effect of Wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for COVID-19 Treatment on Blood Culture Contamination: Implication for Optimal PPE Strategies.

The personal protective equipment (PPE) used to minimize exposure to hazards can hinder healthcare workers from performing sophisticated procedures. We retrospectively reviewed 77,535 blood cultures (202,012 pairs) performed in 28,502 patients from January 2020 to April 2022. The contamination rate of all blood cultures was significantly elevated in the coronavirus disease 2019 ward at 4.68%, compared to intensive care units at 2.56%, emergency rooms at 1.13%, hematology wards at 1.08%, and general wards at 1.07% (All of P < 0.001). This finding implies that wearing PPE might interfere with adherence to the aseptic technique. Therefore, a new PPE policy is needed that considers the balance between protecting healthcare workers and medical practices.

Risk Factors for the Prescription of Ineffective Antiviral Candidates for COVID-19 During the Early Pandemic Period in Korea.

BACKGROUND: Although the evidence of treatment for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) changed rapidly, little is known about the patterns of potential pharmacological treatment during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea and the risk factors for ineffective prescription. METHODS: Using claims data from the Korean National Health Insurance System, this retrospective cohort study included admission episodes for COVID-19 from February to December 2020. Ineffective antiviral prescriptions for COVID-19 were defined as lopinavir/ritonavir (LPN/r) and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) prescribed after July 2020, according to the revised National Institute of Health COVID-19 treatment guidelines. Factors associated with ineffective prescriptions, including patient and hospital factors, were identified by multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 15,723 COVID-19 admission episodes from February to June 2020, 4,183 (26.6%) included prescriptions of LPN/r, and 3,312 (21.1%) included prescriptions of HCQ. Of the 48,843 admission episodes from July to December 2020, after the guidelines were revised, 2,258 (4.6%) and 182 (0.4%) included prescriptions of ineffective LPN/r and HCQ, respectively. Patient factors independently associated with ineffective antiviral prescription were older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] per 10-year increase, 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.20) and severe condition with an oxygen requirement (aOR, 2.49; 95% CI, 2.24-2.77). The prescription of ineffective antiviral drugs was highly prevalent in primary and nursing hospitals (aOR, 40.58; 95% CI, 31.97-51.50), public sector hospitals (aOR, 15.61; 95% CI, 12.76-19.09), and regions in which these drugs were highly prescribed before July 2020 (aOR, 10.65; 95% CI, 8.26-13.74). CONCLUSION: Ineffective antiviral agents were prescribed to a substantial number of patients during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea. Treatment with these ineffective drugs tended to be prolonged in severely ill patients and in primary and public hospitals.

Persistent Antibody Responses Up to 18 Months After Mild Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Humoral immunity to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may wane rapidly in persons recovered from mild coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but little is known about the longevity. METHODS: Serum samples were obtained 8, 12, and 18 months after infection from 20 patients with mild COVID-19. The binding activities of serum antibodies (immunoglobulin [Ig]A, IgG, and IgM) against SARS-CoV-2 antigens of the Wuhan-1 reference strain (wild-type) and the B.1.1.7, P.1, B.1.167.2, and B.1.1.529 variants were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Neutralizing antibody titers were measured using a cytopathic effect-based live virus neutralization assay. RESULTS: Serum IgA and IgG antibodies against spike or receptor-binding domain (RBD) protein of wild-type SARS-CoV-2 were detected for up to 18 months, and neutralizing antibodies persisted for 8 to 18 months after infection. However, any significant antibody responses against RBD proteins of SARS-CoV-2 variants were not observed, and median neutralizing antibody titers against the Delta variant at 8, 12, and 18 months were 8- to 11-fold lower than against wild-type viruses (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Humoral immunity persisted for up to 18 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with mild COVID-19. However, humoral immune activity against more recently circulating variants was reduced in this population.

