Patients with history of covid-19 had more side effects after the first dose of covid-19 vaccine.

INTRODUCTION: COVID-19 vaccination seems to be the most pertinent pharmacologic public health measure to control the pandemic. Reactogenicity symptoms were frequent in vaccine recipients mostly mild to moderate and commonly reported after the second dose. However, there is a lack of data in patients with a previous diagnosis of Covid-19. METHODS: We analysed side effects of 311 patients after the first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, in a french university hospital. We compared patients with COVID-19 history to naive individuals. All the data collected are based on self-reported, including COVID-19 exposure status. RESULTS: Overall, 229 (74%) patients reported at least one side effect. Among participants with history of Covid-19, 95% reported at least one adverse event versus 70% in naive patients (p < 0.01). However, symptom intensity was not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Vaccine recipients with prior COVID-19 reported more, but no more serious, side effects than naive participants.

Vaccination coverage in hematological patients undergoing chemotherapy: Should we move towards personalized vaccination?

INTRODUCTION: Immunocompromised patients are at high-risk for severe influenza and invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPD). Despite the French Public Health Council (FPHC) and the 7th European Conference on Infections in Leukaemia (ECIL7) recommendations, vaccination coverage remains insufficient. This study aimed to estimate the coverage and determinants of influenza, pneumococcal and diphtheria-tetanus-poliomyelitis (dTP) vaccinations in hematological patients underlying chemotherapy. METHODS: A survey was distributed to all patients of the hematology day hospital assessing vaccine uptakes and general opinion about vaccination. Vaccine uptakes were collected from medical and vaccination records; knowledge of and attitudes towards vaccinations in immunocompromised patients were evaluated for each general practitioner (GP) by phone call. Adequacy between vaccine uptakes and indication or not to vaccinate according to ECIL7 guidelines was assessed. Factors associated with vaccine uptakes were assessed by multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 145 patients, 66 % were aged 65 years or older, 40 % were followed for lymphoma and 38 % for multiple myeloma, 39 % were treated with anti-CD20 antibodies. Vaccination coverage was suboptimal for influenza (45-56 %), dTP (44 %) and IPD (16-19 %) regardless of the guidelines followed, with a wide variation in rates by information source (19-76 %). Adequacy rate with ECIL7 recommendations were 63 % and 87 % for influenza and IPD respectively. Information of patients on specific vaccinations was positively associated with flu and IPD vaccinations, as well as favorable attitude toward vaccination and age ≥ 65 years for flu vaccination, and recommendation by hematologist for pneumococcal vaccination. CONCLUSION: Despite vaccination opportunities, the complexity of these specific recommendations and the lack of communication between the health actors could explain the suboptimal vaccination coverage in this high-risk population. A proactive attitude of all actors in the city and hospital, including better patient information and a personalized and evolving vaccination schedule to help GPs to coordinate vaccination would allow to improve vaccine coverage.

Real-Life Impact on Lipid Profile of a Switch from Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate to Tenofovir Alafenamide in HIV-Infected Patients.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is a prodrug of tenofovir diphosphate that exposes patients to renal toxicity over the long term. Tenofovir alafenamide, a new prodrug, now makes it possible to reduce toxicity, but at the cost of an alteration in lipid profile. There is currently no recommendation for follow-up of lipid profile when switching from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to evaluate the effects on renal function and lipid profile of a switch from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide, and the consequences for patient management. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and biological data was recorded from a retrospective clinical cohort study in real-life, including patients who switched from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide. A descriptive analysis of the study population, with a comparison of biological parameters using the paired Student t test for paired data was performed. RESULTS: From January 2016 to January 2019, a total of 103 patients were included. There was no significant difference in renal function before vs after the switch in therapy (p=0.29 for creatinine, p=0.30 for phosphoremia). We observed a change in lipid profile, with a significant increase in total cholesterol (p=0.0006), HDL cholesterol (p=0.0055) and triglycerides (p=0.0242). Four patients received lipid-lowering therapy after switching. CONCLUSION: In patients who switch from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate to tenofovir alafenamide, lipid profile is altered, and may require initiation of lipid-lowering therapy. It seems necessary to monitor lipid parameters after this switch, despite the absence of an official recommendation.

A survey investigating the current practice of French health professionals regarding infection risk after monkey bites.

International tourism is steadily increasing, with 15% of travellers reporting health problems when they come back. Animal bites represent 2% of consulting causes, of which 20% are due to monkey bites. The Monkey B virus (Macacine alphaherpesvirus 1) is an alphaherpesvirus (Herpesviridae, genus Simplexvirus) enzootic in macaques (Genus Macaca). Zoonotic infections with the Monkey B virus following exposure to macaques are exceptionally rare, but can cause fatal encephalomyelitis in humans. An observational survey was undertaken in 2018 to assess the practice of French health professionals regarding infection risk after monkey bites. French health professionals practicing in vaccination and rabies centres were specifically targeted for this study. Standardized questionnaires were sent by email to a sample of French health professionals. They were asked to participate on a voluntary and anonymous basis. The questionnaires requested epidemiological details and included multiple-choice questions about the infection management of monkey bites. The response rate was 33.5%. The frequency of monkey bites in 2017 was variable with a minority of centres managing more than 6 per year (12%), 46% managing 1-5 monkey bites and 42% none. Most of the monkey bites were described as occurring in South Asia at tourist sites, on naked upper limbs, shortly after the travellers arrived at their destination. Tetanus status verification, rabies post-exposure prophylaxis and antibiotic therapy were said to be prescribed in most cases. Knowledge about the Monkey B virus was reported as scarce for 38% of the participants. The number of monkey bites managed per year per centre varied greatly but practices regarding infectious risk after monkey bites were generally homogeneous. The risk of Monkey B virus transmission did not readily come to mind in the differential diagnosis of infection risk for many French health professionals.