Evaluation of Seropositivity After Standard Doses of Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 in Patients With Early Breast Cancer Receiving Adjuvant Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected millions of individuals, and patients with cancer are known to be more susceptible. Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been developed and used for patients with cancer, but scarce data are available on their efficacy in patients under active anti-cancer therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, we semi-quantitatively measured the titers of the immunoglobulin G against the anti-spike protein subunit 1 of SARS-CoV-2 after vaccination of patients with early breast cancer undergoing concurrent chemotherapy, endocrinal or targeted non-cytotoxic treatments, and no treatments. RESULTS: Standard doses of COVID-19 vaccines provided sufficient immune responses in patients with early breast cancer, regardless of the type of anticancer therapies. However, the post-vaccination serum anti-spike antibody titers were significantly lower in the patients under cytotoxic chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our study emphasizes the importance of the personalized risk stratification and consideration for booster doses in more vulnerable populations.

Accurate Diagnosis of COVID-19 from Self-Collectable Biospecimens Using Synthetic Apolipoprotein H Peptide-Coated Nanoparticle Assay.

A high-throughput, accurate screening is crucial for the prevention and control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Current methods, which involve sampling from the nasopharyngeal (NP) area by medical staffs, constitute a fundamental bottleneck in expanding the testing capacity. To meet the scales required for population-level surveillance, self-collectable specimens can be used; however, its low viral load has hindered its clinical adoption. Here, we describe a magnetic nanoparticle functionalized with synthetic apolipoprotein H (ApoH) peptides to capture, concentrate, and purify viruses. The ApoH assay demonstrates a viral enrichment efficiency of >90% for both SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, leading to an order of magnitude improvement in analytical sensitivity. For validation, we apply the assay to a total of 84 clinical specimens including nasal, oral, and mouth gargles obtained from COVID-19 patients. As a result, a 100% positivity rate is achieved from the patient-collected nasal and gargle samples, which exceeds that of the traditional NP swab method. The simple 12 min pre-enrichment assay enabling the use of self-collectable samples will be a practical solution to overcome the overwhelming diagnostic capacity. Furthermore, the methodology can easily be built on various clinical protocols, allowing its broad applicability to various disease diagnoses.

Broad humoral and cellular immunity elicited by one-dose mRNA vaccination 18 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: Practical guidance is needed regarding the vaccination of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) convalescent individuals in resource-limited countries. It includes the number of vaccine doses that should be given to unvaccinated patients who experienced COVID-19 early in the pandemic. METHODS: We recruited COVID-19 convalescent individuals who received one or two doses of an mRNA vaccine within 6 or around 18 months after a diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Their samples were assessed for IgG-binding or neutralizing activity and cell-mediated immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and variants of concern. RESULTS: A total of 43 COVID-19 convalescent individuals were analyzed in the present study. The results showed that humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type and variants of concern, including the Omicron variant, were comparable among patients vaccinated within 6 versus around 18 months. A second dose of vaccine did not significantly increase immune responses. CONCLUSION: One dose of mRNA vaccine should be considered sufficient to elicit a broad immune response even around 18 months after a COVID-19 diagnosis.

Clinical Impact of Empirical Antibiotic Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 Requiring Oxygen Therapy.

Despite the low prevalence of secondary bacterial infection in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, most of them were administered antibiotic therapy empirically. However, the prognostic impact of empirical antibiotic therapy has not been evaluated. We conducted retrospective propensity score-matched case-control study of 233 COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe illnesses who required oxygen therapy and evaluated whether empirical antibiotic therapy could improve clinical outcomes. Empirical antibiotic therapy did not improve clinical outcomes including length of stay, days with oxygen requirement, the proportion of patients with increased oxygen demand, the proportion of patients who required mechanical ventilation, and overall mortality. This finding implies that routine administration of antibiotics for the treatment of COVID-19 is not essential and should be restricted.

Kinetics of Neutralizing Antibody Responses Against SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant in Patients Infected at the Beginning of the Pandemic.

We investigated the kinetics of the neutralizing antibody responses to the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 delta variant over the course of 1 year in 16 patients infected at the beginning of the pandemic. In patients with severe disease, neutralizing responses to the delta variant were detectable, albeit at lower levels than responses to the wild type. Neutralizing responses to the delta variant were undetectable, however, in asymptomatic persons. This finding implies that the vaccination strategy for persons with past natural infection should depend on the severity of the previous infection.

Breakthrough COVID-19 Infection During the Delta Variant Dominant Period: Individualized Care Based on Vaccination Status Is Needed.

BACKGROUND: The clinical features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the COVID-19 vaccination era need to be clarified because breakthrough infection after vaccination is not uncommon. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed hospitalized COVID-19 patients during a delta variant-dominant period 6 months after the national COVID-19 vaccination rollout. The clinical characteristics and risk factors for severe progression were assessed and subclassified according to vaccination status. RESULTS: A total of 438 COVID-19 patients were included; the numbers of patients in the unvaccinated, partially vaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 188 (42.9%), 117 (26.7%) and 133 (30.4%), respectively. The vaccinated group was older, less symptomatic and had a higher Charlson comorbidity index at presentation. The proportions of patients who experienced severe progression in the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated groups were 20.3% (31/153) and 10.8% (13/120), respectively. Older age, diabetes mellitus, solid cancer, elevated levels of lactate dehydrogenase and chest X-ray abnormalities were associated with severe progression, and the vaccination at least once was the only protective factor for severe progression. Chest X-ray abnormalities at presentation were the only predictor for severe progression among fully vaccinated patients. CONCLUSION: In the hospitalized setting, vaccinated and unvaccinated COVID-19 patients showed different clinical features and risk of oxygen demand despite a relatively high proportion of patients in the two groups. Vaccination needs to be assessed as an initial checkpoint, and chest X-ray may be helpful for predicting severe progression in vaccinated patients.

How We Have Treated Severe to Critically Ill Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Korea.

Since 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread worldwide, and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic currently continues. In response to this unprecedented pandemic, several researchers and medical staff have struggled to find appropriate treatments for COVID-19. Patients with mild symptoms can recuperate with symptomatic care, however establishing treatment for severe to critically ill patients who can have a high mortality has been essential. Accordingly, the guidelines for COVID-19 treatment have evolved through numerous trials and errors and have been relatively well established to date. In the Republic of Korea, several evidence-based guidelines for COVID-19 treatment were released and revised, reflecting various research and regional medical conditions. To date, approximately 3 years after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are reflecting on the changes in the guidelines thus far and have summarized the treatment experience of severe to critically ill patients with COVID-19. The Korean guidelines for COVID-19 treatment have been updated continuously as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines have changed. Dexamethasone is currently used as the backbone for the treatment of severe to critically ill patients with COVID-19, and remdesivir, baricitinib, and tocilizumab can be added depending on a patient's situation. In addition, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is one of the important adjunctive therapies for patients with severe COVID-19. In the clinical field, treatment of severely ill patients with COVID-19 based on guidelines is widely practiced by medical staff and established currently.

Changes in Anxiety Level and Personal Protective Equipment Use Among Healthcare Workers Exposed to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between changes in anxiety levels and personal protective equipment (PPE) use is yet to be evaluated. The present study assessed this relationship among healthcare workers (HCWs) involved in the care of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: An online survey was conducted in a municipal hospital with 195 nationally designated negative pressure isolation units in Korea. Anxiety level was measured using the self-rating anxiety scale (SAS), and changes in anxiety levels were assessed based on the time when COVID-19 vaccine was introduced in March 2021 in Korea. Monthly PPE usage between June 2020 and May 2021 was investigated. RESULTS: The mean SAS score (33.25 ± 5.97) was within normal range and was lower than those reported in previous studies conducted before COVID-19 vaccination became available. Among the 93 HCWs who participated, 64 (68.8%) answered that their fear of contracting COVID-19 decreased after vaccination. The number of coveralls used per patient decreased from 33.6 to 0. However, a demand for more PPE than necessary was observed in situations where HCWs were exposed to body fluids and secretions (n = 38, 40.9%). Excessive demand for PPE was not related to age, working experience, or SAS score. CONCLUSION: Anxiety in HCWs exposed to COVID-19 was lower than it was during the early period of the pandemic, and the period before vaccination was introduced. The number of coveralls used per patient also decreased although an excessive demand for PPE was observed.

Longitudinal Analysis of Human Memory T-Cell Response According to the Severity of Illness up to 8 Months After Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the memory T-cell response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is crucial for assessing the longevity of protective immunity after SARS-CoV-2 infection or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. However, the longitudinal memory T-cell response up to 8 months post-symptom onset (PSO) according to the severity of illness is unknown. METHODS: We analyzed peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy volunteers or patients with COVID-19 who experienced asymptomatic, mild, or severe illness at 2, 5, and 8 months PSO. SARS-CoV-2 spike, nucleocapsid, and membrane protein-stimulated PBMCs were subjected to flow cytometry analysis. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients (7 asymptomatic, 9 with mild disease, and 8 with severe disease) and 6 healthy volunteers were analyzed. SARS-CoV-2-specific OX40+CD137+CD4+ T cells and CD69+CD137+CD8+ T cells persisted at 8 months PSO. Also, antigen-specific cytokine-producing or polyfunctional CD4+ T cells were maintained for up to 8 months PSO. Memory CD4+ T-cell responses tended to be greater in patients who had severe illness than in those with mild or asymptomatic disease. CONCLUSIONS: Memory response to SARS-CoV-2, based on the frequency and functionality, persists for 8 months PSO. Further investigations involving its longevity and protective effect from reinfection are warranted.

Antibody Responses 8 Months after Asymptomatic or Mild SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

Waning humoral immunity in coronavirus disease patients has raised concern over usefulness of serologic testing. We investigated antibody responses of 58 persons 8 months after asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. For 3 of 4 immunoassays used, seropositivity rates were high (69.0%-91.4%).

Waning Antibody Responses in Asymptomatic and Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

We investigated the kinetics of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibodies in 7 asymptomatic persons and 11 patients with pneumonia. The geometric mean titer of neutralizing antibodies declined from 219.4 at 2 months to 143.7 at 5 months after infection, indicating a waning antibody response.

Immunogenicity and safety of a live herpes zoster vaccine in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Herpes zoster (HZ) infection of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients is of clinical concern. Vaccination could help restore immunity to varicella zoster virus (VZV); however, temporal changes in immunogenicity and safety of live HZ vaccines after HSCT is still unclear. The aim of this study was to elucidate the temporal immunogenicity and safety of the HZ vaccine according to time since HSCT and to determine optimal timing of vaccination. METHODS: Live HZ vaccine was administered to patients 2-5 years or > 5 years post-HSCT. Control groups comprised patients with a hematologic malignancy who received cytotoxic chemotherapy and healthy volunteers. Humoral and cellular immunogenicity were measured using a glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (gpELISA) and an interferon-γ (IFN-γ) enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay. Vaccine-related adverse events were also monitored. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients with hematologic malignancy (41 in the HSCT group and 15 in the chemotherapy group) along with 30 healthy volunteers were enrolled. The geometric mean fold rises (GMFRs) in humoral immune responses of the 2-5 year and > 5 year HSCT groups, and the healthy volunteer group, were comparable and significantly higher than that of the chemotherapy group (3.15, 95% CI [1.96-5.07] vs 5.05, 95% CI [2.50-10.20] vs 2.97, 95% CI [2.30-3.83] vs 1.42, 95% CI [1.08-1.86]). The GMFR of cellular immune responses was highest in the HSCT 2-5 year group and lowest in the chemotherapy group. No subject suffered clinically significant adverse events or reactivation of VZV within the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that a live HZ vaccine is immunogenic and safe when administered 2 years post-HSCT.

Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients were performed between January 5 and 11, 2021. The overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test compared to RT-PCR were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-32.0%) and 100% (95% CI, 95.3-100.0%). Analysis of the results using RT-PCR cycle thresholds of ≤ 30 or ≤ 25 increased the sensitivity to 26.9% (95% CI, 13.7-46.1%), and 41.1% (95% CI, 21.6-64.0%), respectively.